Freedom of Speech - should it have limits?

Read Comments Comments (12)

• jorge 12 years ago

  I think u hit the nail on the head. what we all have to know as a people is that, if we dont agree with others it doesnt mean they are enemies. Some people are hiding behind the 'freedom of speech' to insult leaders. God is ...
  read full comment

  I think u hit the nail on the head. what we all have to know as a people is that, if we dont agree with others it doesnt mean they are enemies. Some people are hiding behind the 'freedom of speech' to insult leaders. God is watching all of us.

  reply
• Thank you Jesus 12 years ago

  GHANAIAN TALK TOO MUCH. EVERY BODY IN GHANA WANT TO MAKE THEIR VOICE HEARD ON RADIO OR NEWSPAPER.. THANK GOD SC HAS BROUGHT SANITARY TO OUR AIRWAY MOSTLY LOCAL CHAMPION...
  
  BOTH CAT & RAT HAS TO TURN AIRWAY TO WHERE THEY C ...
  read full comment

  GHANAIAN TALK TOO MUCH. EVERY BODY IN GHANA WANT TO MAKE THEIR VOICE HEARD ON RADIO OR NEWSPAPER.. THANK GOD SC HAS BROUGHT SANITARY TO OUR AIRWAY MOSTLY LOCAL CHAMPION...
  
  BOTH CAT & RAT HAS TO TURN AIRWAY TO WHERE THEY CAN EXERCISE THEIR POWER..

  reply
• GHFUO, BE SERIOUS NOT PRIDEFUL! 12 years ago

  WHEN IT THREATENS THE LIVES OF OTHERS OR THE PEACE

  WHEN IT THREATENS THE LIVES OF OTHERS OR THE PEACE

  reply
• nelson 12 years ago

  i believe you know what happen to "Asangie" of wikileaks and snowden. Hilary Clinton made it clear that, there are limits even in USA.leave Ghanaians unchecked and they will burn this country.

  i believe you know what happen to "Asangie" of wikileaks and snowden. Hilary Clinton made it clear that, there are limits even in USA.leave Ghanaians unchecked and they will burn this country.

  reply
• princewilly@ymail.com 12 years ago

  Charlie marries a virgin. On their wedding night, he's on fire, so he gets naked, jumps into bed, and immediately begins groping her. "Charles, I expect you to be as mannerly in bed as you are at the dinner table." So, Charli ...
  read full comment

  Charlie marries a virgin. On their wedding night, he's on fire, so he gets naked, jumps into bed, and immediately begins groping her. "Charles, I expect you to be as mannerly in bed as you are at the dinner table." So, Charlie folds his hands on his lap and says, "Is this better?" "Much better!" she replies with a smile. "Okay, then," he says, "now will you please pass the pussy."

  reply
• Kwobia (Torono) 12 years ago

  As Ghanains,among the first thinks you learn as a child is to always respect your elders.This means that for the rest of your life you will always have to watch your tongue,as no human catn always say as they like.

  As Ghanains,among the first thinks you learn as a child is to always respect your elders.This means that for the rest of your life you will always have to watch your tongue,as no human catn always say as they like.

  reply
• OBURONIBA FITAFITA 12 years ago

  At what point do you therefore establish a threshold ? Shouldnt commission of crime have the element of intent ? If utterances are devoid of intent to harm should the accused suffer detriment for a potential detriment he does ...
  read full comment

  At what point do you therefore establish a threshold ? Shouldnt commission of crime have the element of intent ? If utterances are devoid of intent to harm should the accused suffer detriment for a potential detriment he does not intend to inflict inflict ?
  
  Your call for social intervention "which can rein in against people, saying things that displease others or might potentially inflame or incite others" is reminiscent of position taken by a good leaders like Kwame Nkrumah. His Preventive Detention Act spelled his doom and subsequently created a recipe for our choatic future.
  
  Exercise of limitation of free speech over citizenry rights is a thin line to cross : its curtailment brings more harm than good.

  reply
• OBURONIBA FITAFITA 12 years ago

  Must read ...a good leader like Kwame Nkrumah..

  Must read ...a good leader like Kwame Nkrumah..

  reply
• Nii Lante Okunka 12 years ago

  I couldn't agree with you more,OBURONIBA(Why u waana call yourself that is another issue all together,lol).
  The article was all over the place.There are laws that take care of threats, assaults,libel,hate speech,malicious in ...
  read full comment

  I couldn't agree with you more,OBURONIBA(Why u waana call yourself that is another issue all together,lol).
  The article was all over the place.There are laws that take care of threats, assaults,libel,hate speech,malicious intent to defame inter alia. These serve to limit so called free speech.Beyond that,anything goes.Saying that our Supreme Court was being prejudicial and selective is no reason a fellow Ghanaian should be thrown into jail.That's an outrageous exercise of judicial fiat.That statement was not intended to disrespect,incite an uprising,insult our Justices,except that their bloated egos were bruised.The writer answered his own question several times over in the article.We should be free to say anything at all we want as long as our speech doesn't violate other stipulated laws in the book i.e.libel etc.
  Our problem is this cultural and moral adherence to respecting our elders.It's all well and good but we should desist from extending it to our treatment of public servants.No one puts a gun to the head of any public servant to accept a job with the government.So if a public servant cannot take the heat,he/she should be free to leave the kitchen.
  Insulting,disrespecting,making outrageous statements and fun of,drawing ridiculous conclusions based on wrong premises and all crap,should be covered by the wide umbrella of free speech otherwise the whole exercise is rendered useless...there is no point.
  Public servants should be made of sterner stuff,thick skinned and accept to be ridiculed by the citizenry.Or they can quit.For all the wealth they accrue in the service of our nation within a short time of taking office, the least we can do is call them names.

  reply
• Yaw Ohemeng 12 years ago

  I thought you were discussing freedom of speech then you deviated to all forms of criminal acts that one can commit in a society. Majority of your instances are covered by laws in our criminal justice system and commission wi ...
  read full comment

  I thought you were discussing freedom of speech then you deviated to all forms of criminal acts that one can commit in a society. Majority of your instances are covered by laws in our criminal justice system and commission will never be justified under freedom of speech.
  
  A lot of the acts that Supreme Court is seeking to prevent are covered under our laws, especially laws on incitement. The problem is that the security agencies operate under political direction and they almost always fear to tread on the toes of their political masters.
  
  If you are really arguing freedom of speech, its curtailment is permitted under very narrow circumstances. There are other avenues provided for dealing with the ills you alluded to, including the victims resorting to the law to gain relief.

  reply
• Kobena 12 years ago

  Nana,
  In all the instances you mentioned, you ended with "I have broken the law." When someone breaks the law, there is "due process" to right any wrong thereby committed. Ken Kuranchie's case in particular, should fall unde ...
  read full comment

  Nana,
  In all the instances you mentioned, you ended with "I have broken the law." When someone breaks the law, there is "due process" to right any wrong thereby committed. Ken Kuranchie's case in particular, should fall under "use of abusive language", which under our liberal democratic constitution should not be a criminal offence.
  
  Due process in this case shoud mean his being brought before an independent judge. If the person against whom abusive language has been used sets up his own court, judges and pronounces judgement and punishment, that is mob action. It is just like the neighbour whose house you inadvertently burnt down decides to burn your house because you have burnt his. That certainly is not right.

  reply
• tiger shark 12 years ago

  Freedom of speech is no freedom from
  responsibility.That is under freedom of speech one is still responsible for what one says or rights.

  Freedom of speech is no freedom from
  responsibility.That is under freedom of speech one is still responsible for what one says or rights.

  reply