Irreligious Cartoons and Freedom of Expression: A Critical Reassessment

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In a recent article, Neville Cox argued that there is no right under international human rights law to publish 'irreligious' cartoons. Secondly, he questioned the very idea of such a right. Finally, he argued that, given the fact that there is no international right to publish irreligious cartoons and that the message spread by the cartoons was akin to hate speech, the 'real' reason for the international solidarity with Charlie Hebdo may have been 'Islamophobia'. In this article, I will argue that Cox may be right in holding that there is no international right to 'irreligious speech', but I will question his reasoning. Secondly, I will argue that, under robust free speech theory, arguments in favour of suppressing anti-religious speech are highly questionable. Finally, and irrespective of the two previous points, I will argue that Cox's conclusion is mere speculation, and there are no compelling arguments for adhering to it.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)89-109
Number of pages21
JournalHuman Rights Law Review
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2018

Keywords

  • Blasphemy
  • Charlie hebdo
  • Defamation of religions
  • Freedom of expression
  • Freedom of religion
  • Irreligious cartoons

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Irreligious Cartoons and Freedom of Expression: A Critical Reassessment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this