ABSTRACT
With a focus on the chilling effect's origins in the US and the jurisdiction of England and Wales, this chapter traces the historical roots of the 'chilling effect' concept in relation to human rights, and in particular, laws of defamation and privacy, and the areas of freedom of information and state surveillance. It considers the difference between its judicial and social use within and between these distinct areas of law. The chapter also considers the impact of the chilling effect metaphor on communication law and policymaking and argues that in order to better protect fundamental human rights, there is a need for clearer articulation by lawmakers of desired boundaries for legitimate speech. In the freedom of information context, the chilling effect argument has received markedly different treatment between tribunals and other bodies considering disclosure of the same information. Chilling effect claims have tended to focus on costs even when making a broader point about threats to freedom of expression.
