64 the denial of the freedom of expression or whether it entails a restriction beyond permissible limits.172 Not every breach of Article 13 of the Convention entails an outright denial of the right to freedom of expression, which occurs when government power is used to establish means to prevent the free flow of information, ideas, opinions or news. Examples of this type of violation are prior censorship, seizure or banning of publications and, in general, any measures that subject expression or dissemination of information to State control. In such case, there is a gross violation not only of the right of each individual to express their views, but also of the right of each person to be well informed, thus affecting one of the fundamental basis of a democratic society.173 69. The book “Ética y Servicios de Inteligencia” (“Ethics and Intelligence Services”) as well as the statements made by Mr. Palamara-Iribarne, which were published in the media, involved the exercise of the right to freedom of thought and expression through the dissemination of his thoughts and ideas regarding issues related to the need for “intelligence personnel,” in the interest of preventing human rights violations, to adhere to “ethical standards of conduct” and the possibility to express his views on the proceedings and the treatment he and his family were subject to by the authorities. In addition, they also further the social dimension of said right by offering readers access to the information contained in the book and the opinions and ideas advanced by Mr. Palamara-Iribarne. The concept of the individual and social dimension of freedom of thought and expression, as well as their interdependence, has been developed by the Court on several occasions.174 70. The Court must determine, in view of the facts proven in the instant case, firstly, whether the State committed acts of prior censorship incompatible with the American Convention when it prohibited Mr. Humberto Antonio Palamara-Iribarne from publishing his book “Ética y Servicios de Inteligencia” (“Ethics and Intelligence Services”) and seized the copies thereof, instituting proceedings against Mr. Palamara-Iribarne for disobedience and breach of military duties. Secondly, this Court must establish whether the contempt charge in the military criminal proceedings brought against Mr. Palamara-Iribarne based on the statements he made, as well as the military and criminal sanctions imposed as a result of said proceedings and the opening of an administrative investigation, which was subsequently closed, constitute and undue restriction on his right to freedom of thought and expression. 172 Cf. Case of Ricardo Canese. Judgment of August 31, 2004. Series C No. 111, para. 77; and Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism (Articles 13 and 29 of the American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-5/85 of November 13, 1985. Series A No. 5, paras. 53 and 54. 173 Cf. Case of Ivcher-Bronstein. Judgment of February 6, 2001. Series C No. 74, para. 152; and Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, supra note 172, para. 54. 174 Cf. Case of Ricardo Canese, supra note 172, paras. 77-80; Case of Herrera-Ulloa. Judgment of July 2, 2004. Series C No. 107, paras. 108-111; Case of Ivcher-Bronstein, supra note 173, paras. 146–149; Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo-Bustos et al.). Judgment of February 5, 2001. Series C No. 73, paras. 64-67; and Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism. Advisory Opinion OC-5/85, supra note 172, paras. 30-33 and 43.