64 2) Freedom of thought and expression in a democratic society 112. In its Advisory Opinion OC-5/85, the Inter-American Court referred to the close relationship that exists between democracy and freedom of expression, when it stated that: Freedom of expression is a cornerstone upon which the very existence of a democratic society rests. It is indispensable for the formation of public opinion. It is also a conditio sine qua non for the development of political parties, trade unions, scientific and cultural societies and, in general, those who wish to influence the public. It represents, in short, the means that enable the community, when exercising its options, to be sufficiently informed. Consequently, it can be said that a society that is not well informed is not a society that is truly free. 90 113. In the same terms used by the Inter-American Court, the European Court of Human Rights has underscored the importance that freedom of expression has in a democratic society, when it stated that: […] freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential pillars of democratic society and a fundamental condition for its progress and the personal development of each individual. This freedom should not only be guaranteed with regard to the dissemination of information and ideas that are received favorably or considered inoffensive or indifferent, but also with regard to those that offend, are unwelcome or shock the State or any sector of the population. Such are the requirements of pluralism, tolerance and the spirit of openness, without which no ‘democratic society’ can exist. […] This means that […] any formality, condition, restriction or sanction imposed in that respect, should be proportionate to the legitimate end sought. 91 114. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights 92 and the United Nations Human Rights Committee 93 have also upheld this same principle. 115. On September 11, 2001, the Chiefs of State and Heads of Government of the Americas approved the Inter-American Democratic Charter, Article 4 of which reads in part as follows: 90 Cf. Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism (Arts. 13 and 29 American Convention on Human Rights) supra note 85, para. 70. 91 Cf. Case of Ivcher-Bronstein, supra note 85, para. 152; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” Case (Olmedo Bustos et al.), supra note 85, para. 69; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Scharsach and News Verlagsgesellschaft v. Austria, Judgment of 13 February, 2004, para. 29; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Perna v. Italy, Judgment of 6 May, 2003, para. 39; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Dichand and others v. Austria, Judgment of 26 February, 2002, para. 37; Eur. Court. H.R., Case of Lehideux and Isorni v. France, Judgment of 23 September, 1998, para. 55; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria, Judgment of 20 September, 1994, Series A no. 295-A, para. 49; Eur. Court H.R. Case of Castells v Spain, Judgment of 23 April, 1992, Series A. No. 236, para. 42; Eur. Court H.R. Case of Oberschlick v. Austria, Judgment of 25 April, 1991, para. 57; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Müller and Others v. Switzerland, Judgment of 24 May, 1988, Seriess A no. 133, para. 33; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Lingens v. Austria, Judgment of 8 July, 1986, Seriess A no. 103, para. 41; Eur. Court H.R., Case of Barthold v. Germany, Judgment of 25 March, 1985, Seriess A no. 90, para. 58; Eur. Court H.R., Case of The Sunday Times v. United Kingdom, Judgment of 29 March, 1979, Seriess A no. 30, para. 65; and Eur. Court H.R., Case of Handyside v. United Kingdom, Judgment of 7 December, 1976, Seriess A No. 24, para. 49. Cf. African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, Media Rights Agenda and Constitutional Rights Project v. Nigeria, Communication Nos. 105/93, 128/94, 130/94 and 152/96, Decision of 31 October, 1998, para 54. 91 93 Cf. U.N. Human Rights Committee, Aduayom et al. v. Togo (422/1990, 423/1990 and 424/1990), report of July 12, 1996, para. 7.4.