The fundamental right to communication 40 years after its constitutionalization: expression, television and internet

Abstract

Abstract:
This article analyzes the constitutional regime of the right to human communication (Article 20.1 a and b SC). The aim is to analyze the right evolution in the light of contemporary forms of communication trying to assess whether its constitutional protection is enough. This paper starts studying from an anthropology approach human communication and its essentiality for the concept of human dignity. Subsequently, its historical evolution can be observed unfolding in its double aspect: subjective, freedom in front of the interference of the public authority; and objective, as a foundation element of pluralism and constitutional democracy. We point out some contradictions between the two dimensions caused by the evolution of the media. Later it is pointed out how these contradictions are accentuated in two contemporary media: television and internet. In the first, we observe how both objective and subjective dimension has resulted in a dialectic based on the contrast between public and private, respectively. In the case of the internet, we observe how this dialectic is reproduced, but confusing the public and private spaces, and bringing the right´s limits to the absurd. Paper ends with two conclusions. On one hand, the  Spanish constitutionalization right to receive and impart information and ideas does not seem sufficient in front of contemporary phenomenon of human communication. On the other hand, communication as the basic element on which human dignity has been built requires reading article 20 (1) of the Constitution from one more anthropological approach to, as a pre-existing right. We bet for a revaluation of its subjective versus the objective dimension, because it is the evolution of the forms of human communication that determine the political order, and not contrariwise.