30 88. In this section, the Court will analyze whether Mr. Lagos del Campo’s statements fell within the sphere of special protection of the right to freedom of expression and, if applicable, whether his freedom of expression was ensured by the State by the decision of the second instance judge. To this end, the Court will analyze this dispute in the following sections: (a) Freedom of expression in labor contexts and (b) Analysis of the necessity and reasonableness of the restriction in this case. 1.1 Freedom of expression in labor contexts 89. The Court’s jurisprudence has provided the right to freedom of thought and expression recognized in Article 13 of the Convention with a wide-ranging content. The Court has indicated that this article protects the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, as well as to receive and obtain the information and ideas imparted by others. 110 It has also indicated that freedom of expression has both an individual and a social dimension, and from this it has extrapolated a series of rights that are protected by this article. 111 The Court has asserted that the two dimensions are equally important and must be guaranteed absolutely and simultaneously in order to give full effect to the right to freedom of expression in the terms of Article 13 of the Convention.112 For the ordinary citizen, knowing the opinion of others or the information possessed by others is as important as the right to disseminate his or her own opinion or information.113 Consequently, in light of the two dimensions, freedom of expression requires, on the one hand, that no one may be arbitrarily hindered or prevented from expressing his or her own opinion and, thus, represents a right of each individual; while, on the other hand, it also signifies a collective right to receive any kind of information and learn about the opinions of others.114 90. The American Convention guarantees everyone’s right to freedom of expression, regardless of any other consideration, so that it cannot be restricted to a specific profession or group of persons.115 Thus, the Court has maintained that freedom of expression is essential for the formation of public opinion in a democratic society. “It is also a condition sine qua non to enable […] labor unions […] and, in general, those who wish to have an influence over the collectivity to develop their full potential.”116 Cf. Compulsory Membership of 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, and Case of López Lone et al. v. Honduras. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment October 5, 2015. Series 302, para. 166. 110 Cf. Compulsory Membership of an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism OC-5/85, supra, paras. 31 and 32, and Case of López Lone v. Honduras, supra, para. 166. 111 Cf. Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” (Olmedo Bustos et al.) v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 5, 2001. Series C No. 73 supra, para. 67, and Case of López Lone v. Honduras, supra, para.166 112 Cf. Case of “The Last Temptation of Christ” v. Chile, supra, para. 66, and Case of López Lone v. Honduras, supra, para. 166. 113 Cf. Compulsory Membership of an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, OC-5/85, supra, para. 30, and Case of López Lone v. Honduras, supra, para. 166. 114 Case of Tristán Donoso v. Panama. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 27, 2009. Series C No. 193, para. 114, and Case of López Lone v, Honduras, supra, para. 169. 115 Compulsory Membership of an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journalism, OC-5/85, supra, para. 70, and Cf. Case of Granier et al. (Radio Caracas Televisión) v. Venezuela. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 22, 2015. Series C No. 293, para. 22. Also, Articles 3 and 4 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter emphasize that “[e]ssential elements of representative democracy include […] respect for social rights, and freedom of expression and of the press.” Cf. Case of López Lone et al. v. Honduras, supra, para. 164. 116