Borrowing, rephrasing, or inventing? How the African Commission and Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights have filled the gap on legitimate restrictions to freedom of expression

ABSTRACT The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) does not contain a list of legitimate aims for the lawful restriction of freedom of expression. Article 9 ACHPR only provides a general formulation, leaving a wide margin to interpretation. Nevertheless, legitimate aims analysis is part and parcel of the case-law of the African Commission and Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This article investigates how the two African bodies identified and applied legitimate aims for the restrictions of freedom of expression, comparing it with the law and practice of the European and the Inter-American courts. By reviewing all the cases on freedom of expression decided to date, the article shows that the African Court and Commission have filled the gap of Article 9 ACHPR by either borrowing legitimate aims from international instruments, rephrasing existing language in African or international documents, or inventing completely new grounds.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Rights Law Review
Published
2025-11-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngaf043
Primary Topic
Human Rights and Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Borrowing, rephrasing, or inventing? How the African Commission and Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights have filled the gap on legitimate restrictions to freedom of expression

Human Rights Law Review
Human Rights and Development
article

Borrowing, rephrasing, or inventing? How the African Commission and Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights have filled the gap on legitimate restrictions to freedom of expression

article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) does not contain a list of legitimate aims for the lawful restriction of freedom of expression. Article 9 ACHPR only provides a general formulation, leaving a wide margin to interpretation. Nevertheless, legitimate aims analysis is part and parcel of the case-law of the African Commission and Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This article investigates how the two African bodies identified and applied legitimate aims for the restrictions of freedom of expression, comparing it with the law and practice of the European and the Inter-American courts. By reviewing all the cases on freedom of expression decided to date, the article shows that the African Court and Commission have filled the gap of Article 9 ACHPR by either borrowing legitimate aims from international instruments, rephrasing existing language in African or international documents, or inventing completely new grounds.

Human Rights Law ReviewVol. 26(1)
Institute for Legal Studies (HU), Brunel University of London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Human Rights and Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.