How to Balance Freedom of Speech and National Security: Expert Analysis

Taiwan’s Public Policy Institute and Taiwan Think Tank, along with several other organizations, held a symposium on the topic of “Freedom of Speech vs. National Security: Where is the Red Line in a Democratic Society?” Scholars and experts were invited to analyze and discuss these important issues.

At the beginning of the event, Professor Jiang Yaqi from the College of Law and Politics at Taiwan Ocean University posed a question: “If someone uses ‘democracy’ to oppose democracy, and advocates for ‘reunification’ through the use of freedom of speech to overthrow the democratic constitutional system through war, how can we defend democracy through legal means?” Drawing upon the example of Latvia, where inciting war is considered a criminal offense due to past Russian invasions, Professor Jiang highlighted the importance of safeguarding democracy through appropriate legal frameworks.

Researcher Chen Xian pointed out that freedom of speech encompasses the liberty to express opinions, seek, receive, and disseminate information and ideas. In contrast to authoritarian regimes that seek to control people’s thoughts and restrict their freedom of expression, freedom of speech is considered a core value in democratic countries, allowing for societal progress through diverse perspectives. However, individual freedoms are predicated on not infringing upon the freedoms of others, leading to restrictions on speech that includes defamation, sexual harassment at a personal level, and the promotion of terrorism or advocating war at a national level.

Chen further emphasized the challenge of determining what speech poses a threat to national security, highlighting the distinction between authoritarian states where such definitions are imposed by those in power, and democratic societies like Taiwan where there is room for diverse debates. Nevertheless, it remains a difficult balancing act to draw the line of free speech in a way that upholds democratic values while also protecting Taiwan’s democratic systems and national security.

Deputy Executive Director Song Cheng’en of the Future Horizon Foundation analyzed that the issue at hand is not just about freedom of speech but about how we perceive our country and bridge the gaps between differing viewpoints. While the case of “Yaya,” a mainland Chinese spouse, has been viewed by some as a freedom of speech issue, the primary concern lies in the potential threats to national security and social stability, violating regulations governing mainland Chinese residents in Taiwan.

Song stressed the need to differentiate between propaganda and freedom of speech. He cautioned against blindly following doctrines that align with the Chinese Communist Party’s narratives, emphasizing the importance of engaging in face-to-face discussions to build consensus on the country’s future direction amidst the current lack of genuine communication in Taiwanese society, often marred by insults and personal attacks.

Assistant Professor Xiao Yuhe from Feng Chia University pointed out that national security and freedom of speech are not necessarily at odds, and the definitions and boundaries of freedom of speech require thorough discussion. By revisiting the harm principle coined by liberal philosopher Mill, which suggests that individual freedom should only be limited if it causes harm to others, there is a need to debate what constitutes harm in the context of modern society and decide how to regulate speech violence and provocations under the guise of freedom.

Xiao highlighted the necessity to understand the historical context in which Mill operated, noting that the 19th-century media landscape was vastly different from today’s environment, necessitating a reevaluation of the true meaning of freedom of speech in contemporary times. As society evolves and media dissemination expands, freedom of speech transcends the private sphere, inevitably creating social connections and influences.

Following the discussions, the host and young participants raised questions regarding “advocacy for reunification, human rights, and international public opinion warfare,” “constitution and freedom of speech,” as well as the “interview of a North One female teacher by China Central Television (CCTV).” The participants engaged in in-depth analyses and responses to these pertinent issues, underscoring the ongoing complexities that Taiwan must navigate in upholding democratic principles amidst challenges to national security.