Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 18 views

    JUAN - JDCONIL-19 - Quiz 7

    Uploaded by

    heherson juan
    The document discusses three legal cases related to freedom of speech and expression. The first case is about whether to sustain the conviction of someone for libelous and offensive speech. The second case is about whether a mayor can implement content-neutral regulations on freedom of assembly. The third case discusses different tests used to determine restrictions on freedom of expression.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    JUAN - JDCONIL-19 - Quiz 7

    Uploaded by

    heherson juan
    18 views1 page
    The document discusses three legal cases related to freedom of speech and expression. The first case is about whether to sustain the conviction of someone for libelous and offensive speech. The second case is about whether a mayor can implement content-neutral regulations on freedom of assembly. The third case discusses different tests used to determine restrictions on freedom of expression.

    Original Description:

    xnxnxnnx

    Original Title

    JUAN_JDCONIL-19_Quiz 7

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses three legal cases related to freedom of speech and expression. The first case is about whether to sustain the conviction of someone for libelous and offensive speech. The second case is about whether a mayor can implement content-neutral regulations on freedom of assembly. The third case discusses different tests used to determine restrictions on freedom of expression.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    18 views1 page

    JUAN - JDCONIL-19 - Quiz 7

    Uploaded by

    heherson juan
    The document discusses three legal cases related to freedom of speech and expression. The first case is about whether to sustain the conviction of someone for libelous and offensive speech. The second case is about whether a mayor can implement content-neutral regulations on freedom of assembly. The third case discusses different tests used to determine restrictions on freedom of expression.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Linglingay U. Juan Quiz No.

    7
    19-13941-644 18 October 2022
    1. a. If I were to decide, I will sustain the conviction because his utterances are
    offensive and libelous.

    Settled is the rule that while the right has a widespread scope, it is not absolute.
    Libelous, offensive and hate speeches are not covered under the Constitutional freedom
    of speech and expression. Here, Pedrong Pula claimed that the officials are corrupt and
    that they will cause trouble if they will not resign. Every defamatory imputation is
    presumed to be malicious, even if it is true, hence, the conviction of Pedrong Pula should
    be sustained.

    b. The two basic prohibitions of the freedom of speech and of the press clause are
    when it is against national security and it obstructs the administration of justice.

    In a case, SC held that written or spoken words that incites rebellious conspiracies
    and tends to turn the people against the constituted authorities constitutes as inciting to
    sedition, while obstructing, by means of spoken or written word, the administration of
    justice by the courts is an abuse of the liberty of speech or press and will subject the
    abuser to punishment for contempt of court.

    2. No, the claim is not correct because Mayor Lebron is empowered to implement
    the content-neutral regulation on their freedom of assembly and religion.

    Content-neutral regulation is one where the incidents of the speech, or one that
    merely controls the time, place and manner are being considered in the restriction of their
    rights. Here, Mayor Lebron allowed them to use the northwestern part of the plaza but
    not the kiosk. This is well within the powers of Mayor Lebron for the interest of peace
    and order of the LGU.

    3. a. Clear and Present Danger Test under this test, in order to justify restraint, the
    court must determine whether the expression presents a clear and present danger
    of any substantive evil, which the state has a right to prevent.

    b. Balancing of interests test is applied when in a given situation it should appear


    that there is urgent necessity for protecting the national security against
    improvident freedom of expression, the right must yield. But if no special
    justification exists for the curtailment of the freedom of the interests of the State
    not being especially threatened by its exercise, it is the right that must prevail.

    c. Conscientious Objector Test is a test used to determine whether or not refusal to


    perform a legal duty by reason of religious freedom is justified.

    You might also like