To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Hate speech Freedom of speech.
Journal articles on the topic 'Hate speech Freedom of speech'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Hate speech Freedom of speech.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Yong, Caleb. "Does Freedom of Speech Include Hate Speech?" Res Publica 17, no. 4 (July 13, 2011): 385–403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11158-011-9158-y.
Full text
2
Bonotti, Matteo. "Religion, hate speech and non-domination." Ethnicities 17, no. 2 (March 9, 2017): 259–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468796817692626.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper, I argue that one way of explaining what is wrong with hate speech is by critically assessing what kind of freedom free speech involves and, relatedly, what kind of freedom hate speech undermines. More specifically, I argue that the main arguments for freedom of speech (e.g. from truth, autonomy and democracy) rely on a ‘positive’ conception of freedom intended as autonomy and self-mastery or as collective self-government, and can only partially help us to understand what is wrong with hate speech. In order to fully grasp the wrongness of hate speech and to justify hate speech legislation, I claim, we need to rely instead on the republican idea of freedom as ‘non-domination’. I conclude that the hate speech used by religious citizens, even though it is a manifestation of their religious freedom, should be subject to the same restrictions that apply to other citizens’ hate speech, because republicans should be concerned with the undominated (i.e. robustly secured) religious freedom of all religious citizens and, more generally, with the undominated freedoms of all citizens, including those who are victims of religious hate speech.
3
Howard, Jeffrey W. "Free Speech and Hate Speech." Annual Review of Political Science 22, no. 1 (May 11, 2019): 93–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051517-012343.
Full textAbstract:
Should hate speech be banned? This article contends that the debate on this question must be disaggregated into discrete analytical stages, lest its participants continue to talk past one another. The first concerns the scope of the moral right to freedom of expression, and whether hate speech falls within the right's protective ambit. If it does, hate speech bans are necessarily unjust. If not, we turn to the second stage, which assesses whether speakers have moral duties to refrain from hate speech. The article canvasses several possible duties from which such a duty could be derived, including duties not to threaten, harass, offend, defame, or incite. If there is a duty to refrain from hate speech, it is yet a further question whether the duty should actually be enforced. This third stage depends on pragmatic concerns involving epistemic fallibility, the abuse of state power, and the benefits of counter-speech over coercion.
4
Demenko, Anna, and Michał Urbańczyk. "Politically correct hate speech." Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 82, no. 3 (September 30, 2020): 169–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/rpeis.2020.82.3.12.
Full textAbstract:
In the paper we discuss the reasons behind a specific permissiveness of the Polish judicial authorities with regard to hate speech. Hate speech is criminalized by various provisions of the Polish Criminal Code. But as conducted surveys and statistics show, these regulations do not seem to be used adequately. The acceptance of hate speech does not necessarily result from the fact that we are a less tolerant society, but also to a large extent, from the fact that the scope of what is allowed to be said, especially publicly, is in Poland very broad. Paradoxically, it seems that in this ‘new democracy’ there is more freedom of speech than in Western countries, where political correctness plays a very important role in public and social life. The lack of responsibility that goes with freedom of speech and of boundaries on what might be expressed in public, the scurrilous language used also by high-ranking officials, influence the rules of socially acceptable behaviour. These rules also influence the scope of what is considered criminal behaviour. When tackling the problem of the acceptance of hate speech, it is also very important to remember that legal acts, especially criminal law, might not necessarily be the best way to change the attitudes in a society. Restrictions on freedom of speech might not only have a freezing effect but also be counterproductive – that which it is prohibited to say tends to be said more. The problem is to strike the right balance between those two possible outcomes.
5
Medvedieva, M., E. Dibrivna, and R. Kuharchuk. "«HATE SPEECH» IN INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LEGAL CONTEXT." Actual Problems of International Relations, no. 133 (2017): 95–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/apmv.2017.133.0.95-105.
Full textAbstract:
It is proved that the term hate speech used in international legal discourse does not have a generalized and precise definition. It is noted that when using the term «hate speech» there is a conflict between the right to freedom of expression and the prohibition of discrimination on any grounds. It is emphasized that the concept of «hate speech» in its current use contradicts the fundamental principle of the rule of law, because it represents a threat to the democratic foundation of society. The unconditional introduction of the concept of «hate speech» into the laws of European states may endanger the right to freedom of expression, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly, as it provides grounds for establishing unreasonable restrictions on the exercise of these rights and freedoms.
6
이광진. "Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression." Journal of Law and Politics research 17, no. 1 (March 2017): 321–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.17926/kaolp.2017.17.1.321.
Full text
7
Swe, Ei Thandar. "Hate Speech in Myanmar." Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences 3, no. 4 (December 30, 2020): 31–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.33422/jarss.v3i4.533.
Full textAbstract:
Freedom of expression can be abused in concerning with race, religion or nation, politics and gender and it transfers into a hate speech. This research intends to investigate the gap between the legal ideals and actual practice, especially to understand effectiveness or impact of a draft for the Protection against and Prevention of Hate Speech Law in Myanmar. This paper analyzes the Domestic Laws such as the Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2008 and the Penal Code, 1861 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discriminations against Women (CEDAW) and the Genocide Convention relating to international Conventions and international other documents. This research uses a qualitative approach research method, applying analysis of laws. The draft law is required to balance the right to freedom of expression and the prohibition of hate speech. International human rights laws and standards recognize all protected characteristics of human rights that should be comprised all protecting range of any actions to define “hate speech” in the draft law and should not be restricted to ethnicity, religion, nation, politic and gender. The Government should provide the upcoming Law Protection against and Prevention of Hate Speech in Myanmar urgently.
8
Pégorier, Clotilde. "Speech and Harm: Genocide Denial, Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression." International Criminal Law Review 18, no. 1 (February 15, 2018): 97–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718123-01801003.
Full textAbstract:
This article expounds upon the issue of genocide denial, especially its particular relations to freedom of expression and hate speech. It proceeds from the twin view that the gravity of the act of denial is such that anti-denial legislations are not irreconcilable with democratic standards and the principle of freedom of expression, and that what is required in the wake of recent high-profile rulings favouring freedom of expression is not an abandonment of attempts to develop a workable framework for criminalising denial, but rather renewed investment in thinking through operable approaches that are more finely-attuned to the characteristics of denial and its consequences. The aim of the contribution is thus to offer a re-examination of the relations between genocide denial, freedom of expression and hate speech, and, on this basis, to venture new possibilities for confronting denial via reference to the current framework(s) of hate speech.
9
Sottiaux, Stefan. "‘Bad Tendencies’ in the ECtHR's ‘Hate Speech’ Jurisprudence." European Constitutional Law Review 7, no. 1 (February 2011): 40–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1574019611100048.
Full textAbstract:
European Court of Human Rights – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – ‘Hate speech’ – Féret – Le Pen – Keegstra – Commonalities between Canadian and ECtHR jurisprudence –Development of uniform test of incitement – Sharp distinction from US Supreme Court jurisprudence on freedom of expression
10
Amin, Munandzirul. "Merebaknya Intoleransi (Hate Speech dan Hate Crime) dalam Politik Indonesia." Madani Jurnal Politik dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan 12, no. 1 (February 21, 2020): 87–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.52166/madani.v12i1.1902.
Full textAbstract:
Democracy provides a place for us to learn to live with the enemy because only democracy allows tension and paradox, which comes from freedom, to occur in society. In contrast to the New Order era, we can now enjoy freedom of opinion and association. This freedom can in turn produce tension. The relationship between elements of society with one another, or the relationship between the state and elements of society, can be tense because of differences in interests in regulating social and political order. Meanwhile, Indonesian society witnessed the paradox which also originated from freedom. This, for example, is shown by the emergence of intolerant groups such as the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) and Hizb ut-Tahrir Indonesia (HTI). Even organizations such as HTI are of the view that democracy is not in accordance with the teachings of Islam in terms of sovereignty in the hands of the people, what should determine that is the preogrative right of Allah SWT. The government in the view of HTI only implements sharia and determines administrative technical issues.
11
Elliott-Harvey, Charlotte. "Freedom of speech at the intersection of racist speech and online political hate speech." European Journal of Communication 36, no. 3 (April 9, 2021): 302–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02673231211006798.
Full text
12
Rəfail qızı Ələsgərova, Gülnaz. "The concept of hate speech - a comparative analysis of the approaches of the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights." SCIENTIFIC WORK 15, no. 2 (March 9, 2021): 37–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.36719/2663-4619/63/37-42.
Full textAbstract:
Providing an opportunity for society to develop and progress, freedom of speech is surely one of the vital conditions for sustainable democracy. Nevertheless, freedom of speech is not an absolute right and exhaustive list of limitations are delineated by many jurisdictions. In Europe as well it is still subject to accepted restrictions designed to prohibit incitement to hatred or conflict with other human rights. This article discusses approaches to hate speech as a legitimate ground for restriction of freedom of speech. The article is dedicated to a comparative analysis of the case law of the ECHR and the provisions of the Recommendations adopted in the framework of the Council of Europe. In particular, the author tries to find a clear distinction between speech that is not welcome by the majority of society and the prohibition of hate speech. Key words: freedom of speech, hate speech, standards of Council of Europe, European Court on Human Rights, context of speech, call for violence
13
BRINK, DAVID O. "MILLIAN PRINCIPLES, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, AND HATE SPEECH." Legal Theory 7, no. 2 (June 2001): 119–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1352325201072019.
Full text
14
Tierney, William G. "Hate Speech and Academic Freedom in the Academy." Educational Researcher 35, no. 3 (April 2006): 33–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189x035003033.
Full text
15
DI ROSA, ALESSANDRO. "PERFORMATIVE HATE SPEECH ACTS. PERLOCUTIONARY AND ILLOCUTIONARY UNDERSTANDINGS IN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW." Age of Human Rights Journal, no. 12 (June 13, 2019): 105–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.17561/tahrj.n12.6.
Full textAbstract:
The first part of this work analyses the concept of hate speech and its legal-philosophical foundations linked to freedom of speech, through the use of tools provided by current trends in the theory of performativity. The second part, in turn, aims to suggest two possible perspectives on the translation of these philosophical demands into positive legislation within human rights law: the first one based on a liberal conception of freedom as non-interference and a perlocutionary understanding of performative speech acts; the second one adopting a neo-republican interpretation of freedom as non-domination and an illocutionary understanding of speech acts. Finally, the work aims to critically sift through the application of the theory of performativity to the legal definitions that hate speech has acquired within this context.
16
Gerber, Scott D. "THE POLITICS OF FREE SPEECH." Social Philosophy and Policy 21, no. 2 (June 4, 2004): 23–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s026505250421202x.
Full textAbstract:
Freedom of speech long has been regarded as one of the “preferred freedoms” in the United States: one of the freedoms the U.S. Supreme Court deems “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” However, what freedom of speech does—and should—mean is a highly charged question in American constitutional law. I will explore this question by examining how several prominent constitutional theorists have proposed particular approaches to free speech law in order to further their political objectives. I will examine the free speech theories of the nation's leading feminist legal theorist (regarding pornography), critical race theorists (regarding hate speech), libertarian (regarding commercial speech), and legal republican (regarding deliberative democracy). I also will discuss the principal criticisms of each of these theories, whether the courts have been influenced by any of them, and, in conclusion, whether it is possible to advance a nonpolitical (i.e., a purely law-based or value-free) theory of free speech.
17
Kohl, Helmut. "Freedom of speech and hate expression: The German experience." Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 20, no. 1 (October 1993): 147–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.1993.9976411.
Full text
18
Anindyajati, Titis. "LIMITATION OF THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON THE INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT CONSIDERATION." Indonesian Law Journal 14, no. 1 (August 1, 2021): 19–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.33331/ilj.v14i1.45.
Full textAbstract:
Nowadays, everyone tends to use the right to freedom of speech without limitation, such as emergences of hate speech expression on various social media platforms. However, such expression is regulated by Article 28, paragraph (2) of the ITE Law and deemed to be contrary to public order. On the other hand, this law was considered by some people as a criminalization towards the right to freedom of speech. This paradox becomes a big issue that never ceases to be discussed. That is why Constitutional Court had conducted judicial review on some norms related to freedom of speech. This study aims to analyze the Constitutional Court decision towards the polarity of the right to freedom of speech and the public order. This study uses normative research with the statutory, analytical and comparative approach. Therefore, the results show the importance of limitation in implementing the freedom of speech to protect the constitutional right of society as stated in the 1945 Constitution. Despite the already decided judicial review by the Court, there is still an urgency to revise The ITE law in order to clarify certain rules related to hate speech in social media.
19
DOWNS, DANIEL M., and GLORIA COWAN. "Predicting the Importance of Freedom of Speech and the Perceived Harm of Hate Speech." Journal of Applied Social Psychology 42, no. 6 (April 16, 2012): 1353–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00902.x.
Full text
20
Taradhita, Dewa Ayu Nadia, and I. Ketut Gede Darma Putra. "Hate Speech Classification in Indonesian Language Tweets by Using Convolutional Neural Network." Journal of ICT Research and Applications 14, no. 3 (February 23, 2021): 225–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5614/itbj.ict.res.appl.2021.14.3.2.
Full textAbstract:
The rapid development of social media, added with the freedom of social media users to express their opinions, has influenced the spread of hate speech aimed at certain groups. Online based hate speech can be identified by the used of derogatory words in social media posts. Various studies on hate speech classification have been done, however, very few researches have been conducted on hate speech classification in the Indonesian language. This paper proposes a convolutional neural network method for classifying hate speech in tweets in the Indonesian language. Datasets for both the training and testing stages were collected from Twitter. The collected tweets were categorized into hate speech and non-hate speech. We used TF-IDF as the term weighting method for feature extraction. The most optimal training accuracy and validation accuracy gained were 90.85% and 88.34% at 45 epochs. For the testing stage, experiments were conducted with different amounts of testing data. The highest testing accuracy was 82.5%, achieved by the dataset with 50 tweets in each category.
21
Yoyo, Yoyo. "UJARAN KEBENCIAN (KHITĀB AL-KARĀHIYAH) DALAM RUANG KONTESTASI SOSIAL POLITIK ARAB KONTEMPORER." Adabiyyāt: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra 3, no. 1 (June 18, 2019): 120. http://dx.doi.org/10.14421/ajbs.2019.03106.
Full textAbstract:
The collapse of most authoritarian rulers in the Arab world in particular and the Middle East in general, was automatically followed by a wider change in the direction of political policy and freedom of expression (hurriyyah al-ta'bīr), channeled through various social media. The freedom of expression does not always have positive implications but is accompanied by the growth of expressions of hatred. Hate speech or khitāb al-karāhiyah contri-butes to the social and political contestation of the Arab Arab World. The research questions in this study are as follow (1) what factors are behind the emergence of hate speech in the Arab world?(2) what is the form and type of hate speech that occurs in the Arab socio-political context? and (3) what is the meaning behind the hate speech? The primary research data were newspapers, journals, related books, and supporting data obtained online. These data were analyzed qualitatively based on the sequence of research formulation. The data analyzed with a socio-pragmatic approach combined with a discourse analysis approach that views language as a social symbol. The results of the study show that (1) hate speech in the context of the Arab World emerged from diverse contexts such as the clash among football supporters, Sunni vs. Shia, and the tensions among rebel groups and the rulers, and the peak of the hate speech occurred during the Arab Spring; (2) though hate speech may be expressed using neutral terms, it essentially refers to a particular discourse; (3) forms of hate speech are contained in the selection of words that are rude, dirty, and hateful; 4) forms of hate speech are expressed in the form of revolutionary slogans. These three forms of hate speech have a referential meaning towards the social facts that occur, namely in the form of the guiding of certain political discourses such as criticism of the Mubarak regime, hatred of certain social groups such as the IM, hatred of political figures, and incitement to commit criminal acts.
22
Narwastuty, Dian, and Christian Nugraha. "POSSIBILITY TO CORRECT THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN INDONESIAN LAW: COMPARISON BETWEEN SINGAPORE LAW AND INDONESIAN LAW ON BROADCASTING." Indonesian Law Journal 14, no. 1 (August 1, 2021): 53–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.33331/ilj.v14i1.43.
Full textAbstract:
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. This principle is one of the Human Rights principles that are necessary for the progress of humanity itself. But its existence has always triggered a dispute because of the abuse of the right. The abuse of the rights consists of Hate Speech and Hoaxes. This research is normative legal research that uses a comparative approach and conceptual approach. And also, this research will compare the Freedom of Speech and Broadcasting laws in Indonesia and Singapore, especially law in the broadcasting sector. Theoretically, the benefits of this research are to answer the problem of correcting Freedom of Speech, especially in broadcasting law. Practically, it is helpful for society to know much more about hate speech and hoaxes also the possibility to correct the broadcasting law in Indonesia based on the same regulation in Singapore.
23
Onah, Nkechinyere G., and Favour Uroko. "HATE SPEECH AND ETHNO-RELIGIOUS CONCLICTS IN NIGERIA: Implications for Political Stability." MAHABBAH: Journal of Religion and Education 2, no. 2 (July 30, 2021): 161–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.47135/mahabbah.v2i2.31.
Full textAbstract:
While freedom of expression or free speech is a fundamental human right of all, hate speech heralds danger for a country. Using a qualitative research approach, this study examines the connection between hate speech, ethnoreligious conflicts, and political stability in Nigeria. This study argues that the threat to internal security in Nigeria is a resultant effect of social injustice in the country. In Nigeria, hate speech has been on the increase instigating ethnic and religious sentiment, mistrust, and conflicts. The study suggests that peace social justice and political inclusion should be adopted in running the affairs of the nation.
24
Jääskeläinen, Tuula. "Countering hate speech through arts and arts education." Policy Futures in Education 18, no. 3 (May 13, 2019): 344–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1478210319848953.
Full textAbstract:
Hate speech has become a growing topic of discussion and debate on a global scale, especially as advances in the internet transform communication on many levels. Among scholars, hate speech has been defined as any form of expression – for example by means of speech, images, videos or online activity – that has the capacity to increase hatred against a person or people because of a characteristic they share or a group to which they belong. In order to maintain the integrity of a functioning democracy, it is important to identify the best balance between allowing freedom of expression and protecting other human rights by countering hate speech. In addition to strengthening the legal framework to address the cases when hate speech can be considered criminal, and developing automated monitoring of online systems to prevent the spreading of cyberhate, counter narratives can be utilized by the targets of hate speech and their communities to create campaigns against hate speech. The employment of artists’ expression and arts education have great potential for creating different counter narratives to challenge one-sided narratives and hate speakers’ simplified generalizations. Because hate speech is not an easy issue to address in schools, clear research evidence, concrete guidelines and practical examples can help teachers to contribute, along with their students, in combating it. A great body of evidence supporting the beneficial social impacts of the arts and culture fields is already available, but much more research, backed by sufficient resources, is needed to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of intervention strategies in countering hate speech through arts education.
25
Stradella, Elettra. "Hate Speech in the Background of the Security Dilemma." German Law Journal 9, no. 1 (January 1, 2008): 59–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200006301.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper I will analyze the relation between the limitations on freedom of speech and the increasingly intense defense of “security” intended as a psychosomatic and material condition of well-being. I will consider, in particular, the evolution of the legal limitations on the freedom of speech, moving from the apparently new dilemma of the protection of self-preservation contrasting with the guarantee of individual liberties. I will describe the transition from an internal foundation of this kind of limitation, caused by the will to destroy the potential enemies of State power, to a new form of “thought control” existing in the international construction of general paradigms of “well-thinking”, in addition to those of a “well-doing.”
26
Ullmann, Stefanie, and Marcus Tomalin. "Quarantining online hate speech: technical and ethical perspectives." Ethics and Information Technology 22, no. 1 (October 14, 2019): 69–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10676-019-09516-z.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract In this paper we explore quarantining as a more ethical method for delimiting the spread of Hate Speech via online social media platforms. Currently, companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google generally respond reactively to such material: offensive messages that have already been posted are reviewed by human moderators if complaints from users are received. The offensive posts are only subsequently removed if the complaints are upheld; therefore, they still cause the recipients psychological harm. In addition, this approach has frequently been criticised for delimiting freedom of expression, since it requires the service providers to elaborate and implement censorship regimes. In the last few years, an emerging generation of automatic Hate Speech detection systems has started to offer new strategies for dealing with this particular kind of offensive online material. Anticipating the future efficacy of such systems, the present article advocates an approach to online Hate Speech detection that is analogous to the quarantining of malicious computer software. If a given post is automatically classified as being harmful in a reliable manner, then it can be temporarily quarantined, and the direct recipients can receive an alert, which protects them from the harmful content in the first instance. The quarantining framework is an example of more ethical online safety technology that can be extended to the handling of Hate Speech. Crucially, it provides flexible options for obtaining a more justifiable balance between freedom of expression and appropriate censorship.
27
Santuraki, Suleiman Usman. "Trends in the Regulation of Hate Speech and Fake News: A Threat to Free Speech?" Hasanuddin Law Review 5, no. 2 (August 14, 2019): 140. http://dx.doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v5i2.1625.
Full textAbstract:
The Information and Communication Technology (ICT) revolution heralding the emergence and dominance of social media has always been viewed as a turning point in free speech and communication. Indeed, the social media ordinarily represents the freedom of all people to speech and information. But then, there is also the side of the social media that has been often ignored; that it serves as platform for all and sundry to express themselves with little, if any regulation or legal consequences. This as a result has led to global explosion of hate speech and fake news. Hate speech normally lead to tension and holds in it, the potential for national or even international crisis of untold proportions. It also has the likelihood to scare people away from expressing themselves for fear of hate-filled responses and becoming a source of fake news. Using doctrinal as well as comparative methodologies, this paper appraises the trend between states of passing laws or proposing laws to regulate hate speech and fake news; it also appraises the contents of such laws from different countries with the aim of identifying how they may be used to suppress free speech under the guise of regulating hate speech and fake news. It argues that the alarming trend of hate speech and fake news presented an opportunity for leaders across the globe to curb free speech. The paper concludes that the advancement in ICT helped in a great deal to advance free speech; it may as well, because of the spread of hate speech and fake news, lead to a reverse of that success story.
28
Smolla, Rodney A. "Academic Freedom, Hate Speech, and the Idea of a University." Law and Contemporary Problems 53, no. 3 (1990): 195. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1191797.
Full text
29
Youm, Kyu Ho. "First Amendment Law: Hate Speech, Equality, and Freedom of Expression." Journal of Communication 51, no. 2 (June 1, 2001): 406–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02887.x.
Full text
30
Poshka, Agim. "HUMANISTIC ASPECTS IN THE LANGUAGE PLANING POLICIES." Knowledge International Journal 28, no. 7 (December 10, 2018): 2335–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij28072335a.
Full textAbstract:
It is believed that language policies aim to organize, encourage but sometimes even discourage language rights. Although slowly states in the Balkans started to believe that language rights could be used as a tool for creation of social cohesion, there is one aspect of language practice that is ignored but seems to cause quite negative impact, and that is hate speech. This paper investigated modes in which this dangerous tool is harming inter-ethnic and inter-cultural stability in the region. It is a long term interest to the judicial system of every country to limit the negative impact that hate speech has to certain fragile societies. The study also reflects on particular laws that aim to expand the span of freedom of speech and minimize the presence of hate speech in public life. This derogatory behavior can ultimately produce hatred and in some cases even human sacrifices. A definition that is often available in literature regarding hate speech is that “hate speech is an abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation”. In other words the basic concept of using language for solely communicational purpose has switched to use language to insult, intimidate, or threaten a group or an individual and is primarily based on a particular characteristic or disability. In its violent history, Europe has witnessed a considerable number of cases of human rights violations, and recent ones often get the “prefix” of hate speech. Certain domains of public speaking undoubtedly require legal measures and few societies have already designed their legal framework in order to address the issue The conditions have become even more dramatic with the introduction of social media. There are thousands of pages and blogs in which hate speech is expressed publicly. In an article published by the legaldictionary.net it states that with the advent of social media, the issue of offensive and threatening speech has become a global problem”. There are many cases in which hate speech is used as an argument of free speech. The process becomes even more challenging when the officials are expected to draw a line between where free speech ends and hate speech begins. Certain domains of public speaking undoubtedly require legal measures and as a result few societies have designed legal framework in order to address the issue and this study provides different methods and approaches are considered in the process. The study also cites a number of international cases which aim to create a greater picture of these deleterious phenomena and although there are many elements of the ethical and moral dilemma in regards to the freedom of expression it is important that we are aware of the responsibility and the impact we have when using hate speech in any public appearances.
31
Poshka, Agim. "HUMANISTIC ASPECTS IN THE LANGUAGE PLANING POLICIES." Knowledge International Journal 28, no. 7 (December 10, 2018): 2335–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij29082335a.
Full textAbstract:
It is believed that language policies aim to organize, encourage but sometimes even discourage language rights. Although slowly states in the Balkans started to believe that language rights could be used as a tool for creation of social cohesion, there is one aspect of language practice that is ignored but seems to cause quite negative impact, and that is hate speech. This paper investigated modes in which this dangerous tool is harming inter-ethnic and inter-cultural stability in the region. It is a long term interest to the judicial system of every country to limit the negative impact that hate speech has to certain fragile societies. The study also reflects on particular laws that aim to expand the span of freedom of speech and minimize the presence of hate speech in public life. This derogatory behavior can ultimately produce hatred and in some cases even human sacrifices. A definition that is often available in literature regarding hate speech is that “hate speech is an abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation”. In other words the basic concept of using language for solely communicational purpose has switched to use language to insult, intimidate, or threaten a group or an individual and is primarily based on a particular characteristic or disability. In its violent history, Europe has witnessed a considerable number of cases of human rights violations, and recent ones often get the “prefix” of hate speech. Certain domains of public speaking undoubtedly require legal measures and few societies have already designed their legal framework in order to address the issue The conditions have become even more dramatic with the introduction of social media. There are thousands of pages and blogs in which hate speech is expressed publicly. In an article published by the legaldictionary.net it states that with the advent of social media, the issue of offensive and threatening speech has become a global problem”. There are many cases in which hate speech is used as an argument of free speech. The process becomes even more challenging when the officials are expected to draw a line between where free speech ends and hate speech begins. Certain domains of public speaking undoubtedly require legal measures and as a result few societies have designed legal framework in order to address the issue and this study provides different methods and approaches are considered in the process. The study also cites a number of international cases which aim to create a greater picture of these deleterious phenomena and although there are many elements of the ethical and moral dilemma in regards to the freedom of expression it is important that we are aware of the responsibility and the impact we have when using hate speech in any public appearances.
32
ZAITSEV, Yurii. ""I HATE GRILL ON THE WINDOWS"." Contemporary era 6 (2018): 249–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.33402/nd.2018-6-249-257.
Full textAbstract:
The author offers the reader a document - a unique monument of the political thought of the Ukrainian Resistance movement to the communist regime of the 1960-1980s. The eleven-page manuscript "Ostanne slovo Niny Strokatoi na protsesi v Odeskomu oblasnomu sudi 17 travnia 1972" reveals the opposition's view on the "freedom of speech" in the USSR, the reasons for samizdat (self-publishing), stigmatizing nationalism, and the government's disregard for Ukraine's right to secede from Russia declared by Lenin. The document focused on the need to hand over "senseless censorship" to justice, to stop ignoring the principles of democracy, which "opens the way to tyranny." It emphasizes the urgent need for a critical estimate of imperfections and social distortions, the use of the constitutional right to receive and disseminate information, and the recognition of the indivisibility of freedom and the finality of the realization of the national idea. At the same time, the source shows the way to solve the problem of publicity through the adoption of the law on the press and information, which would specify the constitutionally guaranteed "freedom of speech in general and freedom of the printed word in particular." It meant the transfer of declared guarantees in the field of specific social practice. In response to the charge of acquainting with the work of samizdat stated, "the natural right of intellectuals and scholars to read and preserve any literature." Ukrainian patriotism is characterized as the natural essence of the Ukrainian, "which is inherited, becomes a moral asset, and does not allow to become a bastard, a fatherless, a janissary." Against the background of modern flirting between Western Europe and the Moscow aggressor, N. Strokata's reminder that "hordes of Batu Khan, khans and sultans stopped with Ukrainian blood" is relevant – this allowed European nations to rise so high. She not only convicted the anti-democratic communist dictatorship but also expressed confidence that "better times are already within us." Keywords: independence, nationalism, national idea, samizdat, freedom of speech, censorship, human rights.
33
Pilgrim, Tim A. "Giving Oral Expression “Free Rein”: Implications for Diversity of University Hate Speech Code." Ethnic Studies Review 20, no. 1 (January 1, 1997): 25–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/esr.1997.20.1.25.
Full textAbstract:
This paper uses history, law, and First Amendment theory to examine the concepts of political correctness, free speech, and hate speech in a search for a solution of how best to deal with hate speech incidents that occur in the university campus community. The paper notes the American tendency toward tyranny of the majority as noted by Alexis de Tocqueville in the 1830s and then proceeds to examine the double-edged sword of free speech. By guaranteeing freedom of speech we promote the right to shout down ethnic and other minority groups; by providing penalties against those who use it to shout others down we make society less free. This paper suggests a different answer: promote more speech expressed in community meetings conducted in an atmosphere that is safe and encouraging for all to express their views.
34
Koval, Ekaterina, Andrey Sychev, and Natalya Zhadunova. "Hate rhetoric vs trust rhetoric in contemporary public discourse." SHS Web of Conferences 72 (2019): 03038. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20197203038.
Full textAbstract:
Modern public discourse is so closely related to power that we can talk about the power of discourse. The value-normative basis of public discourse in most modern societies is human rights and fundamental freedoms. This leads to a high level of not only discursive diversity, but also communicative aggression, one of the most dangerous manifestations of which is the rhetoric of hatred. Although hatred rhetoric in certain communicative contexts and situations can perform useful functions based on violence, it hinders the achievement of such ideals of public discourse as the public good and justice. For this reason, in most states, the use of hate speech in public discourse is prohibited or restricted. However, the state, as a rule, finds itself in a difficult situation of a compromise between freedom of speech and social equality. On the one hand, it should ensure freedom of speech, especially in political debate; on the other hand, the state has a duty to protect discriminated and stigmatized groups. It is extremely difficult to find such a compromise using exclusively legal mechanisms, therefore, other strategies are required to squeeze out the rhetoric of hatred from public space. One of these strategies is the expanded reproduction of social trust, the accumulation of social capital, entailing a natural transition from the rhetoric of hatred to the rhetoric of trust. It is hardly possible to make such a transition without conflict, therefore, the use of compromise and consensus mechanisms is required (compromise is preferable).
35
Okolie, Ugo Chuks, and Eseohe Glory Okoedion. "Ethno-religious hate speeches and political violence in Nigeria’s fourth republic." RUDN Journal of Public Administration 6, no. 2 (February 28, 2020): 106–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2312-8313-2019-6-2-106-120.
Full textAbstract:
Ethnoreligious hate speech is the precursor to political violence in Nigeria’s fourth republic. While it is true that one of the greatest benefits of democratic societies is freedom of speech, still no one should be allowed under the disguise of exercising the right to free speech to offend, humiliate and demean another human being. In Nigeria, hate speech has been elevated to the status of political campaign strategy and it accounts for the escalation of political violence in Nigeria’s fourth republic. Therefore, this study explored the impact of ethno-religious hate speech on political violence in Nigeria’s fourth public. A descriptive method was adopted and data was collected via a survey of 600 electorates in South-South zone of Nigeria. The study found that there is a positive and significant relationship between Ethno-religious hate speech and political violence in Nigeria’s fourth republic. This paper recommends among others that political campaign in Nigeria should focus on the implementation of the critical national issues such as economic, political, social, cultural, educational, and healthcare services rather than attack on political opponents or mobilization of ethnic, religious, and regional sentiments.
36
Teršek, Andraž. "Common and Comprehensive European Definition of Hate-Speech Alternative Proposal." Open Political Science 3, no. 1 (January 1, 2020): 213–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/openps-2020-0019.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractEurope needs to define the term and legal (criminal & constitutional) concept of “hate speech” precisely. The definition must be written in legal literature and in legislation. It must also be offered by the European Constitutional Courts and, last but not least, by the ECtHR. A descriptive definition offered inter alia by the ECtHR judgement in case of Vejdeland vs. Sweden (2012) was only a guidance. The new ECtHR judgement in the case of Carl Jóhann Lilliendahl vs. Iceland (11th of June 2020) addressed “homophobic speech” as “hate speech” directly. By combining the ECtHR case-law on freedom of expression in the last five years with understanding of this concept in the Slovenian Criminal Code (and with only subordinated reference to the understanding of this term by the European Commission) the author offers an alternative proposal for a new, common and comprehensive European definition of “hate speech.”
37
Lacerda Tanure, Augusto, and Marcelo Campos Galuppo. "O EMBONDEIRO E A TOLERÂNCIA." Revista Eletrônica Direito e Política 16, no. 1 (May 4, 2021): 65–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.14210/rdp.v16n1.p65-85.
Full textAbstract:
RESUMO O presente artigo têm como objetivo discutir a tolerância e seus limites no tocante à liberdade de expressão. Questionará a possibilidade ou impossibilidade de definir quais discursos deveriam disputar o mercado de ideias democrático. Para tanto, tecerá reflexões a partir do texto: “O embondeiro que sonhava pássaros” de Mia Couto, contrapondo-o às ideias sobre tolerância de Jeremy Waldron em “The Harm in Hate Speech” e Andrew Jason Cohen em “Toleration and Freedom From Harm”. Pretende-se demonstrar que a liberdade de expressão é essencial à tolerância, sendo que suas limitações devem ser as mínimas possíveis. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: tolerância; liberdade de expressão; identidade; violência ABSTRACTThis article aims to discuss tolerance and its limits with regard to freedom of expression. It will question the possibility or impossibility of defining which speeches should compete for the democratic ideas market. To this end, it will uses “O embondeiro que sonhava pássaros” by Mia Couto, contrasting it with the ideas about toleration by Jeremy Waldron in “The Harm in Hate Speech” and Andrew Jason Cohen in “Toleration and Freedom From Harm”. It is intended to demonstrate that freedom of expression is essential to toleration, and its limitations should be kept to a minimum. KEY-WORDS: toleration; freedom of expression; identity; violence
38
Kuna, Marian. "Eric Heinze on Freedom of (Hate) Speech in the Democratic State." Politické vedy 23, no. 3 (September 22, 2020): 145–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.24040/politickevedy.2020.23.3.145-162.
Full text
39
Cowan, Gloria, Miriam Resendez, Elizabeth Marshall, and Ryan Quist. "Hate Speech and Constitutional Protection: Priming Values of Equality and Freedom." Journal of Social Issues 58, no. 2 (January 2002): 247–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00259.
Full text
40
Graber, Mark A., and Philippa Strum. "When the Nazis Came to Skokie: Freedom for Speech We Hate." Journal of American History 87, no. 1 (June 2000): 313. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2568066.
Full text
41
Rumenjak, Nives. "Freedom of expression in multicultural societies: Political cartooning in Europe in the modern and postmodern eras." Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication 10, no. 2 (November 1, 2019): 167–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ejpc_00005_1.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract At the intersection of modern cultural and political history, security studies and debates about freedom of expression and international human-rights law, this article aims to contribute to a better understanding of political cartooning and its implications in multicultural societies of Europe, which have shifted in a geographical, cultural, normative, communicational, political and many other respects through the last two centuries. Through comparison of the Serbian cartoons from late nineteenth-century Croatia and the recent Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, the article reveals that both modern and postmodern European cartoons have been centred around equally discriminatory narratives: a 'clash of civilizations' and 'racialization of religion'. Since open racial stereotyping in cartoons became illegal in the postmodern international regulations, traditional discriminatory practices of cartooning have shifted towards subtle, 'liquid' racism. This decodes some of the twelve Danish cartoons as ambiguous strategies of racialization of Muslim immigrants in Europe (as 'terrorists' and 'others') but also as hate speech which is illegal in the European Union, and member states of the Council of Europe. The author concludes that the most current European and international regulations of hate speech, whether concerning offline media or online media, actually protect free speech. While a truly clear-cut regulation of liquid racism might remain problematic in Europe (and the world) due to the lack of a universally accepted definition of hate speech, neither strict legal regulations nor different definitions of hate speech could diminish the role of political cartooning as a viable free speech platform in the multicultural landscape of Europe. Ultimately, what diminishes its viability is the enduring lack of diversity in the creation of visual satire, which could and should reflect the multicultural reality of communities, politics and societies in Europe.
42
McGaffey, Ruth. "Freedom of Speech for the Ideas We Hate: Nongovernmental Abridgment of Freedom of Expression." Free Speech Yearbook 26, no. 1 (January 1987): 90–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08997225.1987.10556079.
Full text
43
Thornberry, Patrick. "Forms of Hate Speech and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)." Religion & Human Rights 5, no. 2-3 (2010): 97–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187103210x528138.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn this article, issues are raised concerning freedom of expression and forms of hate speech including advocacy of religious hatred in light of proposals to combat defamation of religions. In particular, it is asked whether parallels can be drawn between freedom of expression and protection from forms of hate speech in the area of race and ethnicity, and expression and protection in the field of religion. The present article offers a brief summary of relevant ICERD (‘the Convention’)<xref ref-type="fn" rid="FN1">2</xref> principles and practice. The sketch of principles revolves around key areas of the Convention: the concept of discrimination including the ‘grounds’ of prohibited discrimination and how they relate to religious groups; the Convention’s stance on hate speech and rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion<xref ref-type="fn" rid="FN2">3</xref> and freedom of opinion and expression.<xref ref-type="fn" rid="FN3">4</xref> The concluding section reflects on the concept of defamation of religions, the boundaries of ICERD in its current interpretation, and the idea of ICERD as a model for wider exercises in standard setting. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination (CERD) has the longest practice of any treaty body in the fields within its mandate and has developed a distinctive discourse in key areas. ‘Hate speech’ in the present article is used as shorthand for a range of international provisions protecting individuals and groups from discrimination and other assaults on their dignity and does not imply a special definition beyond the examples cited.
44
Jacoby, Ana Ximena. "Más que palabras: libertad de expresión y discurso de odio en el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos = More than words: freedom of speech and hate speech in the Inter-American Human Rights system." EUNOMÍA. Revista en Cultura de la Legalidad, no. 18 (April 1, 2020): 148. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/eunomia.2020.5268.
Full textAbstract:
Resumen: El derecho a la libre expresión tiene un alcance sumamente amplio. Incluye, entre otras, la manifestación de ideas y opiniones que otros pueden considerar profundamente ofensivas y perturbadoras. Por su naturaleza radical, este derecho suele entrar en colisión con otros derechos fundamentales, como el derecho a la honra, a la privacidad, al olvido, a la libertad religiosa o con las normas que resguardan la seguridad nacional o la circulación del “discurso de odio”. Estas tensiones, que atraviesan al derecho a la libre expresión, quedan frecuentemente manifiestas en fallos y posicionamientos de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. El presente trabajo se propone analizar las distintas perspectivas teóricas que subyacen a los posicionamientos de esta Corte en relación al “discurso del odio”. Como veremos, en los pronunciamientos de la Corte y los demás órganos que conforman el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos conviven, dentro de un marco liberal, distintas concepciones que van desde los principios liberales clásicos hasta posturas más cercanas al liberalismo igualitario. Palabras clave: Discurso de odio, libertad de expresión, Sistema Interamericano de Derechos HumanosAbstract: The freedom of speech has an extremely wide scope. It namely preserves the free expression of ideas and opinions that others might find profoundly offensive and disturbing. Due to its radical nature, this freedom can either collide with other fundamental rights, such as the right to honor, to privacy, to oblivion or to religious freedom, or with certain rules that preserve the national security or the circulation of “hate speech”. These tensions crossing the freedom of speech are frequently expressed in judgments and declarations of the Interamerican Court of Human Rights. This work seeks to account for the different theoretical perspectives undermining the arguments presented by this Court regarding “hate speech”. As to be seen, different conceptions within a liberal framework coexist in the declarations issued by the Court and rest of bodies that comprise the Interamerican System of Human Rights, ranging from those that follow classic liberal principles to more egalitarian liberalism-oriented positions. Keywords: Hate speech, freedom of speech, Inter-American Human Rights System.
45
Gelber, Katharine. "Freedom of political speech, hate speech and the argument from democracy: The transformative contribution of capabilities theory." Contemporary Political Theory 9, no. 3 (August 2010): 304–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2009.8.
Full text
46
Callamard, Agnès. "Combating Discrimination and Intolerence with a Free Speech Framework." Religion & Human Rights 5, no. 2-3 (2010): 153–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187103210x528174.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe objective of this article is to address the questions as to whether Articles 19 and 20 of the ICCPR are an indivisible whole, and particularly as to whether States can impose restrictions on freedom of expression without first embracing the full scope of such freedom? The overriding objective is to clarify the nature of the obligations of States under Article 20 (limitations as an option or an obligation) following a series of freedom of expression related incidents that have polarised societies, created tensions and fuelled xenophobia and racist attitudes and highlighted the substantive ambiguities as to the “demarcation line” between freedom of expression and hate speech, especially in relation to religious issues.
47
Bhattarai, Gaurav. "Artistic Freedom against Moral Responsibilities: An Appraisal of Aesthetics against Ethics." KMC Research Journal 2, no. 2 (December 31, 2018): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/kmcrj.v2i2.29945.
Full textAbstract:
How the hate speech should be separated from the free speech and why the blasphemous laws should be banned to shield free thought and freedom of expression from any danger or damage? This article examines the argument that whether blasphemous art should be publicly displayed, and if yes, in what manner artist are free and to what extent they should be responsible while exercising their artistic freedom. The write-up argues against those who say blasphemy is an offence, an attack on religion and sacred, to aver that blasphemy shouldn’t be understood merely on the moral and ethical lines, but through the contextual and philosophical understandings of the issue. Particularly, this write-up criticizes the blasphemy laws, including fatwas and death threats issued against two writers--Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasrin. Finally, this paper discusses how the notion of blasphemy itself is the product of misunderstanding and misreading the free speech as the hate speech. The article concludes that the line between aesthetics and ethics, between art and religion, should be drawn only by the rationalistic judgment of the contextual issues and for that artist’s intention should be realized at first, before colligating it with the religious matters, ethical issues and falsely apprehending freedom of thought as a sacrilege and profanation.
48
GAFFAF, Fatma, and Karima Abdullah DRAH. "Hate Crime, Discrimination, Violence, Criminal La." International Journal of Humanities and Educational Research 03, no. 03 (June 1, 2021): 198–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.47832/2757-5403.3-3.19.
Full textAbstract:
There is no doubt that freedom of expression and thought is guaranteed to everyone, and no person has the right to slander, derogate or abuse others in any form of expression, whether verbally, in writing, drawing, or with reference ... etc, because of his disagreement with him in opinion. The mere disagreement of opinion is a natural thing, and it is the way of advancement in life and treatment, except that what currently prevails is the opposite, as the difference of opinion is the beginning of public disagreements and boycott. Violence, as it falls within the framework of hatred and incitement to it, which makes it fall within the circle of criminalization and punishment legally. In view of the legal controversy raised by hate speech and incitement to it, the importance of this study appears in that it is based on clarifying the relationship between it and the freedom of expression of opinion and how to separate between legitimate expression that is prohibited or restricted, and expression that results in violations of other basic rights and harms the freedoms of humanity without discrimination. Thus, the problem of this study is determined in knowing what is legitimate and what is unlawful in the context of expressing an opinion and the means used to express it, and what is the legal methodology and legislative policy that countries follow in facing this type of crime in light of the escalating societal controversy about what is considered incitement to Violence, hostility or hatred, racial discrimination, and the occurrence of many incidents based on speeches of incitement and hat Accordingly, we wanted to evaluate this study as follows: First: The general concept of freedom of expression and the exceptions contained therein. Second: The legislative policy of states to confront and limit expressions of hatred.
49
Witro, Doli. "PEACEFUL CAMPAIGN IN ELECTION AL-HUJURAT VERSE 11 PERSPECTIVE." Alfuad: Jurnal Sosial Keagamaan 3, no. 2 (December 6, 2019): 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.31958/jsk.v3i2.1796.
Full textAbstract:
Democracy is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. The popularity of the democratic system is arguably at its peak. This is proven by the many uses of the democratic system in modern countries in the world. Indonesia as a country that runs a democratic system does not give authority to the authorities to monopolize votes in an election. Because security and freedom for every citizen, free to choose as a representation of the sovereignty of the people. But on the side that democracy often happens is seen as freedom so that there are some elements mixing elements in democracy that actually damage democracy itself. Call it when campaigning for a candidate to hate speech, insult, and berate other candidates so that damage the good name in the eyes of the community. As reported in Detik.com in 2016, the National Police stated that there were 2,018 cases of hate speech that occurred. Then it increased by 44.99% in 2017 to 3,325 cases. Furthermore, in 2018 reported in January 2019 there were 3,884 cases of hate speech that occurred. This proves that in campaigning the candidates cannot be said to campaign peacefully, fairly and competitively. Whereas Allah s.w.t. It has been said in Surah al-Hujurat verse 11. Based on the description above the writer is interested in discussing and studying more about the campaign in the Elections in Indonesia and campaigning peacefully perspective of Surah al-Hujurat verse 11. This is important to discuss given the rampant hate speech cases that conducted by candidates in campaigning. This study aims to contribute knowledge to the candidates so that in campaigning, they do not utter hate speech, insult, and berate other candidates.
50
박정원 and 이성흠. "Legal Sanction Against 'Hate Speech' and Freedom of Expression in the Cyberspace." Journal of hongik law review 10, no. 3 (October 2009): 119–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.16960/jhlr.10.3.200910.119.
Full text