Freedom of Expression: J.S. Mill versus Jeremy Waldron

Elisabeth-Gabrielle Åžatalan
Additional contact information
Elisabeth-Gabrielle Åžatalan: Postgraduate student, University of Bucharest, Faculty of Political Science, Bucharest, Romania

Anuarul Universitatii „Petre Andrei” din Iasi / Year-Book „Petre Andrei” University from Iasi, Fascicula: Drept, Stiinte Economice, Stiinte Politice / Fascicle: Law, Economic Sciences, Political Sciences, 2022, vol. 30, 243-247

Abstract: The first section will give an overview of case that Udo Pastörs brought to the European Court of Human Rights (EC(t)HR) case and the decision that was made. This will be followed up with Mill’s theory and what he would have most likely concluded on the topic, followed by Waldron’s perspective. This article argues that Mill would have agreed with Pastörs and would not have chosen to limit his freedom of speech, while Waldron would have agreed with the court, limiting Pastörs’ freedom.

Keywords: freedom of expression; the harm principle; Holocaust denialism; utilitarianism (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: K1 K2 K4 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/upa-sw/article/view/6257/4367 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:lum:rev11d:v:30:y:2022:i::p:243-247

DOI: 10.18662/upalaw/104

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Anuarul Universitatii „Petre Andrei” din Iasi / Year-Book „Petre Andrei” University from Iasi, Fascicula: Drept, Stiinte Economice, Stiinte Politice / Fascicle: Law, Economic Sciences, Political Sciences from Editura Lumen, Department of Economics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Antonio Sandu ().