The question arises because of a recent SAMOA OBSERVER editorial that asserted: For a Cabinet Minister, answering to the public isn’t optional—it’s essential.

The Editorial declaration followed the refusal of a certain Cabinet Minister to answer questions put to him by the newspaper.  

Yet, the declaration of the Principles on Freedom of Expression that the recent Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Apia adopted clearly states that; freedom of expression embraces free speech, the sanctity of an individual’s opinion, a free press, the transmission and receipt of ideas and information, the freedom of expression in art and other forms, the ability to receive ideas from elsewhere, and the right to silence.

This right applies to everyone as well as the following: freedom of expression is one of many mutually supporting rights (including freedom of thought, association and assembly, and the right to vote) and is integral to other civil and political rights, such as the right to justice, and the right to take part in public affairs. Equally, the right to freedom of expression impacts social and cultural rights, such as the right to education.

And more: a debate about freedom of expression is both wide reaching and constantly evolving, in response to the development of the human mind, technological innovation and a globalised media, community practices and standards, and political and judicial responses. More constant is the fundamental idea that freedom of expression is designed to protect and enhance democratic ideals.

Three overlapping arguments have historically been used to advance the right to freedom of expression: the search for truth, democratic self-government, and autonomy and self-fulfilment.

The search for truth relates to the competition of arguments and ideals that leads to the discovery of truth. When all ideas have been freely heard, “the jury of public opinion will deliver its verdict and pick the version of truth it prefers”.

The role of freedom of expression in democratic self-government is best expressed by Lord Steyn:

The free flow of information and ideas informs political debate. It is a safety valve: people are more ready to accept decisions that go against them if they can in principle seek to influence them. It acts as a brake on the abuse of power by public officials. It facilitates the exposure of errors in the governance and administration of justice in the country.

The democratic rationale has been prominently used in many major court decisions in recent years in the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand. For example, . . . in Australia, New Zealand and the UK, the Courts recognised that the democratic rationale for freedom of expression requires a limitation on defamation laws so that freedom of speech about public and elected officials is not chilled by potential liability.

Others have argued that freedom of expression is an end in itself, not because it assists in truth-finding nor in pursuing democracy, but because it sustains the autonomy and self-fulfilment of individuals in society. This is why art and literature are routinely protected under the umbrellas of freedom of expression, and why some oppose censorship and suppression as intrinsically negative and doing more harm than good.

Freedom of expression has always been subject to limitations. Each of the arguments for freedom of expression accommodates some restrictions. For example, while the search for truth has permitted tolerance for offensive and unsettling ideas, perjury and false advertising are penalised. There may, too, be restrictions on the ‘time, manner and place’ of expression, such as the screening times of adult-only movies on public television. The autonomy argument similarly permits restrictions in the interests of the autonomy of others.

Government ministers no doubt have the right to keep government secrets confidential and the Press have to inform the public. But as the above statement reveals: freedom of expression has always been subject to limitations.

As long as the restrictions on the freedoms are: reasonable.

Ia manuia tele le vaiaso fou.