Human Rights Watch with two other organizations, in this intervention argue that trends in pluralistic democracies and in the historical evolution of “public morality” indicate that a proper assessment of “public morality” with regards to any restriction of sexual expression and imageries should be based on the degree of harm caused to others. In consequence, the use of open-ended and vague obscenity clauses to place restrictions on freedom of expression is incompatible with global understandings of sexual expression as a basic right.