Selective quotations

[Jean-Pierre]

This is taken from the banner headline of the site os a well known "McCann Sceptic"


1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

Question 1 - Is it an acceptable translation of Article 37?

[ferryman]

This is taken from the banner headline of the site os a well known "McCann Sceptic"


1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

Question 1 - Is it an acceptable translation of Article 37?

It is selective, because the Portuguese constitution also guarantees the right of Portuguese citizens and (by extention) those who have stayed in Portugal but are not Portguese citizens the right to a good name.

The original tussle over the injunction on Amaral's book centred on that conflict.

The original judgment found that the McCanns' right to a good name should overrule Amaral's right to free speech; the (ex-parte) judgment, that Amaral's right to free expression should overrlue the McCanns' right to a good name; also (bizarrely) that Amaral's book is faithful to what is written in the files (it isn't!) ...

[Jean-Pierre]

Thank you Ferryman

Question 2 - what was the point in only publishing half of the article? 

[Carana]

Thank you Ferryman

Question 2 - what was the point in only publishing half of the article?

It didn't fit on the banner?  >@@(*&)

[ferryman]

I suppose another point worth adding is what is meant by inform.

If you make statements that are untrue (and especially that lower reputation) then you are not informing.

The ironically entitled the truth of the lie teems with such examples ...

[Jean-Pierre]

Quite.

I suppose the full article would be inconvenient, because it points out that freedom of speech is not a universal right, and does not give carte blanche to trample over the rights of others. 

[Redblossom]

It didn't fit on the banner?  >@@(*&)

 

Nice one. To be fair, since the 70s revolution, I would imagine freedoms gained are held dear, not just in Portugal and not just on that issue, but many others. And quite right they trumpet them. I doubt it is a cry for freedom to defame! Thats putting a certain spin on it.

Even in this country, UK, in this day and age, civil liberty campaigners still have to point things out to the authorities about wrongs.

[gilet]

Quite.

I suppose the full article would be inconvenient, because it points out that freedom of speech is not a universal right, and does not give carte blanche to trample over the rights of others.

Exactly the situation which Mr Justice Tugendhat outlined in court when Bennett faced him.

Rights come with responsibilities.

[Carana]

Nice one. To be fair, since the 70s revolution, I would imagine freedoms gained are held dear, not just in Portugal and not just on that issue, but many others. And quite right they trumpet them. I doubt it is a cry for freedom to defame! Thats putting a certain spin on it.

Even in this country, UK, in this day and age, civil liberty campaigners still have to point things out to the authorities about wrongs.

Yes, but when I choose to ignore that your fundamental right is just as important as my opposing fundamental right, both of which are equally enshrined in the same Article of the Constitution, I don't see what has been achieved.

[AnneGuedes]

You can't isolate rights from intentions. Suppose someone accuses you of libel and argues that you intended to prejudice him/her, you can always try to justify your good faith and establish that your objective, saying what you said, excluded any personal animosity. Besides you can demonstrate you expressed your opinion carefully and without passion and produce elements allowing you to say what you did.