Return to Answer

Since I got a downvote and speculating that it might be because the legislations cited might not be considered to "closely resemble" the Russian law, let me add that I agree that most rules have suficient checks to prevent their misuse for the supression of opinions, with two exceptions.

For Italy, the cited definition of defamation is not detailed enough to exclude abuse. The Turkish use of the term "degrade" raises questions, but the following sentence explicitely protecting criticism on first glance seems to be an attempt of mitigation. But the paper also gives numerous examples where the rule criminalising insults against the President has been construed in such a way as to generally prohibit criticism against him – and the statistics show the have been hundreds of cases.

Since I got a downvote and speculating that it might be because the legislations cited might not be considered to "closely resemble" the Russian law, let me add that I agree that most rules have sufficient checks to prevent their misuse for the suppression of opinions, with two exceptions.

For Italy, the cited definition of defamation is not detailed enough to exclude abuse. The Turkish use of the term "degrade" raises questions, but the following sentence explicitely protecting criticism on first glance seems to be an attempt of mitigation. But the paper also gives numerous examples where the rule criminalising insults against the President has been construed in such a way as to generally prohibit criticism against him – and the statistics show there have been hundreds of cases.

Since I got a downvote and speculating that it might be because the legislations cited might not be considered to "closely resemble" the Russian law, let me add that I agree that most rules have suficient checks to prevent their misuse for the supression of opinions, with two exceptions.

For Italy, the cited definition of defamation is not detailed enough to exclude abuse. The Turkish use of the term "degrade" raises questions, but the following sentence explicitely protecting criticism on first glance seems to be an attempt of mitigation. But the paper also gives numerous examples where the rule criminalising insults against the President has been construed in such a way as to generally prohibit criticism against him – and the statistics show the have been hundreds of cases.

The recent changes to laws in Russia and Belarus mentioned in the question and other answers are obviously not included in the paper.