1 Left era: the freedom
Freedom means the possibility of acting according to its
own will, without constraint. First term of the French republican currency,
it is a fundamental principle of the democracy.
However, even in the democracies, freedom has limits.
1. "IT There A NOT OF FREEDOM WITHOUT LAWS"
Freedom "consists in being
able to do all that does not harm others " says article 4 of the
Declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen of 1789. The freedom of an
individual thus has limits: the freedom of the others.
But these limits should not be posed
anyhow: the Declaration says that they can "be fixed only by the law ". The democratic laws, without which
anarchy règnerait, are necessary to guarantee freedom.
It is exactly what expresses, twenty-five
years before the French revolution, the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau:
"There is freedom without laws, nor where somebody is above the laws"
(written Letters of the mountain, 1764).
2. FREEDOM EAST A RIGHT TO THE MULTIPLE FORMS
Freedom actually covers with multiple
aspects. This is why one speaks more readily about "freedoms " in the plural. These freedoms rise from the basic
rights recognized to the man: they are the application of the
humans right, such as they were devoted to
the xviii E century.
Among freedoms, one distinguishes the
personal freedoms from collective freedoms.
The personal freedoms are
rights which each individual can only exert: the freedom of going and
coming, freedom of thought, religious freedom, freedom to have a private life
(the residence is inviolable, the secrecy of the correspondence is protected,
etc), the safety (which consists in being protected from an unjust arrest,
nonfounded), etc.
Collective freedoms are
those which several people can exert together: press, demonstration,
association, right to meet. The voting rights also belong to the category of
collective freedoms: to vote has direction only if the whole of the citizens
expresses his opinion.
Among these freedoms, some relate to
also the economic and social life: freedom to syndicate, strike, to
choose its employment, etc.
3.
A PROGRESSIVE CONQUEST
It is in England that the personal freedom
was protected most precociously.
In this country, the conquest of freedom
was progressive. Since 1100, the aristocracy obtains from the king a
charter of freedoms, followed soon by
the Large Charter of 1215 which limits the capacity of the king
on the men.
The law of habeas corpus of 1679
interdict the arbitrary imprisonment and marks, so a decisive projection in the
fight for freedom and the dignity of the person.
Lastly, the Declaration of the rights of
1689, imposed to the sovereign, proclaims the guarantee of fundamental
freedoms of the British subjects:
freedom of circulation, expression, association, right of recourse against the
king.
The English laws are largely discussed
during all the xviii E century by the French philosophers of
the Lights. They inspire the American Thomas Jefferson, principal writer of the
Declaration of American independence (1776) as well as the writers of the
Declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen of 1789.
4.
A COMBAT ALWAYS Of TOPICALITY
The rise of totalitarian modes in Europe
(Nazism, Fascism, Stalinism) in the years 1930 showed at which point freedom
was a
fragile asset, and the democracy a vulnerable form of government.
It thus appeared necessary, the shortly
after the Second World war, to reaffirm these basic human rights. In 1948, UNO
adopts the universal Declaration of the humans right, who makes
introduction and safeguarding of freedom a priority.
This one is however a right still
ridiculed in many country of the world, in prey with dictatorships.
2 2nd Part: Personal
freedoms
We are free, but we
know that that does not authorize us to absolutely do all that we want. What
the principle of freedom? Which significant freedoms each one among does enjoy
us it?
1. Freedom,
a natural right
All the democracies
rest on the principle of freedom. According to this principle, all the men are
free by nature: freedom is a natural right,
a basic right. That does not want to say that each one can do
all that he wants. As the men live in company and that they all are also free, it is necessary to fix limits at the
freedom of each one to protect freedom from the others: "freedom consists
in being able to do all that does not harm others" (universal Declaration
of the humans right and of the citizen of 1789, article 4). As long as it is not
established by the law that a behavior is dangerous for the life in company, it
is authorized: freedom is the rule, prohibition the exception.
The fact of being free
thus gives us rights which one precisely calls of right-freedom,
of the rights to act without being blocked (right to practise a religion, right
to open a trade, right to travel, etc). It is necessary to distinguish these
rights of the right-credit, which are rights to obtain something (right to
education, right to the family benefits, right to the vacation, etc).
2. Freedom and freedoms
As all that is not
prohibited by the law is authorized, it is impossible to make a list of all
freedoms. On the other hand, the Constitution draws up a list of fundamental
freedoms, those without which no freedom is possible, and which is
particularly protected. Among these basic rights, the majority can be exerted
by each one: they are the personal freedoms. Others, on the other hand, cannot
be exerted by a person alone. It is necessary to be several so that they have a
direction: they are collective freedoms.
The
freedom of going and coming is also
called the personal freedom in a strict sense. It is freedom to move and use
its time as one wants. It is that which one is private when one is in prison.
To protect it, the law punishes arbitrary detention hard, any arrest which is
not necessary to justice. One can put in prison only those which are condemned
for a fault punished by the law or the suspects which it is necessary to
prevent from fleeing.
The
freedom of conscience is the freedom
of thought. It indicates also, more precisely, freedom to choose its religion,
to practise it as it is wanted or to choose none of it. In a laic State like
France, the freedom of conscience has as a limit the respect of the freedom of
conscience of the others and obedience with the law, which is the same one for
all without reference to religion.
The
freedom of expression is freedom to
communicate by any means (word, written, image, press, deliver, song, etc.)
without the message being controlled before being made public. This control,
which one calls the censure, existed in France until 1870 (beginning of the III
E République), then was restored during the wars. There exists still
today in many countries. But the absence of censure does not mean that one can
say anything: it is necessary to respect
the dignity of those about which one speaks. Thus, that
which publishes charges libelous (false and that it can be false) or which
reveals with the public of information, same exact, on the private life of a
person which does not wish that this information be published, risk to be
continued in front of justice.
3 2nd Part: Collective freedoms
We are not free
separately, but in company. Is this for that which there are collective
freedoms? Which are they? What do they have of private individual compared to
the personal freedoms?
1. The freedoms exerted with several
The majority of
freedoms are those of the person: these are rights that each one can only exert
(freedom of conscience, freedom of going and coming). But certain freedoms have
direction only if several people exert them together: they are called
collective freedoms.
The
right of association is the type
even of collective freedom. There is association only if several people are
concerned. Recognized in France since 1901, this freedom makes it possible
million citizens to practise activities which are not possible that in group.
So that an association exists, can sell, buy or to employ employees, it is
enough that it is declared with the prefecture. The services of the prefecture
are satisfied to record the declaration, without giving the least opinion on
the reasons for which association is created. If an association does not
respect the law, it is not sanctioned at the time of its creation, but later,
by justice and on evidence drawn from its real operation.
The
right to meet and the
freedom of demonstration are, they
also, inconceivable if they are not exerted with several. These freedoms are
exerted about like the right of association. However, it is more current than
they undermine the law and order: meetings gathering too many people so that
the safety of each one is assured, demonstration disturbing circulation, etc.
For these reasons, the law provides that the police force, in load of the law
and order, can prohibit certain meetings or demonstrations.
One can also classify,
among collective freedoms, the all
media and freedom of the press, more generally, (audio-visual, Internet,
etc). It is about a particular form of the freedom of expression: free
transmission of information by professionals. It is thus not conceived without
journalists, without bodies of press (newspapers, chains of television, etc.)
and of course without public. All these actors have, indeed, need from/to each
other. The freedom of the press is regulated, essentially, like the freedom of
expression, but it is necessary also to take account of the constraints which
the companies of press and the significant capacity undergo that the media have
on the opinion.
2. Political freedoms
The
political rights, like the voting
rights, belong to collective freedoms: to vote has direction only if the
community, the whole of the citizens, expresses his opinion. More generally,
collective freedoms, as a whole, make it possible to the citizens to be
organized, which is a condition of their participation in the public life. The
freedom of the press is thus essential so that the elections are really free.
The right of association is at the origin of the political parties, as well as
trade unions, which gather the workers so that they can better defend their
interests. Collective freedoms are the base of
the democracy.
4 2nd Part: Limits of
freedom
Even in the
democracies, freedom has limits. How to make so that these limits are right? In
which cases does have one to fix some?
1. Freedom and the law: principles of the
State of right
In the countries which
recognize the humans right, the democracies, the men are free, but they are
also equal in dignity and rights. The freedom of each one cannot thus carry
wrong to the freedom of the others, which has the same value exactly. It is the
direction of the definition of the freedom given by the universal Declaration
of the humans right and of the citizen of 1789: "freedom consists in being able to do all that does not harm others "
(article 4). Limits with freedom (a "terminal", known as the
following sentence of the Declaration) are thus necessary. But the Declaration
of 1789 specifies immediately afterwards: "this terminal can be fixed only
by the law". One cannot thus restrict freedoms anyhow: one needs a law,
discussed and voted by the representatives of the people. The law, indeed, is
"the expression of the general will" (article 6 of the Declaration).
No public authority
(minister, mayor, the main thing of college, etc.) thus the harbour due does
not have reached to the freedom of somebody if it did not receive the capacity
of a law from it. The decisions of the administrations which do not respect the
law are arbitrary, in fact abuse of powers can be cancelled by the
administrative judge. We are thus in a mode where, to
protect freedom, everyone, including the government, is subjected
to the law and the control of the judges: it is what one calls a State of
right. The law itself cannot suspend fundamental freedoms. It must indeed
respect the Constitution and certain treaties signed by France, which protect
these freedoms.
2. Conflicts of freedoms
When two also
recognized and also valid freedoms are in conflict, the law must intervene. It
slices by regulating freedoms in question: it becomes possible to
reconcile two freedoms or of knowing
which has priority and in which case.
Freedom to undertake is
one of the aspects of freedom. Each one is free to create a company, but also
to buy that of another to join together it with his, to do what one calls a
concentration. But, if a concentration are done in the field of the press or
the audio-visual one, the pluralism of information (the expression of the
different opinions) to be threatened risk and, with him, freedom of the press.
This is why the French law prohibited the concentration of the companies of
information beyond a certain threshold.
3. Freedom and the law and order
Freedoms can also be
regulated to guarantee the law and order. One thus calls the whole of the
conditions which make it possible the law to be applied: justice can, for
example, to continue, make stop and condemn the authors of infringements. Form
also part of the law and order, the respect of principles recognized by the
Constitution, like the human dignity, to which no freedom can carry reached.
Thus, the freedom of
conscience makes that all the beliefs are accomodated in France. But if it is
proven that a movement which thinks religious undermines the dignity of its
members, by humiliating treatments or by them making act under the constraint,
this movement (which one then calls a sect) can be continued and dissolved by
justice.
