Suchergebnisse

"Vrijheid van meningsuiting was lang de verlichte vrijheid bij uitstek. Ze liet auteurs toe om oneerbiedig uit te halen, onbevreesd voor God of gebod. Ook al was die vrijheid nooit helemaal onbeperkt. In recentere tijden heeft de samenleving meer aandacht gekregen voor de schaduwzijden van die ruime expressievrijheid. Moet alles wat gezegd kan worden écht gezegd worden? Moet het recht niet strenger zijn in de beteugeling van misbruiken? En moeten we als samenleving niet kordater optreden tegen lui die feitenvrij polariseren? In deze bundel met scherpe essays gaat Koen Lemmens op zoek naar het belang van de vrijheid van meningsuiting in een democratische samenleving. Zijn basisstelling: een klimaat waarin men vrij kan spreken is altijd te verkiezen boven een waarin men bevreesd moet zijn voor de gevolgen van zijn woorden."--

There has been a fierce debate amongst scholars about the way privacy ought to be protected in civil law countries. The key issue at stake is the question whether this protection should be implemented via so-called 'personality rights' (i.e. a special category of subjective rights) or whether it would be more appropriate to conceive privacy in terms of fundamental freedoms. It goes without saying that this choice entails important practical and theoretical consequences. In this article, I will first try to summary the different viewpoints, indicating each time the pros and contras. Then, I will deal with the Swiss way of privacy protection, for I believe that it shows clearly that the sketched 'doctrinal' opposition should not be overestimated and that it should be possible to conciliate the two approaches to privacy.

Preface: a constitution in search of a nation -- Constitutional principles: a historical and sociological account -- The fundamental principles of the Belgian constitution -- Federalism and the multilevel structure of government -- The legislative branch -- The executive power and administration -- The pluralistic judicial system and the constitutional court -- Fundamental rights -- Conclusion: no future for Belgium or a Belgian blueprint for the future?

"For some time now, the European Court of Human Rights has been under substantial pressure. The Court has stumbled into a legitimacy crisis with regard to certain countries that needs to be taken seriously, since scholars warn that institutions with eroding legitimacy risk must demise or reform. The goal of this volume is to explore how widespread this critical attitude of the European Court of Human Rights really is. It also assesses to what extent such criticism is being translated into strategies at the political level or at the judicial level to bring about concrete changes in the dynamics between national and European fundamental rights protection. The book is topical and innovative, as these questions have so far remained largely unexplored, especially cross-nationally. Far from focusing exclusively on those voices that are currently raised so loud, conclusions are based on comparative in-depth reports, covering fifteen contracting parties and the EU."--