Have a personal or library account? Click to login
“Access Denied” – Interpreting the Digital Divide by Examining the Right of Prisoners to Access the Internet in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights Cover

“Access Denied” – Interpreting the Digital Divide by Examining the Right of Prisoners to Access the Internet in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights

Open Access
|Jun 2024

References

  1. Blanchard, Michele, Atari Metcalf and Jane Burns. “Bridging the Digital Divide: Creating opportunities for marginalised young people marginalised young people to get connected.” Inspire Foundation – University of Melbourne report (2007): 1–51.
  2. Blomberg, Matt, et al. “Digital divide and marginalized women during COVID-19: a study of women recently released from prison.” Information, Communication and Society 24(14) (2021): 2113–2132 // DOI:10.1080/1369118X.2021.1963462
  3. Borges, Jorge Luís. Collected Fictions. London: Penguin Books, 1998.
  4. Böcskei, Balázs, Marianna Fekete, Ádám Nagy and Andrea Szabó. “Az iskolában ennél jobb átlagom még soha nem volt: egyfolytában ötöst kaptam” – Az online oktatás a magyar fiatalok percepciói alapján.” (“I never had a better average than this at school: I got straight A’s all the time” - Online education as perceived by young Hungarians) Új Pedagógiai Szemle 72(1–2) (2023): 31–48.
  5. Dickerson, Hollin K. “Judging the Judges: The State of Judicial Reform in Eastern Europe on the Eve of Accession.” International Journal of Legal Information 32(3) (2004): 539–581 // DOI:10.1017/S073112650000442X
  6. Gaál, Irén and Anikó Müller. A büntetés-végrehajtási jogszabályok magyarázata (Explanation of prison legislation). Budapest: Wolters Kluwer, 2019 // DOI:10.55413/9789632958347
  7. Gerlitz, Merten. “The Human Right to Free Internet Access.” Journal of Applied Philosophy 37(2) (2019): 314–331.
  8. Gosztonyi, Gergely. Censorship from Plato to Social Media. The Complexity of Social Media’s Content Regulation and Moderation Practices. Cham: Springer, 2023) // DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-46529-1
  9. Gosztonyi, Gergely. “Prison Radios: Communication on the Periphery of a Society.” Mediální studia 1 (2018): 133–139.
  10. Harrison, Lisa. “Prisoners and Their Access to the Internet in the Pursuit of Education.” Alternative Law Journal 39(3) (2014): 159–162 // DOI:10.1177/1037969X1403900304
  11. Hussain, Syed Tauseef, et al. “Examining the status of prison libraries around the world: A literature review.” IFLA Journal 49(1) (2022) // DOI:10.1177/03400352221078032
  12. Koch, Arnd. “Die Entwicklung des Strafrechts zwischen 1751 und 1813” (The development of criminal law between 1751 and 1813): 39–67. In: Arnd Koch, Michael Kubiciel, Martin Löhnig and Michael Pawlik, eds., Feuerbachs Bayerisches Strafgesetzbuch (Feuerbach’s Bavarian Penal Code). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014.
  13. Lendvai, Gergely. “Hybrid Regimes and the Right to Access the Internet – findings from Turkey and Russia in the context of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.” ELTE Law Journal 12(2) (2024) forthcoming.
  14. Lupač, Petr. Beyond The Digital Divide: Contextualizing The Information Society. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, 2019 // DOI:10.1108/9781787565470
  15. Lythreatis, Sophie, Sanjay Kumar Singh, and Abdul-Nasser El-Kassar. “The digital divide: A review and future research agenda.” Technological Forecasting & Social Change 175(2) (2022): 530–544 // DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121359
  16. Magida, Ayanda and Brian Armstrong. “The Third Level Digital Divide: Millennials and Post-Millennials Online Activities in South Africa.” ICICTID 2022: International Conference on ICT, Innovation and Development, Vancouver, Canada (2022).
  17. McCowan, Tristan. Education as a Human Right: Principles for a Universal Entitlement to Learning. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013.
  18. Mezey, Barna. A börtönügy a 17–19. században. A börtön európai útja (The prison system in the 17th-19th centuries. The European way of the prison). Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó, 2018.
  19. Mubarak, Farooq and Reima Suomi. “Elderly Forgotten? Digital Exclusion in the Information Age and the Rising Grey Digital Divide.” Inquiry: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing 59(1) (2022): 907–921 // DOI:10.1177/00469580221096272
  20. Nash, Susan. The Pandemic Has Accelerated The Need To Close The Digital Divide For Older Adults // https://longevity.stanford.edu/the-pandemic-has-accelerated-the-need-to-close-the-digital-divide-for-older-adults/
  21. Orcan, Necdet U. “Legitimate Aims, Illegitimate Aims and the E.Ct.H.R.: Changing Attitudes and Selective Strictness.” University of Bologna Law Review 7(1) (2022): 7–40 // DOI:10.6092/issn.2531-6133/14860
  22. Oster, Jan. Media Freedom as a Fundamental Right. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015 // DOI:10.1017/CBO9781316162736
  23. Piazolo, Daniel. “The Digital Divide.” CESifo Forum 2(3) (2001): 29–34 // DOI:10.2139/ssrn.288963
  24. Pulido, Manuel Lázaro: “Challenges to the Educational “Digital Divide” in Spanish Prisons.” European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 29(2) (2023): 263–281 // DOI:10.1007/s10610-021-09493-4
  25. Pushter, Jacob. Internet access growing worldwide but remains higher in advanced economies // https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2016/02/22/internet-access-growing-worldwide-but-remains-higher-in-advanced-economies/
  26. Reisdorf, Bianca C., Julia R. DeCook. “Locked up and left out: Formerly incarcerated people in the context of digital inclusion.” New Media and Society 24 (2022) // DOI:10.1177/14614448211063178
  27. Reisdorf, Bianca C., Yvonne Jewkes. “(B)Locked sites: cases of Internet use in three British prisons.“ Information, Society and Society 6 (2016): 771–786 // DOI:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1153124
  28. Scharff Smith, Peter. “Imprisonment and internet-access: Human rights, the principle of normalization and the question of prisoners access to digital communications technology.” Nordic Journal of Human Rights 30(4) (2012): 454–482. DOI:10.18261/ISSN1891-814X-2012-04-04
  29. van Dijk, Jan. The Digital Divide. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2020.
  30. Voorhoof, Dirk. European Court of Human Rights: Kalda v. Estonia. IRIS 4(2) (2016): 1–2.
  31. Voorhoof, Dirk. European Court of Human Rights: Ramazan Demir v. Turkey. IRIS 9(4) (2021): 1–2.
  32. Yu, Peter K. “Bridging the Digital Divide: Equality in the Information Age.” Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 20(1) (2023): 1–52.
  33. Braganza, Emily (Jurist). Europe rights court rules Turkish authorities violated detained lawyer’s freedom to receive information. (11 February 2021) // https://www.jurist.org/news/2021/02/europe-rights-court-rules-turkish-authorities-violated-detained-lawyers-freedom-to-receive-information
  34. Ciufoletti, Sofia (European Prison Litigation Network). Out of the cage, into the net. Understanding Access to the Internet in Prison as a Human Right. (2021) // https://www.prisonlitigation.org/internet-as-a-human-right
  35. HUDOC. Case database. // https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
  36. National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Falling through the Net: A survey of the “have nots” in rural and urban America. (July 1995) // www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fallingthru.html
  37. Tynan, Dan (The Guardian). Online behind bars: if internet access is a human right, should prisoners have it? (3 October 2016) // https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/03/prison-internet-access-tablets-edovo-jpay
  38. Cengiz and Others v Turkey. European Court of Human Rights, Applications No. 48226/10 and 14027/11, judgment of the Court of 1 December 2015.
  39. Chocholáč v. Slovakia. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 81292/17, Judgment of the Court of 7 July 2022.
  40. Delfi AS v Estonia. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 64569/09, Judgment of the Court of 16 June 2015.
  41. Donaldson v United Kingdom. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 56975/09, Decision of the Court of 25 January 2011.
  42. Hirst v United Kingdom (No. 2). European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 74025/01, Judgment of the Court of 6 October 2005.
  43. Jankovskis v Lithuania. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 21575/08, judgment of the Court of 17 January 2017.
  44. Kalda v Estonia. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 14581/20, judgment of the Court of 6 December 2022.
  45. Kalda v Estonia. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 17429/10, Judgment of the Court of 19 January 2016.
  46. Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v Russia. European Court of Human Rights, Applications No. 11082/06 and 13772/05, Judgment of the Court of 25 July 2013.
  47. Klibisz v Poland. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 2235/02, Judgment of the Court of 4 October 2016.
  48. Mehmet Çiftçi and Suat İncedere v Turkey. European Court of Human Rights, Applications No. 21266/19 and 21774/19, judgment of the Court of 18 January 2022.
  49. Murray v Netherlands. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 10511/10, Judgment of the Court of 2 April 2016.
  50. Muršić v Croatia. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 7334/13, Judgment of the Court of 20 October 2016.
  51. Nilsen v United Kingdom. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 36882/05, judgment of the Court of 9 March 2010.
  52. Ramazan Demir v Turkey. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 68550/17, Judgment of the Court of 9 February 2021.
  53. Yankov v Bulgaria. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 39084/97, Judgment of the Court of 11 December 2003.
Language: English
Page range: 223 - 237
Submitted on: Oct 7, 2023
|
Accepted on: Apr 4, 2024
|
Published on: Jun 26, 2024
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2024 Gergely Ferenc Lendvai, Gergely Gosztonyi, published by Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.