Defining a right of reply: An examination of the Law Commission's proposals to use a right of reply to regulate online conduct

<p>This paper examines the Law Commission’s proposals to use a right of reply as a remedy within a new regime to combat harmful digital communications on the Internet in its Ministerial Briefing Paper, Harmful Digital Communications: The Adequacy of Current Sanctions and Remedies. It seeks to determine whether a right of reply is a suitable tool to use in an online context against ordinary citizens, when it has typically been an offline remedy for use against the media. It also considers the best form for a right of reply under this new regulatory regime, in order for it to constitute a proportional limit on a defendant’s right to freedom of expression. It concludes that a right of reply could be a suitable remedy under the regime, and it could constitute a proportional limit on a defendant’s freedom of expression, but a Court should carefully balance the harms a right of reply might pose against the values of free speech implicated in each circumstance, on a case-by-case basis, in order to ensure the limitations a right of reply might pose on freedom of expression are always proportional and justified.</p>

Defining a right of reply: An examination of the Law Commission's proposals to use a right of reply to regulate online conduct

<p>This paper examines the Law Commission’s proposals to use a right of reply as a remedy within a new regime to combat harmful digital communications on the Internet in its Ministerial Briefing Paper, Harmful Digital Communications: The Adequacy of Current Sanctions and Remedies. It seeks to determine whether a right of reply is a suitable tool to use in an online context against ordinary citizens, when it has typically been an offline remedy for use against the media. It also considers the best form for a right of reply under this new regulatory regime, in order for it to constitute a proportional limit on a defendant’s right to freedom of expression. It concludes that a right of reply could be a suitable remedy under the regime, and it could constitute a proportional limit on a defendant’s freedom of expression, but a Court should carefully balance the harms a right of reply might pose against the values of free speech implicated in each circumstance, on a case-by-case basis, in order to ensure the limitations a right of reply might pose on freedom of expression are always proportional and justified.</p>

Women’s Participation in the Energy Transition, A Human Rights Approach to Women’s Participation in the Energy Transition

This new publication, Women’s Participation in the Energy Transition, analyses the status of women’s representation and engagement in the global push to transform our energy systems in the face of the climate emergency, while developing a human rights approach to ensure women’s meaningful participation in this process. This new briefing paper provides an overview of the current trends of women’s participation in the rapidly evolving renewable energy sector, as well as normative tools and policy recommendations to use human rights law as a compass for developing energy systems that are not only renewable, but socially and gender-just.

The HEED project: Summary of multi-level cross sectional impact.

Globally, there are 82.4 million displaced people and 26.4 million refugees[i]. An estimated 7 million displaced people in camps have access to electricity for less than four hours a day[ii], making them among the most likely groups left behind in the global drive for improved energy access. In settings that are both precarious economically and politically, humanitarian actors need access to design protocols and pathways for energy products and services that deliver inclusive, affordable, and sustainable energy systems that benefit camp-based populations now and in the future. This briefing paper overviews three impacts that emerged from the project outcomes that can aid short and long-term improved access to energy and sustainability of energy systems for refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs).

Adding Fuel to Fire: How IMF demands for austerity will drive up inequality worldwide

The COVID-19 pandemic has dealt a huge blow to every country, and many governments have struggled to meet their populations’ urgent needs during the crisis. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has stepped in to offer extra support to a large number of countries during the pandemic. However, Oxfam’s analysis shows that as of 15 March 2021, 85% of the 107 COVID-19 loans negotiated between the IMF and 85 governments indicate plans to undertake austerity once the health crisis abates. The findings in this briefing paper show that the IMF is systematically encouraging countries to adopt austerity measures once the pandemic subsides, risking a severe spike in already increased inequality levels. A variety of studies have revealed the uneven distribution of the burden of austerity, which is more likely to be shouldered by women, low-income households and vulnerable groups, while the wealth of the richest people increases. Oxfam joins global institutions and civil society in urging governments worldwide and the IMF to focus their energies instead on a people-centred, just and equal recovery that will fight inequality and not fuel it. Austerity will not ‘build back better’.

Transforming the Systems that Contribute to Fragility and Humanitarian Crises: Programming across the triple nexus

Conflicts and shocks linked to climate change are more frequent and intense, leading to poverty and inequality, exacerbating these phenomena and people’s vulnerability. In this context, humanitarian relief, development programmes and peacebuilding are not serial processes; they are all needed at the same time to tackle the systemic inequalities that trap people in poverty and expose them to risk. The triple nexus, or programming across humanitarian-development-peace pillars, thus means creating synergies and common goals across short-term emergency response programmes and longer-term social change processes in development, as well as enhancing opportunities for peace so that individuals can enjoy the full spectrum of human rights. This briefing paper aims to identify the tensions and dilemmas that Oxfam faces when programming across the nexus and sets out new policy to address these dilemmas, building upon Oxfam’s 2019 discussion paper on the triple nexus.

Digging Up a Painful Past

This chapter talks about the Mattachine Society of Washington, DC, an organization that takes its name from the pioneering gay rights organization of the pre-Stonewall era. It looks at Charles Francis, the president of the Mattachine Society and a leading figure among American gay rights activists, who was a former Republican public relations consultant from Texas with close personal ties to the Bush family. It also discusses Francis’s activism aimed at securing an acknowledgment and apology from the US Congress for discriminatory actions taken by the federal government against LGBT Americans. This chapter analyses the Mattachine Society’s briefing paper “America’s Promise of Reconciliation and Redemption: The Need for an Official Acknowledgment and Apology for the Historic Government Assault on LGBT Federal Employees and Military Personnel,” and it emphasizes the mission of the new Mattachine Society on adjusting the legal struggle to secure an apology from the US government.

ESC rights: PUSHING THE FRONTIERS #1 | Women and public services#1 | Women and public services

This briefing paper aims to explore the role of public services in the transformation of asymmetrical power relations between women and men. Released on International Women’s Day, the brief argues that public services can play a decisive role in this transformation, by fostering a critical examination of gender roles, redistributing resources and opportunities and strengthening positive social practices that enhance gender equality. It puts forward five key elements for a gender-transformative approach to the management, delivery, funding and ownership of public services

Humanitarian energy interventions: the need and opportunities for systematic decision-making

This briefing paper highlights the potential benefits of humanitarian decision-making tools through the application of a decision support tool developed as part of the EPSRC-funded Humanitarian Engineering and Energy for Displacement (HEED) project led by Coventry University in partnership with Practical Action and Scene Connect. HEED draws upon social science and engineering expertise to better understand energy needs and identify solutions which produce socio-technical systems that encourage community resilience and capacity building.