Proponents of the political theory on "deliberative democracy" submit that "substantial, open, [and] ethical dialogue is a critical, and indeed defining, feature of a good polity."159 This theory may be considered broad, but it definitely "includes [a] collective decision making with the participation of all who will be affected by the decision."160 It anchors on the principle that the cornerstone of every democracy is that sovereignty resides in the people.161 To ensure order in running the state’s affairs, sovereign powers were delegated and individuals would be elected or nominated in key government positions to represent the people. On this note, the theory on deliberative democracy may evolve to the right of the people to make government accountable. Necessarily, this includes the right of the people to criticize acts made pursuant to governmental functions.
Speech that promotes dialogue on public affairs, or airs out grievances and political discontent, should thus be protected and encouraged.
Borrowing the words of Justice Brandeis, "it is hazardous to discourage thought, hope and imagination; that fear breeds repression; that repression breeds hate; that hate menaces stable government; that the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies."162
In this jurisdiction, this court held that "[t]he interest of society and the maintenance of good government demand a full discussion of public affairs."163 This court has, thus, adopted the principle that "debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust,and wide open . . . [including even] unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."164
Second, free speech should be encouraged under the concept of a market place of ideas. This theory was articulated by Justice Holmes in that "the ultimate good desired is better reached by [the] free trade in ideas:
No comments:
Post a Comment