Aadel Collection
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. Abid Hussain, submitted in accordance with Commission resolution 2001/47
UNITED
NATIONS
Economic and Social Disth
.
Council
GENERAL
E/CN. 4/2002/75
30 January2002
Original: ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Fifty-eighth session
Item 11(c) of the provisional agenda
C1VIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE
QUESTION OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of
the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. Abid Hussain,
submitted in accordance with Commission resolution 2001/47
E
GE.02-10396 (E) 040302
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 2
CONTENTS
Paragraphs fg gç
Executive summary ... . 4
Introduction 1 7
I. TERMS OF REFERENCE 2-3 7
II. ACTIVITIES 4-37 7
A. Communications 4- 16 7
B. Countryvisits 17-22 10
C. Cooperation and participation in seminars and
conferences 23-37 11
III. TRENDS 38-58 13
A. Harm to media personnel and others: killings,
attacks, threats, harassment 47 - 51 15
B. Detention or arrest, bringing of charges, trial and
sentencing 52-54 16
C. Administrative and legal measures and repressive
measures in connection with the media 55 - 58 16
IV. ISSUES 59-95 17
A. World Conference against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance 59 - 70 17
B. The events of 11 September 71 -79 19
C. Broadcasting 80 - 87 21
D. The Internet 88 - 95 22
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 96- 117 24
A. Conclusions 96 - 104 24
B. Recommendations 105- 117 25
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 3
CONTENTS ( continued)
Annexes
I. General statistics on communications sent to and received from
Governments 29
II. Statistics onjoint communications 30
III. Detailed statistics on urgent appeals (UA), letters of allegation (LA) and
press releases (PR) issued by the Special Rapporteur 31
IV. Joint statement issued on 10 December 2001 by 17 independent experts of
the Commission on Human Rights on the occasion of Human Rights Day 32
V. Challenges to freedom of expression in the new century: joint statement by
the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression,
the OSCE Representative on freedom of the media and the OAS Special
Rapporteur on freedom of expression 34
VI. Joint statement by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of
opinion and expression, the OSCE Representative on freedom of the media
and the OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression on Racism and
the Media 36
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 4
Executive summary
This report is the ninth submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. Abid Hussain (India), whose
mandate was established by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 1993/45. The
report is submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 200 1/47. The report describes the
activities undertaken by the Special Rapporteur and contains a discussion of issues particularly
relevant for the past year. A brief summary of urgent appeals and communications to and from
Governments is contained in addendum 2 to the present report, while a report of the Special
Rapporteur's mission to Argentina is contained in addendum 1.
With regard to the situation in countries, during the period under review
(15 December 2000-14 December 2001), the Special Rapporteur sent 124 urgent actions
and 37 letters of allegation to 69 countries (27 to African countries, 22 to Asian countries,
S to Eastern European countries, 2 to Western European and other countries and 13 to
Latin American and Caribbean countries) on behalf of 1,133 individuals, including 34 women
and 20 minors. Further to his communications, he received 45 replies (from 13 African,
17 Asian, 3 Eastern Europeai , S Western European and other and 7 Latin American and
Caribbean Governments). The Special Rapporteur was not able to deal with all of the some
1,900 communications he received owing to the lack of resources devoted to his mandate.
However, the establishment in June 2001 within the Thematic Mechathsms Team of the Quick
Response Desk and the database have greatly assisted him in the discharge of his mandate by
enabling him to respond more quickly to urgent cases.
It is significant to note that 77 urgent appeals and 15 letters of allegations addressed to
Governments by the Special Rapporteur last year were sent jointly with four country Special
Rapporteurs (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Islamic Republic of Irai , Sudan, Equatorial
Guinea) and six thematic mechathsms (Special Rapporteur on torture, Special Rapporteur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Chairman of the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Special Rapporteur
on violence against women, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for human rights
defenders).
As part of his activities, the Special Rapporteur also issued two press releases and joined
in three declarations including the one issued by 17 experts of the Commission on Human Rights
on the occasion of United Nations Human Rights Day. Furthermore, he sent a note verbale to all
Member States thawing their attention to paragraph 13 of Commission on Human Rights
resolution 200 1/47 which invites States to “submit to the Special Rapporteur comments on their
programmes and policies with respect to access to information for the purposes of education on
and prevention of HIV”. He received information from 16 countries and awaits additional
responses to undertake an in-depth analysis of this important issue.
Country visits are also another essential aspect of the Special Rapporteur's mandate.
From 25 June to 2 July 2001, he undertook a mission to Argentina (his first mission to
Latin America since his appointment as Special Rapporteur). A visit to Sri Lanka from
27 November to 2 December 2001 was plaimed but owing to political developments it was
postponed and will take place in the course of 2002. During the period under review, the
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 5
Special Rapporteur received invitations to undertake a visit from the Governments of Egypt,
Colombia, Guatemala, Indonesia and Equatorial Guinea. He hopes to visit some of these
countries in the course of 2002. The Special Rapporteur regrets, however, that no reply has been
received so far to his request to visit: Angola, China, Cuba, the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea, India, Pakistai , the Russian Federation and Viet Nam. This year, the Special Rapporteur
sent a request to visit Ethiopia, Eritrea and Zimbabwe.
During the year under review, the Special Rapporteur has pursued cooperation with treaty
bodies, United Nations agencies, and intergovernmental and non-governmental orgaiñzations.
Moreover, his close cooperation with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Orgathzation has continued and increased collaboration was obtained from the Special
Rapporteur on freedom of expression of the Orgathzation of American States and the
Representative on freedom of the media of the Orgathzation for Security and Cooperation in
Europe.
In the discharge of his mandate, the Special Rapporteur has also been invited to attend a
number of conferences and meetings. In the context of the World Conference against Racism,
Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which he attended, he attended the
Asian Preparatory Meeting for the World Conference in Teheran (19-21 February 2001) and the
second session of the Preparatory Committee in Geneva (28 May-2 June 2001). Moreover, he
made a keynote address on the occasion of the celebration in Windhoek of World Press Freedom
Day (3 May 2001). He also made a statement at the International Conference on the Right to
Information orgathzed by Article 19, the Global Campaign for Free Expression (Colombo,
29-31 July 2001). He also attended the third meeting whichbrought together the OSCE
Representative on freedom of the media and the OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of
expression orgathzed in London by Article 19. Finally, he delivered a statement at the
International Consultative Conference on School Education in relation with Freedom of Opinion
and Belief, Tolerance and Non-Discrimination in Madrid (23-25 November 2001).
As in previous years, on the basis of the communications received, the report identifies
“trends” that may encourage Governments to review practices and take remedial action when
required. For the first time since he took up his function as Special Rapporteur, detailed
statistics have been included in his aimual report to the Commission on Human Rights. In the
present report, the Special Rapporteur also directs the attention of Governments to a number of
issues such as the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and
Related Intolerance, the events of 11 September 2001, broadcasting and the Internet.
The Special Rapporteur concludes the report with his recommendations. As the right to
freedom of opinion and expression is violated regularly in States with widely different political
and institutional frameworks, he urges Governments to scrutinize their domestic legal systems to
bring them into line with international standards. The Special Rapporteur also encourages
Governments to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to amend criminal laws which
maybe used to infringe article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to ensure
that press offences are no longer punishable by imprisonment. With regard to the events of
11 September, the Special Rapporteur, who condemns them in the strongest terms, urges all
Governments to refrain from targeting groups such as religious and ethnic minorities, political
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 6
activists and the media and not to respond to tenor by adopting laws which have a negative
impact for the realization of human rights, in particular the right to freedom of opinion and
expression as stated in article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Additionally, the Special Rapporteur considers that the free flow of information and ideas
is one of the most powerifil ways of combating racism, discrimination, xenophobia and
intolerance. He recommends as a follow-up to the World Conference that the working
relationship be clearly defined between the Anti-Discrimination Unit of the Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights and the special procedures. He suggests that the special
procedures should be able to make recommendations to the Anti-Discrimination Unit on issues
that may deserve specific thought, research and analysis and eventually recommend tecimical
cooperation programs on issues which they have identified as being critical.
As regards the new tecimologies, the Special Rapporteur recalls that new tecimologies,
and in particular the Internet, are inherently democratic, provide the public and individuals with
access to information sources and enable everyone to participate actively in the communication
process. In that connection, he encourages States to take positive measures to promote universal
access to the Internet and reception of broadcasting. He recommends that no separate rules
limiting Internet content be adopted. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur continues to express
concern at the high number of cases of violations of the right to freedom of opinion and
expression committed by non- State actors and therefore he would like to reiterate his suggestion
that the Commission on Human Rights consider how and by what means the international
community can give particular and coherent attention to the question of non- State actors and
action by them that infringe upon or restrict the rights to freedom of opinion and expression.
With regard to exercise by women of their right to freedom of opinion and expression, he urges
Governments to take all necessary steps to remove formal and cultural obstacles which hamper
their full enjoyment. Finally, the Special Rapporteur repeats his deep concern as regards the
imbalance between the requirements set out by the mandate and the inadequate financial and
human resources put at his disposal.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 7
Introduction
1. The present report is the ninth report submitted by Mr. Abid Hussain (India), Special
Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
The mandate was established by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 1993/45 of
5 March 1993. This report is submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 2001/47. Section I
of the report contains the terms of reference for the discharge of his mandate. Section II presents
an account of the activities undertaken within the framework of his mandate in the past year.
Section III provides a brief discussion on trends. Section IV deals with a number of issues which
the Special Rapporteur considers to be important for the development of the right to freedom of
opinion and expression. Lasily, section V contains the conclusions and recommendations of the
Special Rapporteur.
I. TERMS OF REFERENCE
2. The Special Rapporteur refers to his previous reports as regards the mandate and methods
of work adopted by him. The structure of the present report is along the same lines as the
previous report, except that the summaries of communications with Governments, because of
their length, have been put in a separate document (E/CN.4/2002/75/Add.2). They have been
presented by geographic region rather than in alphabetical order by country, as in the previous
reports. The Special Rapporteur has found that this new methodology has enabled him to
provide more detailed information on urgent appeals and communications sent and received. It
is significant to note that the Special Rapporteur has, for the first time since his appointment,
prepared and included detailed statistics on communications sent and received.' This has
enabled him to analyse the cases more deeply and highlight the trends.
3. In addition, in the main body of the report, the Special Rapporteur has looked at some
issues that he considers to have been particularly relevant during the period under review such as
the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance, the events of 11 September and their impacts on the right to freedom of opinion and
expression, broadcasting and the Internet.
II. ACTIVITIES
A. Communications
1. Information received
4. The Special Rapporteur has noted that the number of communications received
aimually still continue to increase. During the period under review he received some
1,900 communications (1,700 communications were received in 2000). As was the case last
year, the communications brought to the attention of the Special Rapporteur were from a variety
of sources: international, regional, national and local non-governmental orgathzations;
associations of media professionals; trade unions; members of political parties. The Special
Rapporteur would like to thaiilc all of them for the information and documentation provided
which are essential to the discharge of his mandate.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 8
2. Communications sent to and received from Governments
5. During the period under review, the Special Rapporteur sent 37 allegations
and 124 urgent actions (see almex 0. In 2000, the Special Rapporteur sent 16 letters of
allegations and 101 urgent appeals. During the period under review (15 December 2000-
14 December 2001), the Special Rapporteur sent 124 urgent actions and 37 letters of allegation
to 69 countries (27 to African countries, 22 to Asian countries, 5 to Eastern European countries,
2 to Western European and other countries and 13 to Latin American and Caribbean countries)
on behalf of 1,333 individuals, including 34 women and 20 minors. Further to his
communications he received 45 replies (from 13 African, 17 Asian, 3 Eastern Europeai ,
5 Western European and other and 7 Latin American and Caribbean Governments). Seeking to
avoid unnecessary duplication of the activities of the other thematic and country Rapporteurs, the
Special Rapporteur has increased the number ofjoint communications during the past year (see
almex II). Detailed statistics concerning all communications are found in almex III.
(a) Urgent actions
6. The Special Rapporteur trai smitted 124 urgent actions to a total of 61 Governments. Out
of this number, 77 were sent jointlywith other thematic mandates (14 with the Special
Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; 3 with the Special Rapporteur on
the independence of judges and lawyers; 33 with the Special Rapporteur on torture; 15 with the
Special Representative for human rights defenders; 1 with the Special Rapporteur on violence
against women; 23 with the Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention).
7. The Special Rapporteur also sent urgent appeals with the following geographic mandates:
the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo (4); the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Equatorial Guinea (1); the
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (2); the
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Sudan (6). He received 38 replies
(10 from Africa, 16 from Asia, 2 from Eastern Europe, 5 from Western European and other
countries, 5 from Latin America and the Caribbean).
(b) Letters of allegations
8. In addition to the urgent appeals, the Special Rapporteur sent 37 letters of allegations to a
total of 30 Governments. Out of this number, 15 were sent with other thematic mandates (2 with
the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; 1 with the Special
Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers; 12 with the Special Rapporteur on
torture; 2 with the Special Representative onhuman rights defenders; 3 with the Special
Rapporteur on violence against women). 2 The Special Rapporteur received 7 replies (3 from
Africa, 1 from Asia, 1 from Eastern Europe, 2 from Latin America and the Caribbean).
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 9
(c) Press Releases
9. The Special Rapporteur in addition to the press release issued on the occasion of his visit
to Argentina, issued two press releases during the period under review, including one with the
Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. 3
10. The Special Rapporteur has also joined with 16 other independent experts of the
Commission on Human Rights in a statement on the occasion of United Nations Human Rights
Day (10 December 2001). In this statement, the experts “stronglyremind States of their
obligations under international law to uphold human rights and ifindamental freedoms in the
context of the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001” (aimex Ly).
11. Finally, he made twojoint declarations with the Representative on freedom of the media
of the Orgathzation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Special Rapporteur
on freedom of expression of the Orgaiñzation of American States (OAS) respectively on racism
and the media (27 Febmary 2001) and on challenges to freedom of expression in the new century
(21 November 200l).
(d) Support received from the Secretariat in the discharge of his mandate
12. As was the case in previous years, the Special Rapporteur was only able to deal with a
limited number of requests for information from Governments, owing to the insufficient
financial and human resources available. The mailers raised in previous reports to the
Commission on Human Rights regarding the circumstances of work (E/CN.4/l 995/32,
paras. 92-95; E/CN.4/1996/39, para. 6; E/CN.4/1997/31, para. 7; E/CN.4/1998/40, para. 3;
E/CN.4/1999/64, para. 3; E/CN.4/2000/63, para. 4; E/CN.4/2001/64, para. 5) unfortunately
remain of great concern. The mandate continues to require a substantially increased poo1 of
resources. Within the current constraints, the Special Rapporteur has engaged in an exchange of
views with Governments only with regard to a limited number of cases, which are discussed in
addendum 2.
13. Against this background, the Special Rapporteur would like nevertheless to welcome the
establishment within the Thematic Mechathsms Team of a Quick Response Desk in June 2001
pursuant to the recommendations of two independent experts 5 assessing the efficiency of the
special procedures in order to strengthen the urgent appeals mechathsm and to alleviate the
considerable workload of the assistants to special rapporteurs who draft communications. The
Special Rapporteur considers that the establishment of the Quick Response Desk has
considerably improved his capacity to deal with a greater number of cases submitted to him and
to act more quickly. This new structure has also permitted strengthened cooperation between
thematic and geographic mechathsms of the Commission on Human Rights. Furthermore, the
Special Rapporteur is of the view that the thematic database which is now operational for several
thematic rapporteurs, including for his mandate, is a positive step.
3. Requests for information
14. On 7 June 2001 the Special Rapporteur sent a note verbale to all Member States drawing
their attention to paragraph 13 of Commission resolution 2001/47 which invites States “to submit
to the Special Rapporteur comments on their programmes and policies with respect to access to
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 10
information for the purposes of education on and prevention of human immunodeficiency virus
(HF ) infection”, and invites ‘The Special Rapporteur, within the framework of his mandate, to
consider these comments with a view to sharing best practices”.
15. The Special Rapporteur wishes to thaiilc the Governments of the following 16 countries
which have submitted information: Canada, Cuba, Germany, Guatemala, Guinea, Malaysia,
Mauritius, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines,
Slovenia, Thailand, Togo, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
16. The Special Rapporteur awaits additional responses to undertake an in-depth analysis of
this important issue. It should be noted that the Government replies received so far by the
Special Rapporteur are available for consultation at the Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights in Geneva.
B. Country visits
17. In addition to communications with Governments, the Special Rapporteur considers that
carrying out country visits is another essential element of his mandate. Country visits enable
him to examine in situ the realization of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. He
therefore calls upon Governments to cooperate with him in that regard.
1. Visits undertaken during the year
18. From 25 June to 2 July 2001, the Special Rapporteur undertook a mission to Argentina
(E/CN.4/2002/75/Add. 1). This mission is the first undertaken in Latin America by the Special
Rapporteur since he assumed his thnctions. The Special Rapporteur was supposed to travel to
Sri Laiilca from 27 November to 5 December 2001. However, in light of the elections on
5 December 2001, he decided, after consultations with the Government of Sri Laiilca, to postpone
his mission. This mission will take place in the course of 2002.
2. Invitations received
19. During the period under review, the Special Rapporteur received invitations to visit
Sri Laiilca, Colombia, Egypt, Indonesia, Equatorial Guinea and Guatemala. He would like to
thaiilc those Governments for their cooperation.
3. Pending and new requests
20. This year, the Special Rapporteur has pursued his efforts to obtain invitations to visit the
following countries, to which he had sent in the past requests for invitations: China (June 1999),
Cuba (September 1998), Angola (November 2000), the Democratic People's of Korea
(March 1996), Viet Nam (March 1996), India and Pakistan (October 2000). The Special
Rapporteur regrets that invitations have not so far been received from those countries.
21. The Special Rapporteur has sent also requests to visit Ethiopia, Eritrea and Zimbabwe.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 11
4. Planned visits
22. 1112002, the Special Rapporteur intends to visit the following countries: Egypt,
Sri Laiilca, Guatemala, Peru, Colombia (dates to be mutually agreed) and Indonesia (dates to be
mutually agreed).
C. Cooperation and participation in seminars and conferences
23. The Special Rapporteur continued during the period under review to cooperate closely
with treaty bodies and OHCHR human rights field operations, the human rights sections of the
Department of Political Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, as well as other
specialized bodies within the United Nations system, and regional intergovernmental and
non-governmental orgathzations, particularly at the local level, concerned with the right to
freedom of opinion and expression.
24. The Special Rapporteur considers that his collaboration with the OSCE Representative on
freedom of the media and the OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression to be vital to
ensure a coherent global strategy on freedom of expression. In the context of this cooperation,
the Special Rapporteur reiterates that the participation of these two other mechathsms in the
aimual session of the Commission on Human Rights is of particular importance. The Special
Rapporteur would like to pay tribute to the work undertaken by Mr. Canton as OAS Special
Rapporteur on freedom of expression and the cooperation extended by his Office during his
tenure. The Special Rapporteur wishes him success in his new functions as Secretary of the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and hopes that the cooperation between the two
mandates will continue with his successor.
25. The Special Rapporteur would like to express his great satisfaction that the number of
meetings, seminars and conferences he has attended and has been invited to has remained very
high. However, owing to his heavy schedule, he regrets that he has not been in a position to
accept all the invitations tramsmitted to him.
1. Seminars and conferences sponsored by the United Nations
26. The Special Rapporteur participated in the Asian Preparatory Meeting for the World
Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
(Tehrai , 19-21 Febmary 2001).
27. The Special Rapporteur visited Geneva from 2 to 7 April 2001 for consultations and to
present his report to the Commission on Human Rights at its fifty-seventh session. During this
period the Special Rapporteur met with various delegations (Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, Peru,
Sri Laiilca and Viet Nam) to discuss his intention to undertake field visits. He also held
consultations with NGOs.
28. The Special Rapporteur gave a keynote speech on the occasion of the celebration
on 3 May 2001 in Windhoek of World Press Freedom Day orgathzed by the Programme for
Freedom of Expression, Democracy and Peace of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 12
Cultural Orgathzation. This celebration, which marked the Tenth anniversary of the Windhoek
Declaration, was followed by a round-table discussion on the theme “Ten years on: assessment,
challenges and prospects”.
29. From 28 May to 2 June 2001, the Special Rapporteur attended, in Geneva, the second
session of the Preparatory Committee for the World Conference against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
30. The Special Rapporteur attended the eighth meeting of the special rapporteurs!
representatives, independent experts and chairpersons of working groups of the special
procedures and advisory services programme of the Commission on Human Rights, held in
Geneva from 18 to 22 June 2001. On this occasion, he was designated as Rapporteur of the
meeting.
31. The Special Rapporteur along with the Special Rapporteurs on religious intolerance, on
contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and on
the human rights of migrants, attended the World Conference in Durban from 28 August to
7 September 2001. On this occasion, he had the opportunity to meet with delegations as well as
representatives of NGOs. He participated in a high level panel on the media and racism.
32. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur, in his capacity as Rapporteur of the aimual meeting
of special rapporteurs, presented the report of this meeting (E/CN.4/2002/14) on the occasion
of the informal one-day meeting of the Commission on Human Rights held in Geneva
on 25 September 2001. This visit was also the occasion for the Special Rapporteur to conduct
consultations with several delegations with regard to his mandate.
33. Finally, the Special Rapporteur was invited to attend the International Consultative
Conference on School Education in relation with Freedom of Religion and Belief, Tolerance and
Non Discrimination (Madrid, 23-25 November 2001). He made a statement to the Conference.
The Conference, which was organized by the United Nations and the Government of Spain,
was attended by 80 governmental delegations, 6 intergovernmental orgathzations, 27 NGOs,
20 religious communities, human rights institutes as well as academics and expert obsservers).
At the end of the Conference, a declaration was adopted by consensus. The Special Rapporteur
would like to praise this very innovative partnership as well as the excellent organization of this
conference.
2. Others conferences and seminars
34. The Special Rapporteur travelled to Nepal on 1 and 2 February. On this occasion, he
held meetings with representatives of national NGOs working in the field of human rights. He
also went to Rabat, Morocco, on 25 and 29 April to attend a meeting of the Royal Academy of
the Kingdom of Morocco.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 13
35. From 29 to 31 July 2001, the Special Rapporteur attended in Colombo an international
conference on the right to information, focussed on South Asia, orgathzed by Article 19, the
Global Campaign for Free Expression, in association with the Center for Policy Alternatives, the
Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative and the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. On
that occasion he gave a keynote address.
36. The Special Rapporteur was also invited to several conferences in India. He made a
statement at the Universities of Jamia Handard (22 September) and Aligarh (16 and 17 October).
37. A meeting was orgathzed by Article 19, in London on 19 and 20 November 2001 which
brought together for the third time the United Nations Special Rapporteur for freedom of opinion
and expression; the OSCE Representative on freedom of the media, Freimut Duve, and the OAS
Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, Santiago Canton. The key themes selected this
year for in-depth discussion included the Internet, broadcasting, and the consequences of
11 September 2001. As at the two previous meetings, cooperation between the three mandates
was also discussed. The agenda also included an opportunity to discuss regional developments in
Africa and South-East Asia. Ajoint declaration was issued at the end of this meeting (see
almex V).
III. TRENDS
38. As in previous years, the Special Rapporteur wishes to bring to the attention of the
international community a number of policies, practices, incidents and measures with a severe
and negative impact on respect for the rights to freedom of opinion and expression and to seek,
receive and impart information. A review of communications received in the last year
demonstrate clearly that the trends noted in the two previous reports (E/CN.4/2000/63 and
E/CN.4/2001/64) have continued. The Special Rapporteur has noted a number of characteristics
common to the violations reported to him in the framework of his mandate and believes that it
would again be helpful to consider what may be called “trends”.
39. During the period under review over 1,900 communications were transmitted to
the Special Rapporteur from a variety of sources (international, regional and national
non-governmental orgathzations, associations of media professionals, members of opposition
political parties, human rights activists, concerned individuals, etc.). It must be recalled that
resource constraints do not permit the Special Rapporteur to respond to, or act upon, every
communication he received. These constraints also make it extremely difficult to verify the facts
presented in each and every case in order to determine what, if any, action would be appropriate.
40. The Special Rapporteur would like to stress that these communications are not confined
to alleged violations in countries in which the political and institutional arrangements are
implicifly or explicifly undemocratic even though a large number of allegations continues to
refer to the following situations: (a) internal armed conflict; (b) civil unrest; (c) legal and
institutional protections and guarantees of human rights are circumscribed to a greater or lesser
degree; and (d) legal and institutional protections/guarantees exist but are not properly
implemented. Nonetheless, it is important to note that allegations refer also to incidents and
instances in which the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, information, association and
assembly are infringed or violated in both emerging democracies and countries with
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 14
long-established democratic institutions, practices and traditions. Based on information
received, the Special Rapporteur concludes that violations of the rights to seek, receive and
impart information as well as the rights to assembly and association are rampant and may occur
anywhere in the world.
41. A majority of cases received by the Special Rapporteur have continued to relate to
violations and actions taken against media professionals. Similar actions and violations of rights
also occur, however, in relation to political groups and members of opposition political parties,
human rights activists, lawyers, students, academics, trade unionists, persons participating in
general strikes, women, peasants, members of religious and indigenous minorities, authors,
cartoonists and others.
42. As has been the case in the past, in a large number of instances, national security as well
as the “argument of necessity” continue to be frequently used by authorities in a number of
countries to silence and/or suppress independent media and to take punitive action against
journalists, academics, activists, community leaders, religious and indigenous minorities or
ordinary citizens who have expressed their legitimate right to freedom of opinion and expression
or who have assembled peaceffilly to express concern or opposition to government decisions and
actions.
43. From the communications received it appears that the individuals seeking to exercise
freedom of opinion and expression have frequently being accused of “denigrating and defaming
government officials, military personnel or judicial authorities”, “propagating immoral, extremist
and divisive ideas”, “collecting dissident news”, “publishing lies or false and insulting
information”, “disturbing public order”, “criticizing religious and traditional practices”
‘tarnishing the image of the country “, “putting at risk the unity and best interest of the country”,
or “spying for foreign nations”.
44. The response of the authorities, on the basis of these and other characterizations, have, in
the majority of instances, included: bans, closure and seizure of publications; closure of radio
and TV stations; severe restrictions on access to the Internet; denial of access to public
information or to some parts of the country; seizure of audio equipment used by broadcast
media. The communications received in the past year clearly demonstrate that actions and
measures taken by the authorities (police, security forces, the judiciary) against persons seeking
to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression have in the majority of the cases
included: (a) physical harm, attacks, threats and harassment; (b) detention and arrest, bringing of
charges, trial and sentencing; and (c) administrative and legal measures. In addition to these
types of actions by governmental officials or groups affiliated to them, communications received
also relate to actions committed by guerrilla and rebel groups or orgathzed criminals or unknown
persons or groups against the media and pro-democracy groups.
45. With these points in mind, the Special Rapporteur directs the attention of Governments to
the following general trends in terms of violations of the freedom of opinion and expression and
related rights and strongly urges them to take all appropriate action, consistent with the standards
set out in the International Bill of Human Rights and associated instruments, to eliminate not
only the violations themselves but also their causes and negative consequences.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 15
46. The Special Rapporteur hopes that the identification of these trends and the inclusion for
the first lime in the report of detailed statistics on communications sent and received will
encourage Governments to review practices and take remedial action where required. He also
believes that this work will assist OHCHR in developing programmes of tecimical assistance for
interested Governments which will accelerate the process of eliminating the causes of violations
of freedom of opinion and expression, the right to information and associated rights.
A. Harm to media personnel and others: killings, attacks, threats, harassment
1. Killings
47. The Special Rapporteur notes with great concern the extent to which efforts to exercise
peacefully the rights to expression, opinion, information, association and assembly continue to
carry the threat of physical harm. The Special Rapporteur is alarmed at the fact that individuals
continue to be killed for having sought to express their right to opinion and expression. The
excessive use of force by the police and other security services has been consistently addressed
by the Special Rapporteurs on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and on the question
of torture. From the communications received during the period under review, it is clear in
particular that danger is inherent to the profession ofjournalism. The Special Rapporteur is
particularly alarmed by the fact that deliberate killings ofjournalists have continued unabated
in 2001. He would like in that connection to recall that during the period under review
31 journalists were killed, including 8 in Afghathstan, while exercising their duties.
48. The Special Rapporteur is equally deeply concerned by the continuing trend of
“censorship by killing”. The murder and assassination of leaders of political parties, trade union
leaders and community activists, among others, has continued apace. The “censorship by
killing” has continued to be used by State agents, private individuals, or members of armed
opposition groups to censor persons who have exercised their right to freedom of opinion and
expression and expressed dissident points of views.
49. As was often the case in previous years, in most cases the State has failed to undertake an
investigation or has allowed the relevant authorities to carry out investigations in name only. In
those cases where charges have been brought, very few prosecutions have succeeded.
2. Attacks, threats, harassment
50. Information received by the Special Rapporteur also consistently referred to threats
against, harassment of and attacks against persons working in the media or related fields. He is
also extremely concerned that acts of physical harm, threats or attacks against individuals
exercising their right to freedom of opinion and expression, whether in a professional manner or
not, have appeared to continue to increase. Such cases have included: bombings, shootings and
summary executions, death threats, torture ofjournalists to reveal sources of information,
beatings ofjournalists and photographers covering protest marches organized by opposition
parties or labour unions, surveillance of media premises by security forces, summoning
journalists for “consultations” with members of the military or the judiciary, search of
newspapers and radio station premises and labelling ofjournalists as criminals.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 16
51. The Special Rapporteur has noted that such violations seem to have often occurred
following the publication of articles criticizing the Government's policies, accounts of police
misconduct, accusations of corruption against government officials, articles critical of the
judiciary, reports on human rights situations, articles on the results of public polls against the
Government, or broadcasting army repression of demonstrators.
B. Detention or arrest, bringing of charges, trial and sentencing
52. Despite changes in the legal and policy frameworks based on the mle of law and respect
for human rights in a number of countries, there continue to be many cases of arrest and
detention without charge or without a legitimate legal basis, or following judicial proceedings of
doubtifil relevance. The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned at the fact that thousands of
individuals, including over 110 journalists, are detained for having exercised their legitimate
right to freedom of opinion and expression.
53. The Special Rapporteur has observed that, in the past year, individuals have been arrested
and/or detained on charges of: threatening the security of the State; insulting the head of State
and government officials; caricaturing the head of Government; puffing at risk the unity and best
interest of the country; incitement to public unrest; possessing information that could jeopardize
the country's stability; publishing anti-patriotic information; reporting on cormption in
Government; inciting hatred; collecting dissident news; treason and spying; violating the press
law, disclosing and distributing false news, blasphemy; possessing immoral documents;
disseminating subversive information over the Internet; publishing immoral and obscene
material.
54. It should be noted that, while a majority of cases of arrest and detention involved
journalists and other media professionals, communications received by the Special Rapporteur
this year also referred to members of political parties, trade unions, religious and indigenous
communities and NGOs. These actions often resulted in the peremptory and unlawthl seizure of
materials such as books, magazines, pamphlets, research, video and audio equipment, computers
and other kinds of equipment used by the broadcasting media.
C. Administrative and legal measures and repressive
measures in connection with the media
55. While less numerous than communications related to arrests, detentions, physical harm
and threats and harassment, information on administrative and/or legal sanctions continued to be
trai smitted to the Special Rapporteur. These sanctions result in violations and infringements of
the rights that are the subject of his mandate. The Special Rapporteur has noted that in a number
of cases, the sanctions have a direct, immediate and negative impact on the right to seek, receive
and impart information. As such, they are of grave concern to the Special Rapporteur, and in
that connection he would like to remind Governments of their duty to take immediate remedial
measures and actions to eliminate these sanctions from both law and practice.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 17
56. A significant number of cases brought to the attention of the Special Rapporteur
concerned bai's, closure or seizure of publications and/or other media for having, for instance:
investigated the killing of an opposition leader; aired a political debate critical to the orgathzation
of forthcoming elections; published information deemed false and defamatory; published a
cartoon of the Head of State and military officials; promoted anti-patriotic feelings; published
immoral publications. Legislation and measures introduced after the events of 11 September
which have an impact on the right to freedom of opinion and expression are discussed in
section IV of the present report.
57. Additionally, it has been noted that pressure has been exerted on media professionals and
others through such administrative measures as the denial of licences to private and foreign
stations and the denial of entry permits to, or expulsion of, journalists on the grounds that they
are distributing false and tendentious information on the country.
58. Finally, cases of criminal penalties have also been reported to the Special Rapporteur.
These penalties were imposed on a number of grounds including: libel, responsibility for public
disorder and social unrest, blasphemy, defamation and insult, immoral reporting.
IV. ISSUES
A. World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination,
Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
59. The Special Rapporteur participated actively in the World Conference. He was invited to
attend the Asian Regional Preparatory Conference in Teheran, the Preparatory Committee
meeting (he was able only to attend the second session) and the Conference itself in Durban. He
issued, jointly with the OSCE Representative on freedom of the media, and the OAS Special
Rapporteur on freedom of expression, a statement on 27 Febmary 2001 on Racism and the
Media (annex VI).
60. Pursuant to Commission on Human Rights resolution 2000/38 (para. 13 (g)), the Special
Rapporteur submitted a contribution to the Preparatory Committee and the World Conference
(AICONF. 1 89/PC.2/24). In this report the Special Rapporteur, after recalling the international
legal standards which he feels are relevant both to the right to freedom of opinion and expression
and the fight against racism and related intolerance, addressed a few key points which he
considered of importance inthe context of both his mandate andthe objectives of the World
Conference. He then analysed hate speech as an area of conflict between the right to freedom of
expression and the principle of non-discrimination, as well as the issue of Internet.
61. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion
and expression, particularly by the media, and the full respect for the right to freedom of
information contribute extensively to the fight against racism, discrimination, xenophobia and
related intolerance and to the free flow of information, ideas being one of the most powerthl
ways of combating these phenomena.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 18
1. Hate speech
62. With regard to hate speech, the Special Rapporteur is of the view that the right to
freedom of expression should remain unabridged. However, he acknowledges that in some
circumstances, and in particular when freedom of speech leads to the incitement of hatred and/or
discrimination, this right conflicts with the rights of others.
63. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur recognizes that “hate speech”, or the advocacy
of national, racial, religious or other hatred, constitutes an area which commands due and proper
attention. The Special Rapporteur is aware of, and concerned at, the potential harm, whether
psychological or physical, which can result from hate speech, in particular incitement to
violence, heightened tensions between groups of different cultural, etimic, racial and religious
identities, and the perpetuation of stereotypes.
64. In light of these concerns, the Special Rapporteur recognizes that hate speech calls for
reasonable restrictions which are necessary to prevent incitement to acts of imminent violence,
hatred or discrimination on grounds, among others, of race, religion, colour, descent, or ethnic or
national origin. As such, and in accordance with the relevant international standards, the Special
Rapporteur wishes to condemn any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that
constitutes an incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence; such advocacy should be
prohibited by law.
65. At the same time, the Special Rapporteur expresses concern about the possibility of such
prohibitions being abused, particularly where respect for human rights and the rule of law is
weak and hate speech laws have been used in the past against those they were intended to
protect.
66. The Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that great care must be taken to achieve an
appropriate balance between the rights to freedom of opinion and expression and to receive and
impart information, and the prohibition on speech and/or activities promoting racist views and
inciting violence.
2. The Internet
67. The Special Rapporteur considers the Internet to be an increasingly important human
rights education tool which contributes to a broader awareness of international human rights
standards, provisions and principles. He is of the view that ‘The new tecimologies and, in
particular, the Internet are inherently democratic, provide the public and individuals with access
to information sources and enable all to participate actively in the communication process”
(E/CN.4/1998/40, para. 45).
68. The Special Rapporteur stresses the significant contribution that the use of new
tecimologies such as the Internet can make in the fight against racism. The global reach and
relative ease of use of the Internet make it a unique and highly effective tool for the promotion of
human rights, enabling an unprecedented audience previously unfamiliar with human rights
education to gain access to valuable information. It can be used to disseminate positive
E/cN.4/2002/75
page 19
information and materials, research and facts about immigration and minorities which can in turn
support action against racism and discrimination, raise awareness, promote understanding and
increase tolerance.
69. At the same time, the Special Rapporteur recognizes the legitimacy of concerns about
dissemination over the Internet of racist and xenophobic material such as hate speech, which
constitutes a contemporary form of racism. He is aware that the features that make the Internet
an asset to democracy and the realization of human rights also render it a powerful tool for the
spread of hateful messages and propaganda, and that the Internet makes hate speech available to
those who would never before have come into contact with it. In other words, he acknowledges
that although “racist material represents only a small percentage of the volume of information on
the Internet and that racists in cyberspace are comparatively few and far between, the Internet
does act as a ‘force multiplier, enhancing power and enabling racists' to have influence in excess
of their true numbers. The Internet allows racists to cross national boundaries and bypass laws
baiming hate material by moving sites abroad” (AICONF. 189/Pc. 1/5).
70. In light of these considerations, the Special Rapporteur condemns the abuse of the
Internet by some groups and/or persons to promote racist and hate speech in violation of
international law, or the use of the Internet as a platform for any kind of speech which exceeds
the threshold of tolerance. However, the Special Rapporteur believes that the dangers posed by
such materials on the Internet can be adequately addressed through the judicious application of
existing international standards and national laws consistent with international standards
governing freedom of opinion and expression and the right to seek, receive and impart
information. He considers that online expression should be guided by international standards
and be guaranteed the same protection as is awarded to other forms of expression.
B. The events of 11 September
71. The Special Rapporteur condemns unreservedly the attacks of 11 September on the
World Trade centre and the Pentagon and expresses his deepest sympathy for the victims of
those attacks. Such an attack is an assault on the most fundamental of all human rights - the
right to life - and should be condemned unequivocally.
72. He notes that the views of those who launched the attack developed in closed societies
and communities, without access to full freedom of expression, in an atmosphere of hatred, anger
and conspiracy. Guaranteeing frilly the right to freedom of expression and to receive and impart
information, as guaranteed by article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is a
powerfil antidote to the apocalyptic nihilism demonstrated by those who committed these
attacks. The Special Rapporteur believes that peace and justice can onlybe secured bybuilding
open societies that guarantee freedom of expression and the right to dissent.
73. The events of 11 September were an attack upon human rights and, as such, the Special
Rapporteur believes it is particularly important that States consider the human rights implications
of any measures they adopt in response. This is true both of measures directed at those who
plaimed and perpetrated the attacks, which should focus on bringing them to justice rather than
revenge, and of measures designed to prevent further attacks in the future. Human rights should
be at the centre of any attempt to deal with the aftermath of these terrible events.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 20
74. The Special Rapporteur notes that several States have responded to the events
of 11 September by adopting laws which have negative implications for certain rights, including
freedom of expression. To respond to tenor by rolling back human rights which in some cases
have taken centuries to establish is to play into the hands of the terrorists and to let fear
overcome rights.
75. The attacks of 11 September 2001 and their aftermath have led to both decisions by the
relevant authorities in a number of countries and statements and behaviour by ordinary citizens
that have seriously challenged the very principles upon which respect for human rights depends.
76. There are several other observations that the Special Rapporteur would like to make in
the context of the events of 11 September. First, there has been a disturbing trend, particularly in
the coverage by the media in North America, in which the views and opinions of those who
dissent or express concerns are aggressively met with contempt. In a number of instances, it has
been suggested by both officials and, for example, “talk-radio” commentators, that anyone who
questions the measures, laws and policies that are now current is “unpatriotic” and, by their
criticisms, are giving aid and comfort to ‘The enemy”. Similarly, there have been a number of
instances in which intolerance has been strongly expressed by some in response to what they see
as unwarranted sensitivities based on “political correctness”. The Special Rapporteur cautions
against such intolerance of dissent and alternative views.
77. In addition, the reports of harassment and violence against followers of Islam are of deep
concern. The right freely to adopt and mathfest one's religion is one of the most basic rights and
must be frilly respected and protected at all times. The Special Rapporteur commends those
authorities who have taken prompt and appropriate action in response to incidents of threat,
arson and physical assault. The authorities at the local level and community orgathzations and
activists are to be commended for their efforts aimed at public education and their consistent
condemnation of those who would act against others for the simple reason that those others do
not look, speak or dress like them.
78. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur is also concerned that some States have sought to
restrict the international and national media in the way they report on the conflicts in
Afghathstan and elsewhere. It is vital to the legitimacy of the media that they be able to make
editorial judgements as to how conflict is reported, whose views are reported and how events are
presented. Authorities summoning journalists to “discuss editorial mailers” can have a chilling
effect on coverage of conflict and even if such pressure is resisted, it can cloud public
perceptions about the impartiality of the media. The Special Rapporteur notes with particular
concern reports of attempts to inhibit independent coverage of the conflict in Afghathstan by
Al .Tazeera, a leading independent media outlet in the Middle East, a region otherwise
characterized by excessive government control over the media. The Special Rapporteur
emphasizes the need for continuing coverage by the media of the situation in Afghaiñstan and
underscores the need to invite more women and youth to participate in their programmes as
experts or commentators on all mailers, political, economic, social and cultural.
79. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur also notes with concern the effects of censorship
and control over the media within Afghathstan itself, including the denial of women's right to
freedom of expression and the restrictions upon any public display of music or television
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 21
imposed by the Taliban. He recommends that the United Nations, in its attempts to secure a
lasting political sefflement in Afghathstai , prioritize the importance of establishing effective
guarantees of freedom of expression and of putting in place a regulatory framework for the
media in line with international guarantees. Finally, the Special Rapporteur notes the importance
in this endeavour of involving the Afghan media community, including those in exile, as well as
the many women who are active in the media and public life.
C. Broadcasting
80. The Special Rapporteur wishes to thaw to the attention of States the importance of
respect for freedom of expression in relation to broadcasting, and to elaborate on a number of
points raised in previous reports. He would like to stress that for the vast majority of people in
the world, broadcasting, and particularly radio, is the primary source of information and news. It
is thus of the greatest importance that this medium is able to operate independently and in the
public interest.
81. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that a key way to serve the public interest is by
ensuring the availability of the widest possible range of information and ideas through
broadcasting. He believes that promoting diversity should be a primary goal of broadcast
regulation. He has also noted that in a number of countries, the State still has a monopoly over
broadcasting and private broadcasters are either not allowed at all or are restricted to the cable
and satellite sectors. The Special Rapporteur considers that such monopolies can no longer be
justified and that all States should put in place regulatory frameworks which provide for the
licensing of both commercial and community broadcasters, including through terrestrial
trai smission systems. Indeed, the regulatory framework should seek to promote maximum
utilization of the airwaves in the public interest.
82. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur strongly believes that diversity also implies the equal
opportunity for all sectors of society to access the airwaves. The Special Rapporteur has noted
that in many countries, broadcasting is dominated by men and womenjournalists are consigned
to lower echelons. Steps should be taken to address this serious problem, particularly with
respect to public broadcasters which have an obligation to reflect and serve society as a whole.
Similarly, minorities have a right to access the airwaves. Public broadcasters should ensure that
their programming serves all members of society and broadcasting authorities should take steps
to ensure that minority groups have non-discriminatory access to licences.
83. The Special Rapporteur is also of the view that public broadcasters should serve the
public, not the Government or the party in power. This implies protection against political and
commercial interference, including through the appointment of an independent governing board
and respect for editorial independence. It also requires broadcasters to have a clear mandate
setting out the various types of programming they should provide, including a comprehensive,
balanced news service.
84. Similarly, broadcast regulators, and other public bodies which exercise power over
broadcasters, should be protected against political and commercial interference. Licensing
processes should be transparent and fair, with clear criteria, published in advance, for deciding
between competing applications.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 22
85. The Special Rapporteur believes that broadcasting needs an appropriate economic
environment if it is to flourish and provide a diversity of information to the public. This means
that licence fees should not be excessive and that other licensing conditions should not be
onerous, taking into account the level of commercial development of the sector. Furthermore, he
would invite States to take positive measures to promote the spread of appropriate tecimology
and in the area of training. States should also actively promote universal reception of
broadcasting. At the same time, effective mles on undue concentration of ownership are needed
to prevent domination of this key medium by a small number of players.
86. The Special Rapporteur has noted that although historically States posed the greatest
threat to independent and diverse broadcasting, a new threat has emerged in the form of
excessive commercialization of this sector. In some cases, owners treat broadcasting enterprises
as businesses rather than as communication media, interfering with editorial independence for
commercial or political reasons. The Special Rapporteur encourages owners and their
professional staff to conclude agreements that guarantee editorial independence and to ensure
that commercial considerations do not unduly influence media content. At the same time,
elected officials and members of Government who are media owners should refrain from
influencing the content of their media ouflets. One way of doing this would be for officials to
put their media interests under the control of trustees for the duration of their time in office.
87. Finally, the Special Rapporteur considers that another problem of excessive
commercialization is the airing of the cheapest programmes to the detriment of quality and
diversity. One solution to this problem is to require broadcasters to carry minimum quotas of
locally produced material so as to protect local voices from being overwhelmed by programming
imported cheaply from abroad. Another solution is to set broadcasters a range of percentages of
different types of programmes, such as documentaries, films, news, educational and children's
material, and soon. The Special Rapporteur stresses, however, that there is a risk of political
interference where these approaches are applied unless the broadcast regulator operates free of
political or commercial interference.
D. The Internet
88. The Special Rapporteur wishes to thaw the attention of States to the importance of the
Internet to the exercise of the right to freedom of expression. The Internet is a key instrument
both in terms of receiving information and for the right to disseminate information and ideas, and
should be put to use in the pursuit of respect for rights and social justice. The Internet has
enormous potential but, unfortunately, that potential is still largely available only to those in
more-developed countries.
1. The digital divide
89. The Special Rapporteur notes that the overwhelming majority of Internet users continue
to be found in the more-developed societies and that, even within richer societies, there is a
considerable “digital divide” between low-income families and the better off. This means that
the majority of the world's population cannot harness the power of the Internet as a vehicle for
free expression, democratic empowerment, the advancement of human rights and development.
This is exacerbated by the increasing reliance of many actors on the Internet, to the detriment of
more traditional forms of communication.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 23
90. The Special Rapporteur would stress that there is no single barrier to Internet access.
Economic wealth, both of countries and of individuals, is clearly an important factor; poor
infrastructure, the high cost of telecommunications and, in some countries, the lack of cheap,
reliable electricity hamper Internet access. In addition, there is a need for sufficient training,
tecimical expertise and basic education.
91. Wealth is not the only barrier. The Special Rapporteur has received information that
some countries still impose legal and regulatory barriers to access, exacerbating existing barriers.
He would like in that connection to recall that in his report to the Commission on Human Rights
at its fifiy-seventh session (E/CN.4/2001/64), he paid considerable attentionto the question of
the Internet and expressed his concern about excessive control of access. During the last year,
access restrictions in many States have remained in force. In some States, access to the Internet
is restricted to the elite while in others, access is controlled through licensing regimes for
Internet service providers or even individual users. In some States, access is possible only
through Government-controlled “filtered” gateways.
92. The Special Rapporteur would like to express his support for national and international
initiatives to extend Internet access, including the Sustainable Network Development programme
administered by the United Nations Development Programme. At the same time, there is a need
for an internationally coordinated strategy if global access is to be achieved. In this regard, the
Special Rapporteur commends recent progress made through the Group of Eight Digital
Opportunity Task Force, as well as the newly inaugurated ICT Task Force of the United Nations.
2. Internet regulation
93. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned at continuing reports of excessive Internet
content regulation and of on-line surveillance. Whilst there are legitimate concerns about the
availability of illegal material on the Internet, including child pornography, neo-Nazi propaganda
and hate speech, any restrictions on the Internet must remain within the strict parameters set by
article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Some States seek to
justify stringent regulation on the grounds that it is necessary to preserve the moral fabric and
cultural identity of the society. The Special Rapporteur warns that excessively stringent
regulation on these grounds betrays a paternalistic attitude and frustrates the Internet's potential
to ensure respect in practice for the right to freedom of expression.
94. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur has noted that since the events of 11 September,
many States have adopted measures allowing for increased surveillance of the Internet. The
Special Rapporteur is concerned about the negative impact of such measures on the right to
freedom of expression and urges States to seek a fair balance in such regulation. The Special
Rapporteur notes that encryption and anonymity software has been developed which can provide
protection against unwarranted on-line surveillance, and encourages the use and continued
development of these tools.
95. Finally, the Special Rapporteur, maintaining once again that the new technologies, in
particular the Internet, are inherently democratic, provide the public and individuals with access
to information sources and enable all to participate actively in the communication process, once
again urges States to avoid adopting separate rules limiting Internet content.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 24
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Conclusions
96. The Special Rapporteur strongly believes that the right to freedom of expression can be
described as an essential test right, the enjoyment of which illustrates the degree of enjoyment of
all human rights enshrined in the International Bill of Human Rights, and that respect for this
right reflects a country's standards of fair play, justice and integrity.
97. While the Special Rapporteur notes with satisfaction a growing tide in favour of human
rights, and that almost all Governments seem to be upholding the sanctity of the principle of
freedom of opinion and expression, at the same lime he is still encountering innumerable cases
of grave violations of human rights.
98. Long-standing patterns of harassment and oppression of persons whose views and
opinions differ from those of persons holding power persist in a number of countries. In many
instances, restrictions on the freedom of opinion and expression limit to a significant extent the
possibility of violations becoming known and investigated. In the view of the Special
Rapporteur, such trends perpetuate patterns of government cormption and impunity.
99. From the communications received during the period under review, the Special
Rapporteur is compelled to conclude that, as in previous years, violations of the right to freedom
of expression occur in all parts of the world. In a number of instances, these violations and
violations of other human rights concur, including those related to extrajudicial, arbitrary or
summary executions, enforced or involuntary disappearances, torture, religious intolerance and
arbitrary detention. The rights to freedom of opinion, expression and information are violated in
States with widely different political systems and institutional frameworks for governance.
100. The Special Rapporteur condemns the attacks of 11 September in the strongest terms as
crimes against humanity. He would like, however, to express his deep concern that measures
taken by some States have targeted certain groups, in particular religious and etimic minorities,
political activists and the media. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned that some States have
sought to restrict the international and national media in the way they report on the conflict in
Afghathstan and elsewhere. He considers that it is vital to the legitimacy of the media that they
be able to make editorial judgements as to how the conflict is reported, whose views are reported
and how events are presented. Authorities summoning journalists to “discuss editorial mailers”
can have a chilling effect on coverage of the conflict and even if such pressure is resisted, it can
cloud public perceptions about the impartiality of the media.
101. A mailer of particular concern to the Special Rapporteur is the threat that human rights
concerns, including freedom of expression, have declined in importance on the international
agenda. Close international scmtiny of certain States for human rights reasons now seems to
have faded and some NGOs have reported that States and intergovernmental orgathzations are
less responsive to their appeals than formerly. While it is of the greatest importance that a strong
coalition against tenor be maintained, this caimot, in itself, be a reason to sideline human rights.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 25
102. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned at continuing reports of excessive Internet
content regulation and of on-line surveillance. He is concerned that in some States, access to the
Internet is restricted to the elite while in others, access is controlled through licensing regimes
for Internet service providers or even individual users. In some States, access is possible only
through Government-controlled “filtered gateways”. Any restrictions on the Internet must
remain within the strict parameters set by article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights. The Special Rapporteur notes that encryption and anonymity software has
been developed which can provide protection against unwarranted on-line surveillance, and
encourages the use and continued development of these tools.
103. With regard to the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination Xenophobia
and Related Intolerance, the Special Rapporteur considers that the free flow of information and
ideas is one of the most powerful ways of combating these evils. There should be free access to
information which exposes or otherwise helps to combat racism, whether that information is held
by public or private bodies, unless denial of access can be justified as necessary to protect an
overriding public interest. In addition, States should ensure that the public has adequate access
to reliable information relating to racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance including,
where necessary, through the collection and dissemination of such information by public
authorities. The Special Rapporteur considers that media organizations, media enterprises and
media workers - particularly public service broadcasters - have a moral and social obligation to
make a positive contribution to the fight against racism, discrimination, xenophobia and
intolerance.
104. Finally, the Special Rapporteur is still very concerned at the continuing silencing of
women in many areas.
B. Recommendations
105. While noting that the cooperation of Governments in the discharge of his mandate
continued to be satisfactory (e.g. the number of invitations to conduct field visits received this
year), the Special Rapporteur would like to encourage all Governments to cooperate with his
mandate as set out in Commission resolution 2000/86, in particular with regard to
communications addressed to them.
106. Further to the events of 11 September, the Special Rapporteur would like to urge all
Governments not to respond to terror by adopting laws which have a negative impact on the
realization of human rights, in particular the right to freedom of opinion and expression as stated
in article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Special Rapporteur strongly
believes that it is of the utmost importance, after the events of 11 September, that States consider
the human rights implications of any measures they adopt in response. He urges that efforts
aimed at mutual respect and tolerance be strengthened and that they not be limited in time but
continue beyond the exigencies of the moment.
107. He would like to stress that human rights should be at the centre of any attempt to deal
with the aftermath of these terrible events. Therefore, he would like to invite all Governments to
review laws specifically intended to protect national security and to scrutinize their domestic
legal systems with a view to bringing them into line with international standards governing the
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 26
right to freedom of opinion and expression. He also encourages all States that have not ratified
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to do so.
108. The Special Rapporteur is particularly concerned about the “argument of necessity”. He
urges the authorities who most frequently use this argument, in all countries, to make public as
much information as possible related to those questioned or detained and to ensure that their
rights to frill disclosure, to be heard and to respond to any evidence held or presented against
them are frilly respected.
109. With regard to the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination,
Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, at the time the Special Rapporteur was finalizing the
present report the Declaration and Programme of Action of the World Conference were not
available. However, the Special Rapporteur would like to offer the following suggestions. It
will be usefril to define the relationship that will exist between the OHCHR Anti-Discrimination
Unit and the special procedures. Particular attention should be paid to the methodology in order
to avoid overlap and duplication, in particular with regard to relationships with NGOs in areas
such as the presentation of situations and cases of racism. The coordination that could be
implemented between the Unit, the special procedures and the Quick Response Desk should be
on the agenda of the next aimual meeting of the special rapporteurs. Also, the special procedures
should be able to make recommendations to the Anti-Discrimination Unit on issues that may
deserve specific thought, research and analysis, and eventually recommend tecimical cooperation
programmes on issues which they have identified as being critical. As soon as the Durban
Programme of Action is adopted by the General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur intends to
compile in a synoptic table the issues raised in Durban which are relevant to his mandate and to
include it in his next report to the Commission.
110. The Special Rapporteur would like to recall that new tecimologies, in particular the
Internet, are inherently democratic, provide the public and individuals with access to information
sources and enable all to participate actively in the communication process. He remains
concerned at information received regarding the efforts of some Governments either to control or
shut down access to the Internet. In that connection, he would like to refer to his report to the
Commission at its fifty-seventh session (E/CN.4/200 1/64). He urges States actively to promote
universal access to the Internet and not to adopt separate rules limiting Internet content.
111. Noting that broadcasting, particularly radio, is, for the vast majority of people, the
primary source of information and news, the Special Rapporteur considers of the greatest
importance that this medium be able to operate independently and in the public interest. Public
broadcasters should serve the public, not the Government or the party in power, and should be
protected against political and commercial interference, including through the appointment of an
independent governing board and respect for editorial independence. Additionally, he would
like to recommend that licensing processes should be transparent and fair, with clear criteria,
published in advance, for deciding between competing applications. He also recommends that
effective measures be adopted to prevent undue concentration of media ownership.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 27
112. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur would like to recommend that States take positive
measures to promote the spread of appropriate technology and in the area of training. States
should also actively promote universal reception of broadcasting. At the same time, effective
rules on undue concentration of ownership are required to prevent domination of this key
medium by a small number of players. He also recommends that owners and their professional
staff conclude agreements to guarantee editorial independence and ensure that commercial
considerations do not unduly influence media content.
113. As allegations transmitted to the Special Rapporteur relating to the abuse of libel and
defamation laws continue to be numerous, he would like to recall the recommendation made in
an earlier report (E/CN.4/2000/63, para. 205) that Governments should ensure that press offences
are no longer punishable by terms of imprisonment, except in cases involving racist or
discriminatory comments or calls to violence. Along the same lines, the Special Rapporteur
would urge all Governments to ensure that the fines which the media or any
orgathzation/individual is sentenced to pay for offences such as “defamation”, “libel”, “insults”
and publication of “false” or “alarmist” information are not out of proportion to the harm
suffered by the victims. He would like to reiterate strongly that such fines caimot be used by
Governments to limit the right to receive and impart information and ideas.
114. Additionally, the Special Rapporteur is extremely concerned at the high number of cases
of violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression committed by non-State actors,
and therefore he would like to reiterate his suggestion that the Commission on Human Rights
consider how and by what means the international community can pay particular and coherent
attention to the question of non-State actors and action by them that infringes upon or restricts
the rights to freedom of opinion and expression.
115. Furthermore the Special Rapporteur urges Governments to take all necessary steps to
remove formal and cultural obstacles to the exercise by women of their right to freedom of
opinion and expression, including the right to receive information. The Special Rapporteur is of
the view that special efforts to gather and analyse information on that specific issue should be
made. In this regard, he invites submissions by Governments, international organizations,
specialized agencies, NGOs and individuals.
116. The Special Rapporteur would like also, in accordance with Commission
resolution 2001/47, to call on Governments to provide him with comments on their
programmes and policies with respect to access to information for the purposes of education
on and prevention of HIV, in order for him to be able to present his recommendations to the
Commission at its next session, with a view to undertaking a comparative study of the different
approaches taken in the various regions and countries in this regard.
117. Finally, the Special Rapporteur, regrettably, deems it necessary to repeat his deep
concern as regards the imbalance between the requirements set out by the mandate and the
inadequate financial and human resources put at his disposal, despite the recent establishment of
the Quick Response Desk and a thematic database within the Thematic Mechanisms Team.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 28
Notes
1 See almexes 1,2and6.
2 Some letters by the Special Rapporteur were sent with more than one other special mechathsm
This press release may be consulted on the OHCHR website: www.unhchr.ch .
‘ See annexes IV and V.
Ms. Mona Rishmawi and Mr. Thomas Hammarberg.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 29
Annex I
General statistics on communications sent to and received from Governments
Africa
Asia
Eastern
Europe
Western
Europe
and other
Latin America
and the
Caribbean
Total
No. of countries to
which UA and LA were
sent
27
22
5
2
13
69
No. ofUAsent
50
47
4
7
16
124
No. ofjointUA(with
thematic and country
mechathsms)
28
28
1
5
13
77
No.ofLAsent
15
10
5
-
7
37
No. ofjoint LA (with
thematic and country
mechathsms)
5
2
4
-
4
15
No.ofPR
1
-
-
1
-
2
No. of Government
replies
13
17
3
5
7
45
UA - urgent appeals
LA - letters of allegation
PR - press releases
Annex II
Statistics on joint communications
Letters of allegation
Urgent appeals
Number ofjoint communications 15* 77*
Thematic mechanisms
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on 2 14
Human Rights on extrajudicial, summary or
arbitrary executions
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on 1 3
Human Rights on the independence of judges
and lawyers
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on 12 33
Human Rights on the question of torture
Special Representative of the Secretary-General 2 15
on human rights defenders
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on 3
Human Rights on violence against women,
its causes and consequences
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention 0 23
Country specific rapporteurs
Democratic Republic of the Congo 0 4
Equatorial Guinea 0
Islamic Republic of Iran 0 2
Sudan 0 6
* Some allegations and urgent appeals were sent by more than one special rapporteur,
which explains why the total is higher.
E/CN.4/2002/7 5
page 30
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 31
Annex III
Detailed statistics on urgent appeals (UA), letters of allegation (LA)
and press releases (PR) issued by the Special Rapporteur
Africa
Asia
Eastern Europe
Western Europe
and other
Latin America
and the Caribbean
UA LA PR
UA LA PR
UA LA PR
UA LA PR
UA LA PR
No. of countries to
which UA and LA
were sent
27
22
5
2
13
No.of
communications
sent by the SR
50
15
1
47
10
-
4
5
-
7
-
1
16
7
-
No.ofcountries
concerned
23
12
1
21
8
-
3
4
-
2
-
1
12
5
-
No. ofinth duals
332
69
5
411
42
-
3
129
-
59
-
1
67
21
-
No.ofwomen
6
5
-
1
-
-
2
8
-
4
-
-
6
2
-
No.ofminors
16
-
-
3
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
No. ofratho stations
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
No.ofnewspapers
15
7
-
4
6
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
-
No.oftelevision/
media outlets
-
-
-
2
2
-
-
3
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
No.oflaws/
threctives/
athnini strative
measures
3
2
1
2
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Politicalparties !
move ments 7
trade unions
2
1
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
2
-
-
Demonstrations!
civil unrest
1
-
-
2
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
No.ofGovernment
replies
10
3
-
17
1
-
2
1
-
S
-
-
5
2
-
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 32
Annex IV
Joint statement issued on 10 December 2001 by 17 independent experts of
the Commission on Human Rights on the occasion of Human Rights Day
On the occasion of United Nations Human Rights Day, the undersigned independent
experts of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights strongly remind States of their
obligations under international law to uphold human rights and ifindamental freedoms in the
context of the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001.
We express our deep concern over the adoption or contemplation of anti-terrorist and
national security legislation and other measures that may infringe upon the enjoyment for all of
human rights and ifindamental freedoms. We deplore human rights violations and measures that
have particularly targeted groups such as human rights defenders, migrants, asylum-seekers and
reffigees, religious and ethnic minorities, political activists and the media. Concerned authorities
have already been requested to take appropriate actions to guarantee the respect for human rights
and thndamental freedoms in a number of individual cases drawn to the attention of relevant
independent experts. We shall continue to monitor the situation closely.
We remind States of the fundamental principle of non-discrimination which guarantees
that everyone is entifled to all rights and freedoms “without distinction of any kind, such as race,
colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth
or other status” (article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). We also remind States
that under international human rights law some rights caimot be derogated from under any
circumstances, including in times of public emergency. These include: the right to life, the
prohibition of torture or cmel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the freedom of
thought, conscience and religion, as well as the principles of precision and non-retroactivity of
criminal law except where a later law imposes a lighter penalty. Furthermore, we call upon
States to take appropriate measures to uphold the respect for ifindamental rights such as the right
to liberty and security of the person, the right to be free from arbitrary arrest, the presumption of
innocence, the right to a fair trial, the right to freedom of opinion, expression and assembly and
the right to seek asylum.
We call upon States to limit the measures taken to the extent stricily required by the
exigencies of the situation. Public policies must strike a fair balance between, on the one hand,
the enjoyment of human rights and ifindamental freedoms for all and, on the other hand,
legitimate concerns over national and international security. The fight against terrorism must not
result in violations of human rights, as guaranteed under international law.
Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on religious
intolerance
Enrique Bernales Ballesteros, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights
on the use of mercenaries as a means of impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to
self-determination
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 33
Theo van Boven, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the question of
toiture
Radhika Coomaraswamy, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on violence
against women, its causes and consequences
Dato' Param Cumaraswamy, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the
independence of judges and lawyers
Francis Deng, Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons
Abid Hussain, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the promotion and
protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
Asma .Tahangir, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on extrajudicial,
summary or arbitrary executions
Hina Jilath, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders
Mioon Kothari, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on adequate housing
as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living
Anne-Marie Lizin, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on human rights
and extreme poverty
Juan Miguel Petit, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the sale of
children, child prostitution and child pornography
Gabriela Rodriguez Pizarro, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the
human rights of migrants
Katarina Tomasevski, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the right to
education
Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the right to food
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 34
Annex V
Challenges to freedom of expression in the new century: joint statement
by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and
expression, the OSCE Representative on freedom of the media and the
OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression
Having met with representatives of NGOs, UNESCO, journalists' associations and
human rights experts in London on 19 and 20 November 2001, under the auspices of Article 19,
Global Campaign for Free Expression, assisted by Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, we:
Recall and reaffirm our joint declarations of 26 November 1999 and 30 November 2000;
Condemn the criminal terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 and extend our deepest
feelings of sympathy to the victims;
Are of the view that the events of 11 September 2001 and their aftermath highlight the
importance of open public debate based on the free exchange of ideas, and should serve as a
catalyst for States all over the world to bolster guarantees of freedom of expression;
Express our deep concern about the consequences these events are having for the right to
freedom of expression at the advent of the “electronic century” which is witnessing the growing
dominance of forms of communication such as broadcasting and the Internet;
Are aware of the fact that broadcasting remains the most important source of information
for most people in the world;
Recognize the growing importance of regional mechathsms in promoting the right to
freedom of expression and the need to promote such mechathsms in every region of the world,
including in Africa and Asia;
Recall the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia
and Related Intolerance in Durban and our joint statement on Racism and the Media of
27 Febmary 2001, which stated: “Promoting an optimal role for the media in the fight against
racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance requires a comprehensive approach which
includes an appropriate civil, criminal and administrative law framework, and which promotes
tolerance, including through education, self-regulation and other positive measures”;
Adopt the following Declaration:
Countering terror
— Terror must not triumph over human rights in general, and freedom of expression in
particular;
— Certain Governments have, in the aftermath of the events of 11 September, adopted
measures or taken steps to limit freedom of expression and curtail the free flow of
information; this reaction plays into the hands of the terrorists;
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 35
— Guarantees for freedom of expression have developed over centuries but they can
easily be rolled back; we are particularly concerned that recent moves by some
Governments to introduce legislation limiting freedom of expression set a bad
precedent;
— We are of the view that an effective strategy to address tenor must include
reaffirming values and strengthening democratic values, based on the right to freedom
of expression;
— The events of 11 September have brought in their wake a rise in racism and attacks
against Islam; we call on Governments, as well as the media, to do everything within
their power to combat this dangerous trend.
Broadcasting
— Promoting diversity should be a primary goal of broadcast regulation; diversity
implies gender equity within broadcasting, as well as equal opportunity for all
sections of society to access the airwaves;
— Broadcast regulators and governing bodies should be so constituted as to protect
broadcasters against political and commercial interference;
— Effective measures should be adopted to prevent undue concentration of media
ownership;
— Media owners and media professionals should be encouraged to conclude agreements
to guarantee editorial independence; commercial considerations should not unduly
influence media content;
— We are of the view that elected political officials and members of Government who
are media owners must separate their political activities from their media interests.
The Internet
— The right to freedom of expression applies to the Internet, just as it does to other
communication media;
— The international community, as well as national Governments, should actively
promote universal access to the Internet, including through supporting the
establishment of information communication tecimology (ICT) centres;
— States should not adopt separate rules limiting Internet content.
22 November 2001
Abid Hussain, United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression
Freimut Duve, OSCE Representative on freedom of the media
Santiago Canton, OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 36
Annex VI
Joint statement by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom
of opinion and expression, the OSCE Representative on freedom of the
media and the OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression on
Racism and the Media
In support of the objectives and with the desire to make a contribution to the preparations
for the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance, we:
Reaffirm that the promotion of equality, and freedom from racism, discrimination,
xenophobia and intolerance are essential to the realization of human rights and freedoms;
Stress the frmndamental importance of the right to freedom of expression, including of the
media, for the personal development, dignity and fulfilment of every individual, for the
promotion and protection of equality and democracy, for the enjoyment of other human rights
and freedoms, and for the progress and welfare of society;
Note with concern the prevalence of racism and discrimination, as well as the existence
in many countries and regions of the world of a climate of intolerance, and the threat these pose
to equality and frill enjoyment of human rights and freedoms;
Recognize the positive contribution the exercise of the right to freedom of expression,
particularly by the media, and frill respect for the right to freedom of information can make to the
fight against racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance;
Recognize as harmfril all forms of expression which incite or otherwise promote racial
hatred, discrimination, violence and intolerance and note that crimes against humanity are often
accompathed or preceded by these forms of expression;
Are cognizant of the need to ensure a balance between efforts to combat racism,
discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance, and protection of the right to freedom of expression;
Reiterate the need to respect the editorial independence and autonomy of the media;
Desire to make a contribution to the preparations for the World Conference against
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance;
Adopt the following joint statement:
Promoting an optimal role for the media in the fight against racism, discrimination,
xenophobia and intolerance requires a comprehensive approach which includes an appropriate
civil, criminal and administrative law framework, and which promotes tolerance, including
through education, self-regulation and other positive measures.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 37
These efforts must be made with the realization that respect for freedom of expression
and information ensures that all citizens have access to information which helps them form their
opinions and challenges their views, and which they need to make decisions.
Civil, criminal and administrative law measures
Any civil, criminal or administrative law measures that constitute an interference with
freedom of expression must be provided bylaw, serve a legitimate aim as set out in international
law and be necessary to achieve that aim. This implies that any such measures are clearly and
narrowly defined, are applied by a body which is independent of political, commercial or other
unwarranted influences and in a manner which is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory, and are
subject to adequate safeguards against abuse, including the right of access to an independent
court or tribunal. If these safeguards are not in effect, there is a very real possibility of such
measures being abused, particularly where respect for human rights and democracy is weak, and
hate speech laws have in the past been used against those they should be protecting.
In accordance with international and regional law, hate speech laws should, at a
minimum, conform to the following: no one should be penalized for statements which are true;
no one should be penalized for the dissemination of hate speech unless it has been shown that
they did so with the intention of inciting discrimination, hostility or violence; the right of
journalists to decide how best to communicate information and ideas to the public should be
respected, particularly when they are reporting on racism and intolerance; no one should be
subject to prior censorship; and any imposition of sanctions by courts should be in strict
conformity with the principle of proportionality.
These standards should also apply to new communications technologies such as the
Internet, which are of enormous value in promoting the right to freedom of expression and the
free flow of information and ideas, particularly across frontiers and at the global level. Any
restrictions on these new communications tecimologies should not limit or restrict the free flow
of information and ideas protected by the right to freedom of expression, or enable the
authorities to interfere with the work of, or intimidate, human rights defenders.
Defamation laws have in some cases been used to limit the right to freely identify and
openly combat racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. To prevent this from
happening, defamation laws should be brought into line with international standards on freedom
of expression, in particular as outlined in our joint declaration of 30 November 2000.
Freedom of information
The free flow of information and ideas is one of the most powerifil ways of combating
racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. There should be free access to information
which exposes or otherwise helps to combat these problems, whether that information is held by
public or private bodies, unless denial of access can be justified as being necessary to protect an
overriding public interest. In addition, States should ensure that the public has adequate access
to reliable information relating to racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance including,
where necessary, through the collection and dissemination of such information by public
authorities.
E/CN.4/2002/75
page 38
Promoting tolerance
Media orgathzations, media enterprises and media workers - particularly public service
broadcasters - have a moral and social obligation to make a positive contribution to the fight
against racism, discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. There are many ways in which these
bodies and individuals can make such a contribution, including by: designing and delivering
media training programmes which promote a better understanding of issues relating to racism
and discrimination, and which foster a sense of the moral and social obligations of the media to
promote tolerance and knowledge of the practical means by which this may be done; ensuring
that effective ethical and self-regulatory codes of conduct prohibit the use of racist terms and
prejudicial or derogatory stereotypes, and unnecessary references to race, religion and related
attributes; taking measures to ensure that their workforce is diverse and reasonably
representative of society as a whole; taking care to report factually and in a sensitive maimer on
acts of racism or discrimination, while at the same time ensuring that they are brought to the
attention of the public; ensuring that reporting in relation to specific communities promotes a
better understanding of difference and at the same time reflects the perspectives of those
communities and gives members of those communities a chance to be heard; and promoting a
culture of tolerance and a better understanding of the evils of racism and discrimination.
27 Febmary 2001
Abid Hussain,United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression
Freimut Duve,OSCE Representative on freedom of the media
Santiago Canton, OAS Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression
