back
2 comments
Many countries laws and constitutions focus on just speech and expression that undermines current leadership or national concept.

Of course this is all nominal formality and can be used to arbitrarily control all facets of life.

But the priorities are clear.

What is there is a country where speech undermining current leadership is not restricted by law but the government can still arbitrarily enforce it without any laws?
You can arbitrarily enforce something with laws too. Via overly broad laws and selective enforcement.

I don’t have examples, just explaining that your question is a bit too limiting.

I think comment I replied describes that?
China

Article 35 of the PRC constitution guarantees freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration

Article 28 on the other hand undermines all freedoms and protections in the name of both national security and requiring all actions to uphold the socialist state

Article 1 affirms the leadership of the party and Article 28 allows for any offense to the party to be interpreted as a constitutional offense

Hence once the party began leveraging that interpretation as soon as people wouldn't drop a challenge and wanted accountability and answers, like after 1988, all facets of life began being controlled and controllable arbitrarily

Many countries are vulnerable to a conflicting constitution

When you're the head of state getting insulted, you can do whatever you want. It's good to be the king, er, dictator, er, whatever.

Now, if Musk can tinker with it to the point it no longer says woke propaganda and lets the pendulum swing back to nazi stuff, just wait until he has it dump on Trump. I have popcorn at the ready.