Freedom of speech is a foundational tenet in democratic nations. It grants individuals the ability to articulate ideas, challenge authority, and advance knowledge and history. However, while the term is something we understand and grasp, how it is defined or construed, where it applies, and how it is viewed in other parts of the globe are a very diverse set of contingencies.

In this blog, the writer works to articulate the origins, meaning, importance, and scope of free speech as it is interpreted and understood internationally—addressing some of the most googled queries people have struggled with regarding this declaration and the fundamental right to freedom of speech.

What is Freedom of Speech?

Freedom of Speech is the right to express an individual’s thoughts, beliefs and ideas without fear of government censorship or punishment. While this includes spoken words, freedom of speech also includes written words, art, protests, and symbolic acts (e.g., burning the flag). Freedom of speech is essential for freedom of personal expression, public dialogue and debate, exploration of art, and critique of political powers.

This is a right that protects the unpopular, extreme, offensive, and controversial – so long as it does not reach legal limits such as incitement to violence and defamation. Therefore, freedom of speech protects individuals from being silenced by the state.

Which Amendment is Freedom of Speech?

In the United States, freedom of speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution. This amendment was adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. It states:

“Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

The First Amendment protects more than just speech; it also protects the freedom of press, assembly, and petition. The First Amendment constrains government action. All federal, state, or local governments and agencies cannot legally enact laws that restrict expression.

This means when Americans reference their “right to free speech”, they are talking about their constitutional protection under the First Amendment.

Why is Freedom of Speech Important?

Freedom of speech is an essential pillar of democratic societies. It enables citizens to hold their leaders accountable, pushes the boundaries of social expectations, and advocates change. Without freedom of speech, the civil rights movement, women’s rights movement, and LGBTQ+ movement would not have developed.

Freedom of speech also remains fundamental to creative and intellectual development. It fuels journalism, arts, science, education, and social discourse. Safeguarding freedom of speech cultivates societies that allow for innovations from every voice—not just from the most powerful.

What does Freedom of Speech Protect?

Freedom of speech protects:

• Verbal and written communication
• Political expression, and religious expression.
• Art, music, and symbolic speech.
• Non-violent protests and demonstrations.

Freedom of speech does not protect everything. There are lines to this right, and not all speech is protected equally.

Real Arrests for Free Speech

Esila Ayık, Turkey (April–May 2025)

On April 30, 2025, Esila Ayık, a university student studying in Istanbul, was arrested for holding a sign calling President Erdoğan a “dictator” during a peaceful protest. Despite having serious heart and kidney conditions, authorities detained Ayık in prison. After hospitalization, she was released in May. Ayık’s detention raised important questions and considerable debate about boundaries to dissent and criminalizing political dissent in Turkey.

Mahmoud Khalil, U.S. Campus (March–May 2025)

Syrian-born legal resident, Mahmoud Khalil, was arrested after being involved in pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University. Khalil’s arrest was under the “Catch and Revoke” immigration program, and activists and legal experts related to the case said it signaled the criminalization of dissenting speech, as well as an escalation of federal efforts to take advantage of legal residents with green cards.

Tšolo Thakeli, Lesotho (June 2025)

On June 1, 2025, Lesotho activist Tšolo Thakeli was arrested and charged with sedition after criticizing high youth unemployment and the prime minister’s performance in a social media post. Thakeli spent time in poor prison conditions (including being told he couldn’t receive soap), and was warned to refrain from public criticism in the future. Thakeli’s arrest prompted a wave of student protests in Maseru.

These cases highlight the delicate balance between upholding freedom of speech and maintaining national order. While some arrests clearly overstep into censorship—like Ayık’s or Thakeli’s—others, such as Khalil’s, underscore how legal residency comes with conditions. When speech intersects with politically sensitive issues and national security, governments may act to prevent escalation or misuse of status—sometimes rightfully, based on context.

The Limits for Free Speech

While the First Amendment provides broad protection, there are exceptions where speech is not protected. These include:

• Obscenity: Speech or media that violates community standards and lacks serious value.
• Defamation: False statements that damage a person’s reputation (libel and slander).
• Incitement: Speech that urges illegal action or imminent violence.
• True Threats: Statements that convey a real and believable threat to harm someone else.
• Child Pornography: Illegal and harmful to minors.

Moreover, it should be noted that hate speech, even if it is abhorrent, is usually protected in the U.S. This is the case unless it amounts to incitement or threats.

Does Freedom of Speech only Apply to the Government?

The First Amendment applies and limits the government only. It does not apply to private companies, schools, or employers in the same way. For example, social media platforms, such as Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) are private entities. Therefore, they can and do, moderate content as they see fit according to their policies.

So, even though freedom of speech keeps the government from censoring you, it does not mean that there won’t be consequences or backlash, and even moderation outside of government.

Do Students have Freedom of Speech at School?

Students in U.S. Public Schools are still afforded their constitutional rights to free speech. This was established by the Supreme Court, in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), where the Court ruled that “students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech at the schoolhouse gate.”

Nevertheless, schools may impose limits on speech that interferes with the learning process, encourages unlawful conduct, or is vulgar.

Freedom of Speech and Non-Citizens in the U.S.

The First Amendment offers protection to everyone on U.S. soil and is not limited to citizens. This means that green card holders, temporary visa holders, and undocumented immigrants have the right to free speech while present in the country. Non-citizens can organize protests like citizens, voice opinions like citizens, and publish like citizens.

Does Freedom of Speech Apply to Non-citizens?

Satire has historically been a compelling agent in fostering and protecting free speech. Satires like those by Voltaire bravely called for change that challenged regimes that held captive liberties. Writers, such as Mark Twain, and comedians, such as George Carlin, and Lenny Bruce, employed ridicule to grapple with the shortcomings of society, challenging public dialogue, and stimulating belief in the absurd.

Satire frequently provokes offense, but satire remains an integral, yet complicated, protected form of speech in democratic regimes.

Is Freedom of Speech a Human Right?

Yes. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Freedom of speech is recognized as a human right. How that human right is defined and upheld is questioned and formed around countries.

Freedom of Speech Around the World

Different countries offer different degrees of speech protection. Here’s a breakdown:

The United Kingdom

The UK guarantees freedom of speech in law, under the Human Rights Act 1998 (which implements the European Convention on Human Rights). It comes with many more limitations than in the U.S., such as for hate speech, national security, and public order.

Canada

Freedom of expression is guaranteed under Section 2 (b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It allows for reasonable limits provided by law, such as for hate speech, defamation, and obscenity.

Australia

There is no constitutional right to free speech in Australia, but courts have acknowledged that there is an implied freedom of political communication.

Germany

Germany has a strong freedom of speech protections, but prohibits hate speech, Nazi propaganda, and Holocaust denial under the criminal code.

France

France also has freedom of expression, but prohibits speech that incites hatred or discrimination against a protected group.

China

Freedom of speech is not protected. The government severely censors the media and routinely detains dissidents who criticize the state.

Russia

Although there is a technically a freedom of speech clause in the Russian Constitution, it is sharply limited through the use of government censorship, strict propaganda laws, the prosecution of dissenters, etc.

Japan

Freedom of speech is permitted and protected under Article 21 of the Japanese Constitution. I do believe it is not absolute and limits for obscenity and defamation exist.

Mexico

While there is freedom of speech guaranteed in Mexican law, journalists and other activists often face threats and violence in practice.

Social Media and the Challenges of Today

Speech on Social Media Vs Moderation by Private Platforms

1. Telegram CEO Pavel Durov; France (August 2024)

While not arrested for his beliefs, the Telegram founder Pavel Durov, was detained in France in August 2024 for alleged criminal content linked to the platform. While the case dealt with circumstances of platform responsibility and not speaker censorship, the matter raised serious issues over the expectations of how much moderation should be considered by tech executives.

2. Kenya influencer Kelvin Moinde; June 2025

Kenyan social media influencer Kelvin Moinde was arrested in June 2025 for publicly posting statements that were critical of a senior police official. The arrest leads to questions of whether fact-finding about public figures that are critical of the individual should even be criminally investigated in a free society.

3. Private Platforms’ Content Moderation

Speech on private platforms such as Facebook and X is often removed in contradiction to a user’s legal freedom of speech or expression, not just as a matter of compliance with a government actor, but to corporate policies…and typically without transparency in how the moderation decision is made. The question remains; should private platforms be treated as public trustees of free expression?

What will it take to keep Free Speech alive today?

• State repression is still very much a reality: as seen in the Ayık and Thakeli cases, even in contemporary contexts, political criticism can still lead to arrests.
• Private moderation complicates the right to free speech: on any medium, whether Telegram or Instagram, the terms governing what can remain on the platform are not constitutional protection but the platform’s terms of service.
• Global significance: from Europe, to Africa, to North America, we see the tensions associated with free speech, public order, and regulation being played out in a new and complex way.

Conclusion

Freedom of speech is a basic right that supports democracy, innovation, and personal freedom. In the U.S., it is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution, but there are limits. Around the world, the right to free speech differs widely based on cultural, historical, or legal context.

As we continue to navigate a world where ideas spread instantaneously across borders and platforms, understanding the power and the responsibility that comes with being able to express yourself freely is critical. We need to be responsible with our views of others’ differing views and still be able to hold space for civil discourse as we continue to protect a vital right.

Read about: Modern Art and the Fine Line Between Genius and Garbage