Abstract
Freedom of expression is one of the prerequisites for the formation and existence of a democratic society; it belongs among the universal values of paramount importance, because it allows not only to freely express own views, but also reveal the potential of the individual. In addition, it is considered (and it is justified) as one of the main and unconditional achievements of the political reform that is being carried out in Ukraine. The guarantee of freedom of expression, which has the highest political normative content, is, on the one hand, the most important asset of an organic constitution, and on the other hand, serves as the main function of the constitution as a legal source that reflects and responds to the interests of civil society.
However, the real challenge for the unsustainable constitutional tradition that still retains some signs of the post-Soviet model of regulation is the need to balance freedom of expression under the conditions of threats to national security. What should be the proper mechanism for guaranteeing freedom of expression at the constitutional level? How strong is the danger that the state violates the requirement of constitutionality in the case of restrictions on freedom of expression for the sake of national security? How does the post-Soviet tradition of legal regulation manifest itself in deciding which model of guaranteeing freedom of expression is chosen by the state? What is the role of the tradition of respect for personal autonomy and the value of tolerance of a society in guaranteeing freedom of expression? The article is devoted to finding answers to these questions.