How women freedom of expression is manipulated by forcing to

give vote to their men Favorite leaders

Every person first politically right is to vote freely and independtly. Freedom of expression of
women is very important in a democratic society. But in Pakistan it is manipulated on large
scale specially in women. They are considered the property of man. The men manipulate their
right to vote which is the part of freedom of expression. In village areas, women who are not
educated and haven’t political awareness are manipulated by their man to give vote to their
men favorite personality. they give vote to that specific peer whose family is being elected
from many decades. There are some political leaders whom the families are following from
decades. Women are ordered and forced to give vote to their man favorite leaders. they
manipulate women freedom of expression by forcing to vote to the person which is ruling that
area from many years. women under man pressure become unable to express and think about
their freedom of expression. Men stop their women thinking power by imposing and forcing to
vote their favorite leader and doesn’t found need to argue or go against with them. In this way
they manipulate the women freedom of expression.it is very important that the person have
their own personal opinion bases on their own experiences and analysis instead of the thought
of the other person. Being the part of democratic country, every person of society shouldn’t
manipulate by any forcing authority but the society must be trained to use their freedom of
expression in right way.

How Charlie Hebdo magazine manipulated their right to freedom

of expression
On January 7, 2015, terrorists attacked the offices of the satirical French magazine Charlie
Hebdo, killing twelve, including the editor and several cartoonists. Charlie Hebdo, an over-
the-top magazine keen to satirize ideologues, politicians, and the generally humorless, had gone
too far, in the eyes of these religious fanatics, whose rampage was payback for Charlie cartoons
and articles lampooning the Prophet Muhammad. Over the course of three days, the terrorists
killed seventeen people, injured others, and took others hostage. The attacks moved from the
offices of the journal to the streets, and finally to a kosher supermarket at the edge of Paris.
Much of the world denounced this brutal attack on a magazine that at one time or another had
infuriated many who were now supporting it. Three years earlier, the French government had
condemned Charlie Hebdo for re-publishing Danish newspaper cartoons satirizing Islam,
cartoons which sparked riots around the world. But now, French president François Hollande
was expressing outrage over the murder of Charlie Hebdo’s cartoonists, and millions of
ordinary people rallied at the Place de la République in Paris, in the squares of other French
cities, and in cities abroad as well, to reassert their commitment to free speech. Je suis
Charlie became the chant of the day.
On January 11, the same world leaders who were chanting “Je suis Charlie” called for increased
police powers to spy on the internet activities and mobile phones of terrorists, suspected
terrorists, people who might one day become terrorists, and for good measure, just about
everybody else on the planet, including cartoonists. There was little outrage that this
surveillance, calculated to protect everyone’s speech, could actually wind up suppressing
speech. And by the time the survivors of the Charlie Hebdo massacre published a new issue on
January 14, with a cover of Muhammad shedding a tear and holding a sign that says, “Je suis
Charlie,” many of those who had condemned the murder of cartoonists now said, free speech
is important, but insulting religion invites serious consequences.
The Charlie Hebdo attacks expose the paradox of free speech: like it or not, freedom of speech
and the control of speech are always intertwined. Speak out, especially on something
controversial, and someone government, church, school, parent, troll, or terrorist—may try to
stop or punish you. Laws may protect speech, but they always leave some speech unprotected.

How TLP manipulate the right to freedom of expression of their

voters by the slogan “vote Rasool de naam da” and “the last hope
TLP”
The Extremist political party, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) appears determined to make
the most of this situation. Founded by Khadim Rizvi in 2015, TLP is famous for its history of
organising large scale protests in opposition to the blasphemy law. In the 2018 general
elections, it became the fifth-largest party in the country but failed to win seats in the National
Assembly. Since then, the TLP seems to be committed to using social media as a tool to further
its political campaign.According to the Data Analytics firm G5io, TLP has an overwhelming
presence on Twitter. While the party is not always the top trend, it constantly generates the
most tweets in terms of volume. The G5io report presents that the TLP has the 'biggest
firepower' on P on Pakistani Twitter.
The hashtag #LastHopeTLP has been trending on Twitter as one of the top trends. This hashtag
not only dominates Pakistani Twitter, but also sends across the message that while all major
political parties such as the PPP, PML-N, PML-Q, and PTI appear to have failed the people of
Pakistan and are enthralled in feuds fueled by personal agendas, TLP is the last hope for the
country.
The party use the slogans such as “last hope TLP” and “vote Rasool de naam da” and said those
who will not give vote to TLP are not Muslim. In this way they exploit the freedom of
expression of citizens.

Conclusion
• Freedom of expression must be practiced but without hurting any community of the
society.
• Before criticism media and journalists must keep in view the limitations provided in
the constitution.

• the culture of family politics and dictatorship within the parties is abandoned. Media
should show a more careful and responsible behaviour it should conduct a thorough
investigation and research before using their right of expression.
• freedom of expression should not be exploited for the defamation of any group.

• https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&u
act=8&ved=2ahUKEwj6g7HBs8T7AhVlybsIHTdIAVwQFnoECBIQAQ&url=https
%3A%2F%2Facademic.oup.com%2Fhrlr%2Farticle-
abstract%2F18%2F2%2F267%2F5004703&usg=AOvVaw391eg6qI7c2dwJR2W0Nz
zc

• https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahU
KEwjkoZ-
9tcT7AhUn8rsIHSvuCVwQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftribune.com.pk
%2Fstory%2F2347881%2Flasthopetlp-tlps-desperate-attempt-to-gain-
support&usg=AOvVaw36y9y87H51ttCcAy_IFSZG

• https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&u
act=8&ved=2ahUKEwjUp4_CucT7AhUWgP0HHY-
cBV0QFnoECAoQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fredyellowblue.org%2Fdata%2Fpk%2
Fwdpk%2F&usg=AOvVaw0DjGw0M4qpxnknrq-4TpLE