Hate speech regulations

Everyone shall have the right to freely express his or her opinion. This right shall include freedom to hold own opinion, as well as to seek, receive and disseminate information and ideas through any media, without the interference of state or local self-government bodies and regardless of state frontiers.

The RA Constitution. Article 42

Freedom of speech, as one of the pillars of a democratic society, includes almost any form and content of expression, including the right to freely express one’s gender identity, which includes ideas, opinions, and information about one’s identity. Freedom of speech is not an absolute right; it is subject to certain restrictions54. It includes the freedom to express ideas, opinions, but at the same time, the obligation to avoid expressions that offend people and violate their rights55. In particular, the right to freedom of speech does not presuppose freedom of hate speech56 .

Hate speech regulations

The definition of hate speech does not yet have a universally recognized wording, but in practice, conventional interpretations have been made by international bodies. Hate speech can be all forms of expression that spread, incite, encourage, or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, or other forms of hatred: based on intolerance, including intolerance and hatred expressed by extreme nationalism, ethnocentrism, discrimination against minorities, immigrants (migrants), persons of migrant origin57 . Article 19 (2) of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognizes freedom of expression, affirming, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice”58 .

Freedom of expression under Article 19 Part 3 of the Covenant may be restricted if the following conditions are met: a) should be provided by law and should be necessary,

B) aimed at respecting the rights and reputation of others, the protection of public security, public order, public health, or morals, c) be necessary for a democratic society to protect these interests. The mere existence of one or two conditions is not sufficient to justify the restriction. Article 20 (2) of the Covenant states, “Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by

54 UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 34. https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/ docs/gc34.pdf. 55 Erbakan v. Turkey, No 59405/00. 56 UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 11. 57 Recommendation No. R (97) 20 of The Committee of Ministers to Member States on “Hate Speech”, 1997: https://bit.ly/2wa4QoE. 58 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, article 19(2).

Hate speech is expressed not only by calls for, discrimination or justification, advocacy of violence but also with an insulting, humiliating, hostile attitude, sowing intolerance towards certain groups. On the one hand, it can lead to hate crimes against groups or individuals, on the other hand, it can violate the psychological integrity of individuals with certain characteristics, causing mental suffering or depression. Hate speech is addressed at different levels by the legislation of some countries. For example, the laws of Canada, Iceland, Great Britain, Finland, France, the Netherlands, and other countries provide criminal liability for hate speech59 . The responsibility for hate speech is due to its severity. The following factors are considered to determine the severity of hate speech60: ∎ The context in which it is expressed, ∎ Its author, its role, the attitude of the society degree of confidence of the author, ∎ The intent and goal: the speech was expressed intentionally or unintentionally, or was it aimed at causing backlash or achieve a specific effect?

Content: the speech may be as influential as it can be and to what extent it may cause some damage?

Means of dissemination and audience: is it important to determine the extent of public dissemination? ∎ Levels of risks. Based on the analysis of these circumstances, the level of responsibility under the law for hate speech can be distinguished. In a situation where 95% of society has a negative attitude towards homosexuals61, even the most seemingly harmless expression of hatred can deepen the polarization within the society and lead to violations. In the case when the author of the hate speech is a state official, the degree of its peril is higher not only due to the reputation enjoyed by the official but also due to the creation of an atmosphere of impunity. Carelessly uttered hate speech should be criticized and, in some cases, even prosecuted, but in this case, criminal liability is not mandatory. Such expressions may be condemned by public officials, and disciplinary action may be taken against both public officials and members of the professional community as a violation of professional ethics. For the analysis of the content of the speech, it is especially important to assess the consequences, as it can keep a certain group of people in an

59 Relevant Legislative Regulations with the following links: Canada. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-318.html. Iceland. https://www.government.is/library/Files/General_Penal_Code_sept.-2015.pdf. Great Britain. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/section/146. Finland. http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039.pdf. France. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode. do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070719&dateTexte=20181010. Netherlands. https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001854/2018-09-19#BoekTweede_TiteldeelV_%20 Artikel137c. 60 Annual Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2013, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Expert Workshops on the Prohibition of Incitement to National, Racial or Religious Hatred: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/SeminarRabat/ Rabat_draft_outcome.pdf. 61 Pink Human Rights Defender NGO. “From Prejudice to Equality։ Study of Public Attitudes Toward LGBTI People in Armenia”. 2016. https://www.pinkarmenia.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/From-Prejudice-toEquality-Armenian.pdf.