54 sanctions, and the restrictions to leaving the country to which he was subjected for almost eight years and four months. 1) The content of the right to freedom of thought and expression 77. In relation to the content of the right to freedom of thought and expression, the Court has indicated previously that those who are protected by the Convention have not only the right and freedom to express their thoughts, but also the right and freedom to seek, receive and disseminate information and ideas of all kinds. Consequently, freedom of expression has an individual dimension and a social dimension: It requires, on the one hand, that no one be arbitrarily limited or impeded in expressing his own thoughts. In that sense, it is a right that belongs to each individual. Its second aspect, on the other hand, implies a collective right to receive any information whatsoever and to have access to the thoughts expressed by others.114 78. In this respect, the Court has indicated that the first dimension of freedom of expression “is not exhausted in the theoretical recognition of the right to speak or write, but also includes, inseparably, the right to use any appropriate method to disseminate ideas and allow them to reach the greatest number of persons.”115 In this sense, the expression and dissemination of ideas and information are indivisible, so that a restriction of the possibilities of dissemination represents directly, and to the same extent, a limit to the right to free expression.116 79. Regarding the second dimension of the right to freedom of expression, the social element, it is necessary to indicate that freedom of expression is a way of exchanging ideas and information between persons; it includes the right to try to communicate one’s point of view to others, but it also implies everyone’s right to receive other people’s opinions, information and news. For the ordinary citizen, awareness of other people’s opinions and information is as important as the right to impart their own.117 80. This Court has stated that both dimensions are of equal importance and should be guaranteed simultaneously in order to give full effect to the right to freedom of expression in the terms of Article 13 of the Convention.118 114 Cf. Case of Herrera-Ulloa, supra note 15, para. 108; Case of Ivcher-Bronstein. Judgment of February 6, 2001. Series C No. 74, para. 146; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.). Judgment of February 5, 2001. Series C No. 73, para. 64; and Compulsory Membership in an Association prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism (Arts. 13 and 29 American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-5/85 of November 13, 1985. Series A No. 5, para. 30. 115 Cf. Case of Herrera-Ulloa, supra note 15, para. 109; Case of Ivcher-Bronstein, supra note 114, para. 147; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.), supra note 114, para. 65; and Compulsory Membership in an Association prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, supra note 114, para. 31. 116 Cf. Case of Herrera-Ulloa, supra note 15, para. 109; Case of Ivcher-Bronstein, supra note 114, para. 147; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.), supra note 114, para. 65; and Compulsory Membership in an Association prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, supra note 114, para. 36. 117 Cf. Case of Herrera-Ulloa, supra note 15, para. 110; Case of Ivcher-Bronstein, supra note 114, para. 148; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.), supra note 114, para. 66; and Compulsory Membership in an Association prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, supra note 114, para. 32. 118 Cf. Case of Herrera-Ulloa, supra note 15, para. 111; Case of Ivcher-Bronstein, supra note 114, para. 149; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.), supra note 114, para. 67; and Compulsory Membership in an Association prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, supra note