Freedom of expression, freedom of thought and freedom of religion are among key cardinals of any democratic thoughts that have been almost unanimously accepted in today’s political discourse and deliberations. It is impossible to imagine democracy without freedom of expression because democracy presupposes choices and these can be guaranteed only if there are the conditions for the proliferations of various ideas and thoughts which can be presented to eventual electors. And for this we need freedom to allow for circulating of the choices. In short, it is impossible to imagine a democratic society without guaranteeing freedom of the press. Similarly, freedom of religion and hence the freedom to express one’s religious convictions and beliefs in various forms can be broadly included in this cardinal pillar of freedom which is freedom of thought and expression.
However, freedom of expression can not be envisaged in an unfettered manner, in an uncontrolled way. Hence, the need to regulate it with appropriate and reasonable principles that need to be included in a well articulated legal framework. The law is hence called to regulate this critical freedom so that abuses and excesses are prevented and avoided for the survival of the freedom. History has shown us there have been attempts to abuse such freedom by unscrupulous ‘political animals’ and parties who are anxious to come to power using every means available.
The line between the proper use of the right and its abuse is often thin and a strong and unequivocal regulation becomes imperative if we want to avoid such excesses. All political actors need to respect such demarcation for the survival of democracy and, in the end, for the guarantees of other freedoms and others’ peace and survival. Anticipation of excesses becomes a sort of guarantee for the continuation of this crucial freedom. We have seen in the past that excesses have led to violence as emotions have been provoked by the misuse of freedom of expression. Excesses have provoked emotions and the reactions have often been negative with animosities kindled among communities organized or not under party lines or ethnic or ideological lines.
Such freedom of expression, such proper regulation of this freedom is all the more critical in multi interest societies where such interests are underpinned by a multiplicity of reality deriving from multiplicity of ethnic groups, language groups or geographic realities beyond ideological differences. Hence, countries such as ours need to pay attention while allowing this key freedom that can have immense implications in the political landscape of the country.
Furthermore, in societies such as ours where there is low literacy and underdevelopment is the reality in many senses, having well defined and regulated freedoms such as expression and others becomes imperative lest abuses lead to unwanted animosities that could eventually lead to clashes.
Political interests underlie many actions and parties and groups may be tempted to use certain words and phrases which might not go down happily with competing interest groups and their goals. Competing political ideas are expressed through this freedom that is guaranteed but the demarcation must be acceptable to all so that everything is done with compromise and self-imposed common sense, including putting one’s condition in the rivals’ shoes. Only then can there be a certain consensus, and hence the urge to respect the limits of the law.
It is now presumed that Ethiopia is governed by a federal democratic constitution that has incarnated in it various advanced and well-articulated guarantees with ample freedom to nations and nationals which appear to be the key beneficiaries or destinations of the guarantees. The way the constitution tries to address the issues of nationalities or ethnic groups and the way the freedoms are guaranteed may have their own contentions from parties that try to vie for power in the country. That is not the subject of this article, but focuses on how we should address the excesses of such cardinal principle and provision that establishes freedom of expression in very broad and libertarian terms. In fact, there are those who argue that Article 29 of the constitution ‘right of thought, opinion and expression’, can be taken as very generous that is criticized for not taking into due account the level of political consciousness of the society, the level of awareness and probably political maturity as well .
In many ways, the freedoms and principles included in the constitution seems to anticipate or assume a certain level of education in society. Many are heard questioning ‘is the constitution realistic when it allows for broad freedoms in such a society’. Do the principles contained in the constitution take into account the level of literacy and consciousness of the society, the level of maturity that would enable them to appreciate these freedoms and use them appropriately, making their choices freely? These are open questions because we have seen frequent abuses of such freedom of expression through the various media outlets allowed for by the rules. There have come out a flurry of media outlets and bodies that have been catering for the ever thirsty needs of the population.
Various messages have been disseminated among these communities and what is more, beyond and above the traditional media outfits, the new realities of the social media have invaded the political landscape addressing the beneficiaries in no time. With the fast expansion of smart phones and the widespread habit of using them, messages are delivered in real time and that has come to further look again deeply at what sort of freedoms are allowed and which ones need some restraint.
There could be two sides to the issue because some say freedom of expression must be allowed without limits except in some rare and extreme cases with clearly terrorist threats while there are those who argue that such freedom for a society such as ours has more damages than benefits because people are easily pushed or moved by what they read or listen to in certain social media where there are no editors or bodies that take responsibility for the misleading or controversial messages and calls. Hence, beyond and above the conventional media that do have responsible guides or managers, the other sector now largely labeled as ‘social media’ needs appropriate and timely regulation before it gets too late.
The tendency to abuse these multiple forms of expression has been linked now for a while with words and phrases which were once taboo are now seen invading the socio-political landscape of the country; and this has now grown to alarming levels. Above all, more and more hate speeches and hateful ideas are being expressed through these media without any accountability. In the face of all these developments, there have been calls recently by many concerned academics, intellectuals and political figures recommending urgent and effective action to stop abuses.
All those who behind veiled and unidentified masks take advantage of such freedom of expression to disseminate hate inspired ideas, bodies that make emotional appeals with false claims and narratives and try to incite one community against another one need to be sanctioned in an unequivocal manner before it is too late, the academics argue. They envisage the grave dangers our society may run due to the unscrupulous actions of certain groups who may even have taken the agenda of foreign powers who have been found being financed by them to destabilize our society. The recent calls for violence with the pretext of abuse of freedom of religion can be cited as an example of excesses. That is why all of us must wake up and protect our country from any veiled attempts of alien infiltration in our body politic.
For a society such as ours, there needs to be a restraint on similar outbursts because they tend to erode our long lasting peaceful cohabitation between communities. We cannot let this happen threatening the existence of a stable and sovereign state and allow our enemies both new and old enjoy our unmaking. That is why we need to cautiously regulate abuses of freedom of expression using whatever means. Above all we need to watch out hate speeches and hateful discourses that have begun to circulate freely and undisturbed by social media, trying to create chaos.
BY FITSUM GETACHEW
THE ETHIOPIAN HERALD THURSDAY 26 MAY 2022
