A/76/380 or smartphones as an external substitute for memory, and not necessarily as a tool for sharing or expressing thoughts. 32 The Special Rapporteur observes that extending the absolute protection of freedom of thought to certain forms of expression raises complications in various scenarios, including within the justice system. Irrespective of whether these items are deemed forum internum, they already receive qualified protection under the right to privacy. 33 V. Legal framework 17. Though freedom of thought is recognized by several international human rights instruments, 34 its core attributes and scope are unclear. This is complicated by rhetorical inconsistency, where some use “freedom of thought” interchangeably with other rights, and where forum internum rights are closely intertwined, such as thought and belief. A. Freedom of thought and freedom of expression 18. While freedom of thought is absolute, freedom of expression can be limited. But the distinction between “thought” and “expression” in international law is not always clear. Thought and expression are conceptually and practically distinct, yet they engage in a perpetual feedback loop in which expression is a vehicle for exchanging and developing thoughts, and thoughts feed expression. 19. For the United States Supreme Court, “[t]he right to think is the beginning of freedom, and […] speech is the beginning of thought”. 35 The Supreme Court of Canada also observes that when we speak of “thinking aloud […] in many cases, our thoughts become choate only through their expression”. 36 From this perspective, restricting an individual’s freedom of expression may stifle the process of developing thoughts. Therefore, some suggest that “expressions of thought” fall under freedom of thought’s absolute protection, 37 but this may unduly expand its scope and alter the conditional nature of freedom of expression. 20. Article 13 (1) of the American Convention on Human Rights differs from article 18 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, rather protecting a hybrid “right to freedom of thought and expression”. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights interprets this right to include the freedom to voice and disseminate ideas and freedom to receive information without unlawful or unjustified interference. However, freedom of thought is ostensibly n ot absolute under article 13 (2) of the American Convention on Human Rights. __________________ 32 33 34 35 36 37 21-14191 See https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-american-philosophicalassociation/article/abs/is-having-your-computer-compromised-a-personal-assault-the-ethics-ofextended-cognition/AD3872F46DFB86C0A949A9CBD9A15EEC. General Assembly resolution 75/176, thirteenth preambular para. Article 18, Universal Declaration of Human Rights; article 18 (1), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; article 14 (1), Convention on the Rights of the Child; article 1 (1), Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief; article 9, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights); article 13 (1), American Convention on Human Rights; article 22, ASEAN Human Rights Declaration; article 30 (1), Arab Charter on Human Rights; article 9 (1), African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. See https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/535/234/, p. 253. See https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2001/2001scc2/2001scc2.html#par25 , para. 108. See https://intersentia.com/docs/CHRLR_2012_01.pdf, pp. 80–82. 7/28