With thanks to Myths and the posters.
Amaral's concept of free speech
Postby Carana » Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:04 am
I don't remember reading this before. Old, but worth a read...
I wonder what he'd think if any of his former lawyers spilled confidential information to the media? Or his doctor? Or would that be somehow different?
The lackeys of the powerful Correio da Manhã
Gonçalo Amaral
Matter of Fact
Gonçalo Amaral
05 December 2009 - 00h30
Thanks to Astro for translation
Power is something that contains us and transforms us into free persons or mere lackeys, according to our ability to say no or the interest we have in kneeling down. To say that a former policeman cannot write or speak about cases or about the activity that he exercised for years, out of respect for ethics and due behaviour, is to limit that citizen's rights.
It is identical to saying that a politician cannot write or speak about politics, and, widening the scope, a medic, a lawyer or a journalist would be equally limited by an obscure ethical and behavioural code. That is to say, none of these social classes could express technical and based opinions. We would be in the midst of stupidity and of lackeys. But life and individual rights are not what vassals desire.
We have the right, and mainly the duty, within the exercise of responsible freedom of expression, to speak and to write about anything, even if knowledge that was acquired within the scope of a professional activity is at issue. We do not enter speculation, we write and we will continue, within the use of our freedom of expression, no matter how much it hurts the powerful or their lackeys. Values like the discovery of truth and the performance of justice must continue to shape modern and democratic societies.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id288.html
Mobyra » Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:14 am
Unfortunately for Amaral, Portugal is in the EU & is bound by the European Convention on Human Rights. They have a very different idea of Freedom of Speech. The man is simply willfully ignorant.
Art. 10 – Freedom of expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Morais proudly displayed part 1 of article 10 on her blog.
Conspicuously absent was part 2.
Can't for the life of me think why ....
honestbroker1 » Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:29 am
Must be because there wasn't enough room on her banner...
