{"id":1003,"date":"2022-09-21T18:00:16","date_gmt":"2022-09-21T17:00:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/?post_type=publication&#038;p=1003"},"modified":"2022-09-22T11:20:21","modified_gmt":"2022-09-22T10:20:21","slug":"conclusion-2","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Conclusion"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">National security remains a common justification offered by states for limiting freedom of expression by journalists, bloggers, and media organs.&nbsp; However, it is often used not to protect security but to quell dissent and cover up state abuses.&nbsp; Increasingly, courts are limiting the scope of application of national security laws as they are often vague and drafted with a view to circumventing constitutional checks and balances.&nbsp; Activists, lawyers, and members of the media should, however, remain vigilant and test all national security-related laws for compliance with international law, including the Johannesburg, Tshwane and Siracusa Principles.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>National security remains a common justification offered by states for limiting freedom of expression by journalists, bloggers, and media organs.&nbsp; However, it is often used not to protect security but to quell dissent and cover up state abuses.&nbsp; Increasingly, courts are limiting the scope of application of national security laws as they are often vague [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"parent":992,"menu_order":162,"template":"page-templates\/chapter.php","publication-category":[],"class_list":["post-1003","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Conclusion | eReader<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Conclusion | eReader\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"National security remains a common justification offered by states for limiting freedom of expression by journalists, bloggers, and media organs.&nbsp; However, it is often used not to protect security but to quell dissent and cover up state abuses.&nbsp; Increasingly, courts are limiting the scope of application of national security laws as they are often vague [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"eReader\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-09-22T10:20:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/module-9-national-security\\\/conclusion-2\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/module-9-national-security\\\/conclusion-2\\\/\",\"name\":\"Conclusion | eReader\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2022-09-21T17:00:16+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-09-22T10:20:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/module-9-national-security\\\/conclusion-2\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/module-9-national-security\\\/conclusion-2\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/module-9-national-security\\\/conclusion-2\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Publications\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Modules on Litigating Freedom of Expression and Digital Rights in South and Southeast Asia\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":4,\"name\":\"Module 9: National Security\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/publications\\\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\\\/module-9-national-security\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":5,\"name\":\"Conclusion\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/\",\"name\":\"eReader\",\"description\":\"Media Defence\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.mediadefence.org\\\/ereader\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Conclusion | eReader","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Conclusion | eReader","og_description":"National security remains a common justification offered by states for limiting freedom of expression by journalists, bloggers, and media organs.&nbsp; However, it is often used not to protect security but to quell dissent and cover up state abuses.&nbsp; Increasingly, courts are limiting the scope of application of national security laws as they are often vague [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/","og_site_name":"eReader","article_modified_time":"2022-09-22T10:20:21+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/","url":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/","name":"Conclusion | eReader","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/#website"},"datePublished":"2022-09-21T17:00:16+00:00","dateModified":"2022-09-22T10:20:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/conclusion-2\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Publications","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Modules on Litigating Freedom of Expression and Digital Rights in South and Southeast Asia","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"Module 9: National Security","item":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-9-national-security\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":5,"name":"Conclusion"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/","name":"eReader","description":"Media Defence","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/1003","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/992"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1003"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication-category?post=1003"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}