EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Hate speech March 2013(Albania, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Macedonia, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom)
Hate Speech Report
General principles
The authors of the European Convention on Human Rights sought to establish an institutional framework based on democratic values in order to overcome extremism.
The European Court of Human Rights has identified a number of forms of expression which are to be considered offensive and contrary to the Convention (including racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, aggressive nationalism and discrimination against minorities and immigrants)1.
However, the Court is also careful to make a distinction in its findings between, on the one hand, genuine and serious incitement to extremism and, on the other hand, the right of individuals (including journalists and politicians) to express their views freely and to “offend, shock or disturb”2 others.
There is no universally accepted definition of the expression “hate speech”. The Court’s case-law has established certain parameters making it possible to characterise “hate speech” in order to exclude it from the protection afforded to freedom of expression (Article 10) or freedom of assembly and association (Article 11).
The Court excludes hate speech from protection by means of two approaches provided for by the Convention:
(a) by applying Article 17 (Prohibition of abuse of rights3) where the comments in question amount to hate speech and negate the fundamental values of the Convention,
or
(b) by applying the limitations provided for in the second paragraph of Article 10 and Article 114 (this approach is adopted where the speech in question, although it is hate speech, is not apt to destroy the fundamental values of the Convention).