"....In considering whether the Rolling Stone's publication of alleged homosexuals' names, addresses and preferred social hang-outs constituted a violation of the applicant's constitutional rights, the Court, ruled that: 1) The motion is not about homosexuality per se, but '...it is about fundamental rights and freedoms,' in particular about whether 'the publication infringed the rights of the applicants or threatened to do so'. 2) The jurisdiction of Article 50 (1) of the Constitution is dual in nature, in that it extends not just to any person 'whose fundamental rights or other rights or freedoms have been infringed in the first place,' but also to 'persons whose fundamental rights or other rights or freedoms are threatened to be infringed.' ......". A statement by the CSCHRCL
Downloads:
Sign up to receive tailored insights from the Refugee Law Project grounded in our work.