A/HRC/41/48 and to reclaim the return to democracy. Protests and related opinions in favour of democracy should be ensured the highest protection”.12 27. The Inter-American Commission has stated that, as public officials, judges and prosecutors enjoy a right of freedom of expression “that is quite broad” but, at the same time, “subject to special restrictions” aimed at safeguarding the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. 13 C. Professional standards and ethics 28. Codes of professional conduct play an important role in providing practical guidance to judges and prosecutors on how to exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms in a way that preserves the dignity of their office and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. 29. In a number of States that responded to the questionnaire, professional associations have developed codes of professional conduct or guidelines to help judges and prosecutors to act, in the discharge of their professional functions, in accordance with predefined ethical standards and the duties and responsibilities intrinsic to their functions. 14 In some cases, the same code is applicable to both judges and prosecutors. 15 30. Some of these codes contain specific provisions on the exercise of fundamental freedoms and political rights, and identify the restrictions that judges and prosecutors may be subject to in order to preserve their independence and impartiality, the honour and dignity of their office, and the public confidence in the system of administration of justice.16 Only a few ethical codes provide guidance for judges and prosecutors on the use of modern technologies17 IV. Freedom of expression 31. The right to freedom of expression is enshrined in many international and regional treaties.18 The Human Rights Committee has observed that freedom of expression forms the basis for the full enjoyment of a wide range of other human rights, including the rights to freedom of religion, assembly, association, participation in public affairs and the effective exercise of the right to vote. 19 32. International and regional standards on freedom of expression have a similar structure: in the first paragraph it is recognized that “everyone” has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, while in the second paragraph it is stipulated that, in order to be legitimate, restrictions on this right must be prescribed by law, serve a legitimate aim and be necessary in a democratic society. In some of these standards it is expressly recognized that the exercise of this freedom “carries with it special duties and responsibilities”.20 33. These special duties and responsibilities have a special significance in cases concerning the freedom of expression of judges and prosecutors. As civil servants, judges 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 López Lone et al. v. Honduras, judgment of 5 October 2015, para. 160. “Guarantees for the independence of justice operators: towards strengthening access to justice and the rule of law in the Americas” (December 2013), para. 172. Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Slovenia, Sweden and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Northern Ireland only). Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria and Romania. Australia and Slovenia. Australia and United Kingdom (Northern Ireland and Scotland only). For example, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art. 19); the European Convention on Human Rights (art. 10); the American Convention on Human Rights (art. 13); and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (art. 9). General comment No. 34 (2011) on freedoms of opinion and expression, paras. 4 and 20. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art. 19 (3)). See also European Convention on Human Rights (art. 10 (2)). 7