Tag Archives: Inclusion

Editor’s Corner: Freedom of Speech and Diversity

         By: August Bequai*

        “The most beautiful thing in the world is freedom of speech.”

             -Diogenes (404-323 BC)

Freedom of speech has a long history, which predates the modern democracies by several thousand years. In the West, it can be traced back to Ancient Athens and Republican Rome. Examples of it can also be found in Ancient China, India, Persia, and Egypt. 

Global Evolution                                        

In the West, freedom of speech found support in the writings of Erasmus and Milton. Lord Edward Coke viewed it as an integral part of Parliamentarian freedom, and in 1689 the English Bill of Rights established the right of freedom of speech in Parliament.

 In 1766, the Swedish Parliament enacted one of the first freedom of the press laws in Europe, while the French Republic adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen in 1789; affirming freedom of speech as the inalienable right of every citizen. In 1791, freedom of speech was adopted in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Freedom of speech is currently recognized, though far from always practiced, as an inalienable right under numerous international and regional human rights laws. Among these: Article 19 of the  Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights;  Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights; and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Freedom of speech as a right has come to include not only its content but also its mediums of expression; among these,  the Internet.

U.S. Experience 

In the American colonies, controls on free speech, as in England, frequently focused on religion, morality, and the British monarchy. For example, in 1612, Virginia made it illegal to speak ill of government officials; while  Massachusetts law in 1646 made it illegal to deny the immortality of the soul. 

The  trial of Peter Zenger in 1735, however, was an important turning point in efforts to advance free speech. Charged with seditious libel for criticizing the Governor of New York, his lawyer (Andrew Hamilton) convinced the jury to disregard the charges and acquit his client ( Zenger). The case set an important precedent for the drafters of the U.S. Constitution.

The American Revolution enshrined freedom of speech in the U.S Constitution; while many state constitutions, and numerous federal, state, and local laws would follow. The First Amendment’s constitutional right of free speech, applicable to state and local governments under the  incorporation doctrine, prevents governmental restrictions on speech; but not restrictions imposed by private individuals and businesses, unless these are acting on behalf of the government.

When a speech restriction is challenged in court, it is presumed to be invalid, and the burden falls on the government to convince a court that it is constitutional. There are also federal, state, and local laws that provide additional safeguards-i.e., attempts by employers to limit or  infringe on the political speech of its employees are illegal. The courts have also interpreted the First Amendment to  protect the right to receive information.

The First Amendment, however, is not absolute. The courts have carved out exceptions to it. Among these, the publication of child pornography, false advertising, promoting illegal conduct,  inciting lawless action,  and more. These narrow exceptions aside, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, a staunch First Amendment supporter, summarized it best, “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.” 

Diversity and Free Speech

In October 2005, UNESCO adopted the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. This was done to protect cultural diversity worldwide in the face of the trauma of globalization. Concerns over the same, prompted the United Nations General Assembly in 2012 to declare the World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development. The European Union followed with its own Declaration on Cultural Diversity.

The term “diversity” itself has taken on numerous meanings over the centuries. Some view it as necessary safeguard for “cultural minorities” the world over, against the profound disruptions in their culture and development wrought by the forces of globalization. Others view it as analogous to biodiversity; while still others as a form of cultural protection against the forces of global commercialization. 

Diversity is no stranger to history. One can find written references to it in Ancient Persia,  India, and China. Ptolemaic Egypt had enacted laws that protected its diverse minorities, and the Abbasid Caliphate enshrined diversity in its code of laws. The Mongol Empire was very likely the most diverse in written history.

The Roman Empire, with 13 Emperors of African descent and dozens of others from its Euro-Asian regions, promoted diversity in its legal system and governmental apparatus. Save for its name, the Roman Empire bore little semblance to its predecessor (Republican Rome).  Many of the Sultans of the Ottoman Empire, likewise, promoted diversity and some even came to embody it. The mothers of many of the Sultans came from non-Turkic backgrounds; to name a few: Albanian, Serbian, Bulgarian, and Persian. 

Diversity, however, has also had its failings. The collapse of the Umayyad Caliphate being but one example. Followed by others like the Almohad Caliphate, Mali Empire,  Habsburg Empire, Tsarist Russia, and in our own time, the breakup of the Yugoslav state. When diversity fails, millions often lose their lives; while millions more find themselves displaced from their homelands.

A study of the many diverse nations and empires that have collapsed in the last 4,000 years, reveals that the majority of these all shared one common trait: a disdain for freedom of speech. Autocracy was often the rule of governance. Diverse cultures , races, religions, and languages while often tolerated and even encouraged, fell afoul if they posed a threat to the ruling elite. To paraphrase the old adage:  all people are equal, but some more than others.

Freedom of speech has also met in the last two centuries, with fanatical disdain for it from political dogmatists. Robespierre, Napoleon and Lenin acknowledged the right to free speech, provided it met their dogmatic prism of governance. For diversity to survive and thrive, free speech is a necessity; dogmatic driven movements its anti-matter

In Closing

While lawyers are often vilified and viewed as corrupt tools of the affluent sectors of society; yet, without their assistance and commitment, there would be no freedom of speech. From their ranks have come its champions and guarantors of free speech. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution best exemplifies the force that promotes diversity and lawyers are its guardians. Without freedom of speech and lawyers to safeguard it, diversity withers like a flower without water. 


*The opinions expressed are solely those of the Editor and not those of the VSB or the Diversity Conference.

Diversity Conference Statement on Disability Pride Month

Those with disabilities have recently observed Disability Pride month in July. On July 26, 1990, the Americans With Disabilities Act became law. The changes it has brought about in the ensuing three decades have done much to make Americans acknowledge and work together to overcome things that discriminate against the disabled, whether they be physical barriers or work conditions lacking appropriate accommodations.

The Diversity Conference celebrates the attorneys, litigants, consumers of legal services – indeed, everyone – no matter where they may fall in the range of abilities.  Our mission statement expressly includes those with disabilities, stating:

“The Diversity Conference (DC) was established in 2010 to bring together Virginia State Bar members interested in promoting diversity and inclusion in the legal profession and in ensuring that Virginia meets the legal needs of an increasingly diverse population. Diversity refers to, among other things, race, age, ethnicity, gender, religion, education, disability, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation. The DC recognizes the inherent worth and dignity of all people and offers opportunities to serve the profession and the public through various programs and educational sessions.”

We celebrate your pride month with you.

The Second Panel: Understanding Diversity: The Changing Realities and Considerations in the Practice of Law in the Commonwealth of Virginia

by Chris Fortier

How can a practitioner recognize and address the needs of our diverse community?  Changing demographics of our Commonwealth brings changing legal needs of our clients. How can we, as attorneys, serve as counsel?  The differing abilities and needs of our citizenry now significantly affect a lawyer’s professional and ethical obligations in communicating with and representing clients, interactions with the court and juries, litigation, and public service.

The panel was moderated by Hon. Manuel A. Capsalis, Judge, Fairfax General District Court and featured Carteia V. Basnight from the Law Office of Carteia V. Basnight, Martha JP McQuade from McQuade Byrum PLLC and Kimberly M. Turner, Law Offices of Kimberly Martin Turner, PLLC 

The discussion began by acknowledging duties and ethical responsibilities to clients and how the client base and their legal needs has evolved through the years and how have they adapted?  From a criminal law perspective, Ms. Basnight noted that clients may feel that the Criminal Justice system will not treat them fairly. Lawyers need to start with basics and explain the criminal justice system and what it does to try to make things fair.  “While older clients do not expect much, younger clients expect a lot. Younger clients expect to be treated fairly in criminal justice system.

Ms Turner provided observations from a transactional practice perspective. Clients have wanted to address own levels of diversity on their own.  They want to protect loved ones and assets, and make their legacy. Various factors such as religion, orientation, socio-economic background all come into play when deciding who they give agency to assets, craft a will, make funeral arrangements.  Lawyers have to provide clients more customized services. 

Ms McQuade stated that she has advised diverse clientele throughout her career and that each client presents challenges that she must research into crafting her representation.  She urged attendees to help the judge understand what is going on with the facts. “You need to understand what the judge does not understand meaning not only cultural practices but legal issues and the implications of actions.

The discussion turned to cultural norms and how clients raised in different countries interact with the legal system. For example, some cultures emphasize telling the authorities all the facts, including the ones that implicate them in crimes. Other cultures have a fear of the police, and will pay the police to not arrest them.  These are examples of mitigating factors that attorneys must point out and provide context to the court.

The panel ended with a discussion on preparing clients for court.  Audience members shared their tips, urging one another to be direct with clients and seeking testimony from families and communities to explain why your client made the decisions he or she made. Using skills to tease out client information that they make think is irrelevant or embarrassing guides representation of the case.  

____________________________________________________________________

Chris Fortier serves on the Board of the Governors of the Diversity Conference, working on the Invictus newsletter and the Diversity Conference website and social media. In his day job, he works at the Social Security Administration (SSA). The views in this article are his and his alone and do not reflect those of SSA or the Federal Government.