Answer:
The United States first amendment carried more protection and less restriction in its implementation and here is why.
The edict of the United States does not qualify the application of the clause granting freedom of expression. That of the United Kingdom does. In doing so, it ensures that Freedom of Expression is used appropriately in that it must be targeted at the common good and the well being of the state.
It states, for instance, that
<em>"Public authorities may restrict this right if they can show that their action is lawful, necessary and proportionate in order to:
</em>
- <em>
protect national security, territorial integrity (the borders of the state) or public safety
</em>
- <em>prevent disorder or crime
</em>
- <em>protect health or morals
</em>
- <em>protect the rights and reputations of other people
</em>
- <em>prevent the disclosure of information received in confidence
</em>
- <em>maintain the authority and impartiality of judges"</em>
Cheers!
Shift netural hope this help
Answer:
do you still need the answer for this?
Explanation:
Answer:
True.
Explanation:
King Hammurabi is popularly known as the first king of Babylon and he established the Babylonian Empire after conquering the whole of Mesopotamia. King Hammurabi enacted sets of written rules and fundamental laws to rule his subjects and it was referred to as Code of Hammurabi.
This ultimately implies that, King Hammurabi created a written set of laws to rule the Babylonians. The laws were enforced by the king's messenger.
Hence, the Code of Hammurabi is the first set of codified laws, Babylonian, enforced by messengers, equivalent of police.