Fernando v Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation: 1996

(Sri Lanka) Broadcasts were planned including discussion by experts and listeners. Mr Fernando had participated in these discussions. After criticisms of the government the service came to an end and the broadcasts included little listener participation. Art 14 of the Constitution gave every citizen the freedom of speech and expression including publication’. The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka rejected the contention that the right to freedom of information simpliciter is included in the right to freedom of speech and expression. The right to receive information was in Article 10 of the Constitution that ‘every person is entitled to freedom of thought’ which was the corollary of freedom of speech.
Held: The freedom of speech of the petitioner, qua participatory listener, was infringed, because the stoppage of the NFEP prevented his participation. He was in the same position as the contributor of a column in Visuvalingam and the plaintiff in Lamont.

Judges:

Fernando J

Citations:

(1996) 1 BHRC 104

Cited by:

CitedBenjamin, Vanderpool and Gumbs v The Minister of Information and Broadcasting and The Attorney General for Anguilla PC 14-Feb-2001
PC (Anguilla) A first non-religious radio station had been formed, but came to include much criticism of the government. One programme was suspended by the government. The programme makers complained that this . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Constitutional, Media

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182066