Abstract
The 11 of September attacks provide a paradigm shift when it comes to protection of national security. It results in a trending vision that prioritized security over national security, which makes it essential to think about balancing national security with free expression as a pillar of democratization. This study focusses on how the balance between freedom of expression and national security interests is achieved. It studies the legal approached of the European court of human rights and its legal assessment to strike this balance. The findings of this analytical study asserts that in order for the ECtHR to achieve this balance, it implements the 3-part test indicated in the second paragraph of article 10, which include that the interference with free expression must be prescribed by law, pursued a legitimate aim and necessary for democratic society. The court examines each case to determine whether a restriction is legal or not up to those 3 requirements. Despite the fact that the court implement proportionality and margin of appreciation in its assessment of context and content, it is still remained unclear for legal thinkers, how the court logically determine the weight for each factor. This led to an open debate over the coherence and consistency. This study finds that the court’s discissions lack consistency and coherence, when it comes to the principle of proportionality and margin of appreciation implementation. This study believes that the ECtHR lacks the assessment of laws of the respondent state to determine whether they are compatible with the convention. Rather, it only assesses the implementation of those laws, namely the interference itself.
School
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy
Department
Law Department
Degree Name
MA in International Human Rights Law
Graduation Date
Fall 9-30-2025
Submission Date
9-21-2025
First Advisor
Professor Jason Beckett
Committee Member 1
Professor Hedayat Heikal
Committee Member 2
Professor Nesrine Badawi
Extent
129 p.
Document Type
Master's Thesis
Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval
Not necessary for this item
Disclosure of AI Use
No use of AI
Recommended Citation
APA Citation
Massoud, M. A.
(2025).Security and Terrorism Vs Free Expression: Analytical Study on The European Court of Human Rights [Master's Thesis, the American University in Cairo]. AUC Knowledge Fountain.
https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/2640
MLA Citation
Massoud, Mariam Adel. Security and Terrorism Vs Free Expression: Analytical Study on The European Court of Human Rights. 2025. American University in Cairo, Master's Thesis. AUC Knowledge Fountain.
https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/2640
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, European Law Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, International Humanitarian Law Commons, International Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Litigation Commons, National Security Law Commons, Rule of Law Commons