Arhiva kategorije: Sažetak

Legal Concept of Hate Speech and Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

Review article
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.09

Vesna Alaburić ; Lawyer and Political Scientist

Fulltext: english, pdf (310 KB) pages 230-252 cite

Abstracts
This article problematizes the legal concept of so-called hate speech in order to contribute to current debates on this complex and omnipresent social phenomenon. Firstly, it refers to the provisions of various international human rights instruments relevant in the context of combating hate speech, providing general legal framework for the proper assessment of this issue. Then it discusses the legal concept of hate speech and certain controversies and difficulties involved. In particular, it points to the specific distinction that must be established and preserved between hate speech and other forms of hateful speech. Finally, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights concerning hate speech is analyzed by providing relevant examples from its case-law. In this connection, certain serious deficiencies in the ECtHR hate speech jurisprudence are indicated and briefly explained.

Keywords
Hate Speech; Hateful Speech; Discrimination; Vulnerable Groups; International Human Rights Instruments; European Convention on Human Rights; ECtHR

Hrčak ID: 215408

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215408

The Legal Regulation of Hate Speech: The International and European Frameworks

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.08

Natalie Alkiviadou ; School of Law, University of Central Lancashire Cyprus

Fulltext: english, pdf (330 KB) pages 203-229 cite

Abstracts
This paper looks at the tools available on an international and European level in relation to the legal regulation of hate speech. More particularly, it considers the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination along with related case-law of the respective monitoring committees. It looks at the European Convention on Human Rights and how the European Court of Human Rights interprets the limits of free speech when confronted with cases of hate speech. It also looks at the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia of the European Union and the Additional Protocol to the Cybercrime Convention of the Council of Europe. Through the analysis it demonstrates that there is no common approach amongst international and European institutions on what hate speech is and the threshold which needs to be met for legal regulation to be permissible. It also demonstrates that the tools available focus only on some types of hate speech.

Keywords
Human Rights; Hate Speech; Homophobic Speech; Transphobic Speech; Racist Speech; Free Speech

Hrčak ID: 215407

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215407

Hate Speech, Contentious Symbols and Politics of Memory: Survey Research on Croatian Citizens’ Attitudes

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.07

Nebojša Blanuša ; Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Zagreb
Enes Kulenović ; Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Zagreb

Fulltext: english, pdf (619 KB) pages 176-202 cite

Abstracts
The authors are presenting and interpreting the data on Croatian citizens’ attitudes on regulating hate speech, contentious symbols and public commemoration. The data was collected in two nation-wide surveys conducted in 2016 and 2018. The data is analyzed within a normative framework of militant democracy versus anti-democratic tendencies. In the conclusion the authors, invoking the available data, advocate a minimal model of regulating public speech by focusing on public utterances of direct and symbolic hate speech.

Keywords
Hate Speech; Contentious Symbols; Free Speech; Extreme Speech

Hrčak ID: 215406

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215406

Historical Events in Symbols and the Freedom of Expression: The Contemporary Constitutional Debate in Croatia

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.06

Đorđe Gardašević ; Law Faculty, University of Zagreb

Fulltext: english, pdf (347 KB) pages 147-175 cite

Abstracts
In the last few years, the Croatian Constitutional Court delivered several important decisions that significantly shaped interpretative approaches to constitutional guarantee on the freedom of expression in the specific context of the public use of some symbols with contested meanings. Such developments undoubtedly deserve attention, especially in terms of particular tools that the Court used in defining limits to free speech. The primary focus of this article is directed to the issue of whether the use of contested symbols in public may be covered by constitutional free expression guarantees, and be therefore treated as the case of balancing process between them and some opposed interests, or it should be subjected to stricter prohibitions, including their complete ban. For those purposes, I am first presenting the relevant case-law of the Croatian Constitutional Court and then the cases already decided in a similar fashion by the European Court for Human Rights. In the final part I am presenting some personal views on how a further structured approach to constitutional interpretation in cases involving the use of contested symbols with historical meanings could possibly be construed in the Croatian context.

Keywords
Freedom of Expression; Free Speech; Contested Symbols; Disputed Insignia; Constitutional Adjudication

Hrčak ID: 215404

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215404

On Memory Politics and Memory Wars: A Critical Analysis of the Croatian Dialogue Document

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.05

Hrvoje Cvijanović ; Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Zagreb

Fulltext: english, pdf (405 KB) pages 109-146 cite

Abstracts
Based on public demands for rectifying injuries of the past, memory politics recently became the most potent catalyst of social divisions and confrontations, as well as possible limitation of freedom of expression. In addition, facing the past might not yield conciliatory, but rather antagonizing effects, leading toward so-called “memory wars” regarding conflicting past narratives that might jeopardize political stability and aggravate cultural trauma in highly polarized societies, especially if there are powerful mnemonic warriors propelled with foundational and teleological attempts to impose historical “truth”, as the author shows in the first part of the article. In the second part the author focuses on the origin of the politics of memory in Croatia and ongoing “memory wars” regarding displaying and using controversial symbolic expressions, while parts three and four contain a critical analysis of the Dialogue Document provided by the Council for Dealing with the Consequences of Undemocratic Regimes that aimed to deliver comprehensive recommendations for political decision-making and law-framing in an attempt to face the difficult past and socially contested symbolic expressions.

Keywords
Memory Politics; Memory Wars; Mnemonic Warriors; Disputed Symbols; Croatia; Dialogue Document

Hrčak ID: 215403

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215403

No-platforming and Safe Spaces: Should Universities Censor more (or less) Speech than the Law Requires?

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.04

Eric Heinze ; Queen Mary, University of London

Fulltext: english, pdf (315 KB) pages 79-108 cite

Abstracts
How should higher education respond to legally mandated limits on hateful, discriminatory, or provocative speech? Should public universities fortify government rules in the name of equal dignity for vulnerable groups, by imposing even further restrictions of their own? Or should they oppose such restrictions in the name of free speech? Or should they do neither, seeking neither amplification nor repeal, instead simply joining in whatever the government status quo happens to be, as they would do with most other background legal rules? This article advocates the second position: through a brief examination of “no-platforming” and “safe space” policies, it is argued that, within fullyfledged democracies, viewpoint-selective censorship is always indefensible for higher education. Examples are drawn from high-profile controversies involving far-right speakers as well as pro- and anti-Israel speech. Viewpointbased censorship generates one of two scenarios, neither of which coheres with the mission of higher education. One the one hand, no-platformers’ declared principles could never be applied with ethical coherence without becoming so broad as to require massive censorship. On the other hand, if those principles are to apply only rarely, then they lose internal consistency and become outright ad hoc impositions of campus decision-makers’ own political preferences.

Keywords
Antisemitism; Campus Speech; Democracy; Far Right; Free Speech; Higher Education; Israel-Palestine; Leftism; Liberalism

Hrčak ID: 215400

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215400

Political Unity and the “Existential Meaning” of Conflict. On Carl Schmitt’s The Concept of the Political (with some remarks on The Dreyfus Affair in Hannah Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism)

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.03

Thomas Petersen ; Faculty of Philosophy, University of Heidelberg

Fulltext: english, pdf (275 KB) pages 59-72 cite

Abstracts
The article deals with the conflict as an indispensable element of democracy and politics from the perspective of Carl Schmitt’s concept of the political. According to Schmitt, the specific criterion of the political is to be found in the friend-enemy distinction. Denoting the utmost degree of association and dissociation, it corresponds to other antitheses (good-evil, beautiful-ugly, profitable-non-profitable, etc.), but is independent of them and should not be mistaken for them. Understood in this way, the political for Schmitt has an existential meaning, as it characterizes human life as such and as conflict cannot be solved in advance through some general norm or by a neutral third party. Although Schmitt’s definition seems to limit the proper phenomenon of the political to the state – which as political unity monopolizes the friend-enemy relationship and excludes enmity from its domestic affairs – the author finds in Schmitt’s “secondary concepts of the political” the possibility to think the conflict as the principle of domestic politics as well. This would mean to accept antagonism as inevitable and legitimate, without moral or other disqualification of the opponent, and to subdue conflict to the rules of political quarrel and debate. In the second part of the article, the author discusses Schmitt’s critique of liberalism. Although at first sight liberalism seems to be a negation of the political, in the last instance it not only fails to elude the political, but exacerbates and intensifies the conflict. By presenting its claims as universal, it disavows its adversaries as “enemies of humanity”, falling in this way victim to political hypocrisies. In the last part of the article, the author considers some similarities between Schmitt’s and Hannah Arendt’s understanding of the political. Despite all differences between them, these can be noticed in Arendt’s treatment of the Dreyfus Affair in the Origins of Totalitarianism, where she makes clear that conflict is not only a threat to the “political entity”, but can also be the way in which that entity is saved.

Keywords
Carl Schmitt; Political; Friend-Enemy Distinction; Conflict; Liberalism; Hannah Arendt; Dreyfus Affair

Hrčak ID: 215392

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215392

Seneca’s De Clementia. An Overlooked Chapter in the Genealogies of Representation and Sovereignty

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.02

Gonzalo Bustamante Kuschel ; Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Santiago, Chile

Fulltext: english, pdf (320 KB) pages 36-58 cite

Abstracts
In the article, Seneca’s figure is rehabilitated as relevant to understanding the emergence of sovereignty and modern representation. The idea put forth by the author of De Clementia would become one of the bases for Bodin’s writings and is also present in Hobbes’ work. During the Renaissance, De Clementia promoted monarchical forms. In De Clementia, this Stoic philosopher presents Nero in a depersonalised form. He is not only the sovereign capable of shaping a multitude, representing it in its whole and giving it the character of “people”, but also one who secures peace and rules with justice. Thus, in Seneca, one can discern a prototheory of sovereignty and representation, with decisionism as its result. If these readings of Seneca are plausible, genealogies of modern concepts that interpret their emergence as a revolutionary Trennung (e.g. Schmitt and early Conceptual History) (Lehmann and Van Horn Melton, 1994; Lehmann and Richter, 1996) could be facing a problem of omission. The conceptual support for the process through which the medieval social and political world was destroyed and substituted by modernity does not come from Cicero’s republican tradition, but from a monarchical notion of unity among the governor and the governed; an idea defended by Seneca, according to which absolute sovereignty would guarantee private property, contracts, and a sui iuris apolitical soul.

Keywords
Seneca; Begriffsgeschichte; Representation; Democracy; Sovereignty

Hrčak ID: 215388

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215388

Thomas Hobbes and the Political Economy of Peace

Original scientific paper
https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.01

Patricia Springborg ; Humboldt University of Berlin

Fulltext: english, pdf (303 KB) pages 9-35 cite

Abstracts
Thomas Hobbes’s theory of war is currently being re-examined as part of a re-examination of realism in international relations theory which claims to be Hobbes-based. I am not alone in maintaining that Hobbes was first and foremost a peace theorist, rejecting the usual grounds for war, pretexts based on just war, infringements on property or trade, and thus trespass. But those who examine the three-fold causes of war that Hobbes gives, as “competition”, “diffidence”, and “glory”, have generally not noticed the relation between Hobbes’s theory of war and empire. While Hobbes makes remarkably few references to the colonial ventures of Great Britain, for reasons that we will consider, his theory of empire, like his theory of war, is based on classical notions of internal balance and the homeostasis of the body politic along Aristotelian lines. His treatment of the polity as a natural body is consistent with his materialist ontology and he treats war and empire in terms of both “intestine diseases” and pathologies that afflict the body politic from without. The upshot is a theory remarkably backward-looking in terms of its emphasis on the health of the body politic and the politics of balance, which forbid “vain-glorious wars” and demand that overly-powerful subjects, towns of “immoderate greatness” and grandiose enlargements of dominion be excised, like Aristotle’s “big foot” whose disproportion spoils the proportion of the body as a whole.

Keywords
Hobbes; War and Peace; Empire; International Relations; Realism; Bobbitt

Hrčak ID: 215386

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/215386