Documentation Centre Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM)
Achter Sint Pieter 200, 3512 HT Utrecht, The Netherlands, telephone: +31 30 2537038, email: email@example.com
We regret to inform you that the Documentation Centre of SIM, including its databases will be closed in the near future. Due to changing circumstances, such as the increasing amount of information available elsewhere and the investments that would be required to maintain substantive added value, this decision has been taken.
This means that SIM's databases will be no longer be updated and that they will go offline on 1 January 2015 or earlier if circumstances so require.
Thank you for using our databases.
|Title:||Attacking hate speech under article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights|
|Personal author: ||Keane, David|
|Corporate author: |
|Reference to generic unit:||Netherlands quarterly of human rights ; vol. 25, no. 4|
|Place of publication: ||Antwerp||Publisher:||Intersentia|
|Date of publication: ||20071200 |
|Reference to series:|
|Index:||Racism / Freedom Of Expression |
|Local index:||ECHR 17 / ECHR 10 / Racism / Freedom Of Expression / European Convention On Human Rights |
| The issue of racist or hate speech engages both article 10 and article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The early admissibility decisions of the Commission, invoking article 17 alone, or article 10 in conjunction with article 17, reflected a confused understanding of the relationship between the provisions. The Lehideux and Isorni vs France (1996) judgement of the European Court of Human Rights clarified that article 17 applies only in the context of Holocaust denial and related questioning of historical facts, and as a result, racist or xenophobic speech against minorities is protected under article 10(1) of the Convention. The article asks whether all racist speech should find protection under article 10(1), interference being allowed only when balanced against the conditions of article 10(2); or whether all such speech should be condemned and attacked under article 17. The philosophical arguments and legal implications of both approaches are analysed. Finally, the desire to protect criticism of religion at the European level is explored in the context of the 'Danish cartoons' controversy and the evolving meaning of the term 'hate speech'. |
|Last Modified: 13-01-2014 16:18:19 (Documentation SIM)