OVERVIEW
Key facts
Article 19
Freedom of Expression is protected by Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Your voice matters. You have the right to say what you think, share information and demand a better world. You also have the right to agree or disagree with those in power, and to express these opinions in peaceful protests.
Exercising these rights – without fear or unlawful interference – is central to living in an open and fair society; one in which people can access justice and enjoy their human rights.
Diverse opinions are vital for a thriving and happy society. However, freedom of expression is shrinking globally. Many governments are using laws to suppress free thought, speech, writing, and publishing.
Yet governments around the world routinely imprison people – or worse – for speaking out, even though almost every country’s constitution refers to the value of ‘free speech’. A housewife faces legal charges for Facebook posts; students are arrested for holding signs; journalists are jailed for criticizing the government. These are clear signs that freedom of expression is in decline.
Governments are obligated to protect people’s freedoms and enact laws safeguarding freedom of expression. Yet, in practice, this rarely happens. Many people around the world are imprisoned simply for expressing opinions disfavored by those in power.
Governments have a duty to prohibit hateful, inciteful speech but many abuse their authority to silence peaceful dissent by passing laws criminalizing freedom of expression. This is often done in the name of counterterrorism, national security or religion. More recently, freedom of expression has come under threat by authorities clamping down on activists, NGOs and individuals helping refugees and migrants.
How governments tolerate unfavourable views or critical voices is often a good indication of how they treat human rights generally.
Amnesty International supports people who speak out peacefully for themselves and for others – whether a journalist reporting on violence by security forces, a trade unionist exposing poor working conditions or an indigenous leader defending their land rights against big business. We would similarly defend the right of those who support the positions of big business, the security forces and employers to express their views peacefully.
We consider anyone put in prison solely for exercising their right to free speech peacefully to be a prisoner of conscience and call for their immediate and unconditional release.
ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONAL OVERVIEW
The space for freedom of expression continued to shrink across the region. In countries including Indonesia, Nepal and Papua New Guinea, media workers faced violence and intimidation. In Afghanistan, more media outlets were banned, including two private TV stations that were suspended for criticizing the Taliban. Journalists in Myanmar were sentenced to long prison sentences. In Pakistan, at least seven journalists were killed in targeted attacks and dozens of others were arrested and charged under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act.
New laws restricting the right to freedom of expression came into effect in Bangladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan and Viet Nam. Sri Lanka’s new Online Safety Act contained vaguely defined crimes and broad powers leading to fears that it would be used to further restrict free speech. In India, new laws replacing colonial-era legislation were also restrictive and the crime of sedition, used to suppress government critics, was retained. The Chinese government introduced new measures to prevent mainland internet users from using slang and other “obscure expressions” to evade online censorship. In Hong Kong, authorities rubber-stamped the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance which introduced broad definitions of “national securit” and “state secrets” already applied in mainland China, along with stronger enforcement powers and harsher penalties.
Government critics faced prosecution in many countries. In Thailand, trials and imprisonment of pro-democracy activists under lese-majesty and other restrictive laws continued. In Cambodia, a journalist, internationally recognized for exposing human rights abuses in cyber scam compounds, was arrested and charged with incitement. In Singapore, government critics, including opponents of the death penalty, were required to post “corrections” for spreading “online falsehoods”. In Laos, two artists were detained for satirical social media posts criticizing poor road conditions, while in China, a renowned artist was detained for decades-old works criticizing the Communist Party leadership.
Tight control over on- and offline communications in some countries further restricted access to information and excessively limited freedom of expression. The North Korean government’s ban on contact with the outside world continued. Arbitrary internet restrictions were imposed in Pakistan. In Bangladesh and India authorities imposed temporary internet blackouts ostensibly to maintain law and order, but in practice they were used to suppress dissent. In Malaysia, two filmmakers of a previously banned film were charged with “wounding religious feelings”.
Concerns about the use of surveillance technologies continued. In Indonesia, Amnesty International documented the extensive sale and deployment of highly invasive spyware to and by state agencies and private companies. In Thailand, a court dismissed a case brought by a pro-democracy activist against cyber intelligence company NSO Group for its role in facilitating the use of its Pegasus spyware to hack his phone.
Attempts to silence critics abroad by some governments became more pervasive. Mainland Chinese and Hong Kong students studying overseas continued to be subjected to surveillance. Hong Kong authorities issued further arrest warrants and cancelled the passports of pro-democracy activists living overseas, and offered financial rewards for information which could lead to arrests. A human rights lawyer who worked on political cases and was forcibly returned to China from Laos in 2023, was detained pending trial.
WHY IS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IMPORTANT?
The right to freedom of expression is enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which sets out in broad terms the human rights that each of us has. It was later protected legally by a raft of international and regional treaties.
Freedom of expression underpins social progress, individual growth, quality education, technological innovation, business advancement, and access to justice. All of these depend on the ability of everyone to speak, write, debate, and exchange ideas in public spaces, allowing those ideas to flourish and elevate society.
Defending freedom of expression has always been a core part of Amnesty International’s work. Amnesty International staff and members campaign globally to ensure that freedom of expression is protected. We run campaigns to free prisoners of conscience—those jailed solely for the peaceful expression of their beliefs. We work with journalists, teachers, community leaders, public officials, students, and activists to ensure they can speak, think, and write in defense of justice, freedom, and human rights, and is vital in holding the powerful to account. Freedom of expression also underpins other human rights such as the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion – and allows them to flourish.
It is also closely linked to freedom of association – the right to form and join clubs, societies, trade unions or political parties with anyone you choose; and freedom of peaceful assembly – the right to take part in a peaceful demonstration or public meeting.
However, these very freedoms come under regular attack by governments that want to stifle criticism.
For example, in Egypt it is currently extremely dangerous to criticize the government. Over the course of 2018, the authorities arrested at least 113 individuals citing a host of absurd reasons including satire, tweeting, supporting football clubs, denouncing sexual harassment, editing movies and giving interviews.
Those arrested have been accused of “membership of terrorist groups” and “disseminating false news”. Detained without trial for months, those who eventually faced trial were sentenced by military courts, even though military trials of civilians, in Egypt as elsewhere, are inherently unfair.
Peaceful expression of beliefs—regardless of one’s profession—can make individuals targets of silencing efforts by governments, security forces, military, religious leaders, corporations**,** or even community members. They may be prosecuted, assaulted, tortured, disappeared, or even killed. Popular charges used to stifle free speech globally include national security offenses, sedition, computer crimes, and defamation of individuals or state institutions.
PRESS FREEDOM
A free press reporting on the issues that interest us and shape our lives is a key building block of any rights-respecting society. Yet in Azerbaijan, Türkiye and Venezuela to name just a few countries, journalists face repression and attacks.
In June 2019, Tanzania’s parliament fast-tracked the passing of the Written Laws Bill, which would entrench censorship, among other violations. Journalists in the country already operate within the tight confines of a media law that requires media houses to “broadcast or publish news or issues of national importance as government may direct”.
In July 2019, the libel trial began in the Philippines against Maria Ressa, the executive editor of online news outlet Rappler. Ressa, a prominent critic of President Rodrigo Duterte, was arrested in February 2019 on trumped up libel charges after Rappler published detailed investigations into some of the thousands of extrajudicial executions committed by police and unknown armed persons, with Duterte’s explicit encouragement, during drugs-related operations. Her case is widely seen as an attack by the government on press freedom.
During conflict, repression can get worse, such as in Myanmar where journalists investigating the killing of Rohingya men and boys by security forces in Rakhine State were arrested and jailed, before being freed under international pressure.
In Thailand, Taweesak Kerdpoka, a journalist from Prachatai, known for award-winning reporting on environmental and human rights issues, was charged in July 2016 while covering a group of villagers in Ratchaburi monitoring the constitutional referendum votes. Taweesak and three youth activists were charged under the Referendum Act, despite simply attempting to report.
He emphasized the role of journalists in providing accurate, politically relevant information to raise public awareness of social and political issues.
It felt like the government wanted to make an example out of me to warn other journalists, like the saying ‘kill the chicken to scare the monkey.’ But in fact, after my case, more media began reporting on the referendum.
Taweesak Kerdpoka, interviewed by Amnesty International, September 2016
On 29 January 2018, Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that the Ratchaburi Provincial Court acquitted all five defendants, since there were no prosecution witnesses to confirm that the defendants distributed the stickers, nor could they confirm that the documents distributed were in violation of the Referendum Act. However, they were fined 500 baht each for refusing to submit fingerprints.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Freedom of speech, or freedom of expression, applies to ideas of all kinds, including those that may be deeply offensive. While international law protects free speech, there are instances where speech can legitimately restricted under the same law – such as when it violates the rights of others, or, advocates hatred and incites discrimination or violence.
However, any restrictions on freedom of expression must be provided by law, protect certain public interests or the rights of others and, be clearly necessary for that purpose.
In 2018, Amnesty International published research that found that Twitter is a platform where violence and abuse against women flourish, often with little accountability. Instead of the platform being a place where women can express themselves freely and where their voices are strengthened, Twitter leads women to self-censor what they post and limit their interactions. As a company, Twitter is failing its responsibility to respect women’s rights online by inadequately investigating and responding to reports of violence and abuse in a transparent manner.
THE DIGITAL FRONTIER
The digital world gives many more of us access to the information we need, including to challenge governments and corporations. Information is power and the internet has the potential to significantly empower the world’s seven billion people.
But freedom of expression today still often depends on wealth, privilege and our place in society. Those who are rich and powerful are seldom restricted in expressing their views.. Similarly, those who have their own laptops with broadband, have far greater access to information than those who have to walk miles to an internet café.
Increasingly, some states try to build firewalls around digital communications, or in the case of Egypt, Sudan and Zimbabwe among others, respond to mass street protests with an internet shutdown. Iran, China and Viet Nam have all tried to develop systems that enable them to control access to digital information. In India’s northern Kashmir region, mobile Internet and communications are suspended in response to any unrest. At Amnesty International, we are continually finding new ways to stop our website being blocked in China.
Governments are also using dangerous and sophisticated technologies to read activists and journalists’ private emails and remotely turn on their computers’ camera or microphone to secretly record their activities. In 2014, Amnesty and a coalition of human rights and technology organizations launched ‘Detekt’ – a simple tool that allows activists to scan their devices for surveillance spyware.
WHAT IS AMNESTY DOING TO PROTECT THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?
CASE STUDY: POLAND AND THE RIGHT TO PROTEST
Amnesty International has documented how people in Poland have taken to the streets to express their opinions despite restrictive legislation combined with heavy-handed policing, surveillance, harassment and prosecution which threaten to strangle the right to peaceful protest.
Since 2016, tens of thousands of people have protested against repressive legislation aimed at curbing women’s rights and undermining the independence of the judiciary. Protesters have routinely been met with a show of force and restrictive measures that infringe their right to be seen and heard. Hundreds have found themselves in police custody and facing lengthy court proceedings.
In parallel with tightening the laws affecting the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, the government has vastly expanded the surveillance powers of law enforcement agencies with evidence that these expanded powers have been used against people engaged in organizing and participating in peaceful protests.
CASE STUDY: SURGE IN VIETNAMESE PRISONERS OF CONSCIENCE
In 2019, Amnesty released shocking research showing that the number of prisoners of conscience unjustly jailed across Viet Nam had sharply risen by a third in signs of a growing crackdown on peaceful activism by lawyers, bloggers, human rights defenders, environmental activists and pro-democracy campaigners.
The prisoners’ detention conditions remain appalling with evidence of people being tortured and otherwise ill-treated, routinely held incommunicado and in solitary confinement, kept in squalid conditions and denied medical care, clean water and fresh air.
Many prisoners of conscience were jailed for comments made on social media platforms and were targeted using the vague and overly broad provisions of the penal code.
One prisoner of conscience is Tran Hoang Phuc. A pro-democracy and environmental activist, he was arrested in June 2017. Tried and convicted on charges of ‘conducting propaganda against the state’ for making and sharing videos perceived to be critical of the government on social media, he was sentenced to six years in prison, followed by four years under house arrest.
THE SOLUTION: WHAT IS AMNESTY CALLING FOR?
- Prisoners of conscience around the world should be released immediately and unconditionally.
- All laws criminalizing people who speak out or protest peacefully, should be struck off the law books.
- Laws against hate speech or other incitement to discrimination and violence must not be used to repress peaceful dissent.
- People should have access to information, and the power of governments and companies to obtain information about individuals and organisations must be restricted.
AMNESTY’S DEMANDS TO THE THAI GOVERNMENT ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION:
- Repeal laws and end practices that violate freedom of expression and association;
- Amend or abolish laws restricting political or other public expression and enact measures to protect the expression of political or other opinions, as well as freedom of the press.