Freedom of Assembly

Part of a series on
Freedom
By concept
Philosophical freedom Political freedom Economic freedom Liberty
By form
Academic Assembly Association Body: clothing, modifying From government Movement Press Religion and beliefs Speech Thought
Other
Censorship Coercion Human rights Indices Media transparency Negative liberty Positive liberty Self-ownership

File:Prohibitionprotest.jpg

Group of women holding placards with political activist slogans: "know your courts - study your politicians," "Liberty in law," "Law makers must not be law breakers," and "character in candidates" photo 1920

Freedom of assembly is the freedom to take part in any gatherings that one wishes. It is held to be a key right in liberal democracies, whereby citizens may gather and express their views without government restrictions.

First specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, freedom of assembly has since been recognized throughout the world as a fundamental human right. It was also included in the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human rights in 1948, Article 20 of which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association."

Freedom of assembly, however, is not absolute. Thus many constitutional or legal provision regarding this right specify that only peaceful assemblies are protected. Permits are sometimes required for assemblies at some public places, and noise and traffic issues also limit the exercise of this right. Police are often authorized by law to disperse any crowd which threatens public safety.

However, bureaucracies often abuse this power to limit assemblies that express unpopular political views or religious ideas.

The importance of Freedom of Assembly

Freedom of assembly is generally recognized recognized as one of the foundations of a democratic society. Protection this right is considered crucial for creating an open and tolerant society, in which different and often competing groups live together in a pluralistic environment. Freedom assembly is also crucial to the development and expression of culture, as well as in the preservation of minority identities.

Freedom of assembly, like other rights, is not absolute, but must be balanced against the need to protect other rights and needs. Thus, only peaceful assemblies are generally protected. On the other hand, peaceful assemblies that express offensive political message or "heretical" religious ideas are generally protected under international law. For example, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe interprets the “peaceful” to include "conduct that may annoy or give offence to persons opposed to the ideas or claims that a particular assembly is promoting."

History in American tradition

Much of the early history of the establishment of the right to freedom of assembly played out in Anglo-American tradition. No right to free assembly was specified in Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628) and the English Bill of Rights (1689). Nevertheless, Englishmen often assembled to discuss their political grievances. Such gatherings were risky propositions, however. As in other monarchies, any such meeting was not only subject to suppression, but could also be interpreted as a treasonous act.

In religious matters, once the Church of England was established, other religious groups were prohibited not only from gathering in public but also from using even private buildings for meetings or worship. Attempts at reform resulted in a law stipulating that no meeting of more than 50 persons without gaining the permission of the petition the king, unless a magistrate was present with the authority to arrest everyone present. The penalty for resisting the magistrate was death.

Perhaps the first written guarantee of freedom of assembly was the Pennsylvania Declaration of Rights of 1776. It states: "the people have a right to assemble together, to consult for their common good."

The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen did not specify a right to freedom of assembly, but this right may be implied in the statements:

Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights... Law can only prohibit such actions as are hurtful to society. Nothing may be prevented which is not forbidden by law...

Previously, the U.S. Declaration of Independence has stipulated only the rights of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," and the U.S. Constitution spoke vaguely of securing the "Blessings of liberty." It would be the First Amendment to this constitution, however, that finally established the right of freedom of assembly for the American people and set a standard of freedom of assembly that would be copied in many nations throughout the world. It states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The U.S. courts would be busy over the following 200 years in interpreted the exact meaning of freedom of assembly clause. Along with freedom of speech, the right of freedom of assembly has gradually broadened in scope over the years. The standard for abridging the right of freedom of assembly is that such assemblies may only be banned or disrupted by the government if a "clear and present danger" exists to the peace of society. The interpretation of this idea, however, has depended on circumstance. At times, for example, various U.S. Communist groups illegal, and during World War II, Japanese Americans were placed in concentrations camps. Today, however, freedom of assembly in the U.S. is more absolute.

In DeJonge v. Oregon (1937) a conviction under Oregon’s criminal syndicalism statute was determined to be unconstitutional because it was based on mere attendance at a meeting of the Communist Party.

In NAACP v. Alabama, the court held that governments may not adopt policies designed to discourage citizens from joining groups even if the government believes the group to be undesirable. The ruling involved an attempt by the State of Alabama to force the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to reveal the names and addresses its members in Alabama.

The freedom marches and other demonstrations of the 1960s Civil Rights movement provided other important test cases. In Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 52 black citizens had been arrested on April 12, 1963 after leaving their church an marching in an orderly fashion on the city's sidewalk in protest of segregation. In 1969, the U. S. Supreme Court, overturned the conviction of Reverend (Fred?) Shuttlesworth's, holding that his constitutional right to peaceably assemble had been violated by city authorities' implementation of an ordinance for the regulation of parades, noting that no threat to public safety had been created by the group.

In 1977 U.S. Supreme Court ruled in National Socialist Party v. Skokie that Nazis had the right to march through a predominantly Jewish section of Skokie, Illinois.

Freedom of Assembly in Europe

As a fundamental right, the OSCE holds that "freedom of peaceful assembly should, insofar as possible, be enjoyed without regulation. Anything not expressly forbidden in law should be presumed to be permissible, and those wishing to assemble should not be required to obtain permission to do so."

Moreover, it is the state’s duty to protect peaceful assembly, and this right must not be subject to unduly bureaucratic regulation. principle. Laws restricting freedom of assembly must be compatible with international human rights law. The dispersal of assemblies should only be a measure of last resort.

In regulating freedom of assembly, the relevant authorities must not discriminate against any individual or group on any ground such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political opinion, or national origin.

The freedom to organize and participate in public assemblies must be guaranteed to members of minority and indigenous groups including. This includes both nationals and non-nationals (including stateless persons, refugees, foreign nationals, asylum seekers, migrants, and tourists).

The implementation of these standards by members of the OSCE varies from country to country. In France, for example, government opposition to certain "sects" reportedly results in discrimination against certain religious groups. For example, while a march in support of Palestinian rights was approved by Parisian authorities, a march by supporters of Scientology along the same route was banned. In Germany, hotels routinely refuse meeting rooms to groups on the basis of their political and religious views, while neo-fascist groups also face restrictions on their freedom of assembly.

Legal validity

• OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights - article 20, n. 1
• Council of Europe - article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
• Canada - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which is Part I of the Constitution of Canada of 1982
• France - article 431-1 of the Nouveau Code Pénal
• Hong Kong - Basic Law Section 27," Hong Kong residents shall have freedom... of assembly, of procession and of demonstration.."
• Article 27 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran (though, not in opposition to Islam)
• Republic of Ireland - Guaranteed by Article 40.6.1 of the Constitution of Ireland, but only when exercised "peaceably and without arms" and not a "nuisance to the general public."
• Turkey - article 33 and 34 of the Constitution of Turkey guarantee the freedom of association and assembly.
• United States - First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

From time to time, local permit laws collide in court with the freedoms of assembly and of speech, such as in February 2003 when protests were anticipated over the exclusion of women from membership at the Augusta National Golf Club where golf's Masters Tournament is played every year. The Richmond County, Georgia county commission implemented a new rule requiring 20 days of advance notice before a protest, and giving the county sheriff the power to approve or deny permits, and to dictate the location of demonstrations. The sheriff turned down a permit to protest in front of the golf club but approved a protest half a mile away. Two courts upheld the ordinance granting the sheriff this power.

See also

• Freedom of assembly in Russia
• Free speech zone

Template:Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Freedom of Assembly  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Freedom of Assembly"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.