The fundamental right to freedom of speech is a central element of the rule of law in a democratic state that constantly collides with other fundamental rights. Both in court decisions and in legal literature there is a significant discussion on the limits of the freedom of speech, mainly concerning its collision with other fundamental rights, particularly personality rights. This debate has become very strong in Brazilian constitutional case law, mainly in the Federal Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal), but also in other constitutional systems and even in the domain of international law. Based on the decisions of the Brazilian Supreme Court and those of the US Supreme Court and the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, this paper aims to discuss some criteria that may guide Courts when balancing freedom of speech and other fundamental rights.

The principle of the rule of law in the European Union’s external policy

Rule of law, whose core is „the access to an independent judiciary and judicial review”, fulfills in EU external policy two functions. Firstly, according to the art. 21 of TEU, all EU external actions have to be subdued to the rule of law. Secondly, promoting and consolidating the rule of law is one the objectives of EU external action. In most constitutional systems, a wide margin of appreciation is left as regards to foreign policy and judicial review is considerably limited. In case of EU, the Court’s jurisdiction over EU external policy is differentiated and reflects the old pillar structure. The question which arises here is whether it can be accommodated with the disposition of the art. 2 of TEU, which states that the European Union which is a single legal entity „is founded on the value of rule of law”, and with the principle of EU external policy coherence.