The Johannesburg Principles and freedom of expression

In 1995, a group of 36 international experts convened by ARTICLE 19 and the Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS) at the University of the Witwatersrand drew up the Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information and National Security.

Although not binding law, these principles are frequently cited (notably by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of freedom of opinion and expression) as a progressive summary of standards in this area.

The Johannesburg Principles address the circumstances in which the right to freedom of expression might legitimately be limited on national security grounds, at the same time as underlining the importance of the media, and freedom of expression and access to information, in ensuring accountability in the realm of national security.

Read more about the Johannesburg Principles in a piece by the Southern African Litigation Centre, here. The Centre argues that ‘freedom of expression’ and ‘national security’ are very often seen as principles or interests that are inevitably opposed to each other.

‘ “National security” is one of the most common justifications offered by states for limiting freedom of expression by journalists and media organs. Unlike the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the European Convention on Human Rights and the American Convention on Human Rights, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights does not contain this explicit limitation within the protection of freedom of expression. Yet national security remains a genuine public good – and without it, media freedom would be scarcely possible.

‘On the other hand, governments are seldom inclined to recognise that media freedom may actually be a means to ensure better national security by exposing abuses in the security sector.’

Further analysis from ARTICLE 19 can be found here.