ABSTRACT
One contention in Handyside is that the claimant has caused no harm to any actor sufficient to justify government interference with his right of free expression [A: °~Hr~]. But that contention does not tell the claimant’s whole story. It is part of a larger argument, which can be stated in classic syllogistic form:
A’s first premise If the personal actor, in exercising the right, causes to no actor any harm sufficient to justify the restriction, then the restriction violates the right.
