Freedom of Expression and Hate Speech

This is a study of free speech and hate speech with reference to the international standards and to the United States jurisprudence. The study, in a comparative and critical fashion, depicts the historical evolution and the application of the concept of ‘free speech,’ within the context of ‘hate speech.’ The main question of this article is how free speech can be discerned from hate speech, and whether the latter should be restricted. To this end, it examines the regulation of free speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and in light of the international standards, particularly under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The study not only illustrates how elusive the endeavour of striking a balance between free speech and other vital interests could be, but also discusses whether and how hate speech should be eliminated within the ‘marketplace of ideas.’

O hate speech e suas limitações

O objetivo deste trabalho de conclusão de curso é externar a relevância do direito à liberdade de expressão, especialmente em casos de discursos ofensivos e de incitação ao ódio, além de investigar se em algumas situações ele pode ser limitado para ceder a outros valores e de que forma. Por exemplo, através da técnica da ponderação ou de outros parâmetros pré-estabelecidos, os quais têm a função facilitar a resolução de casos difíceis, isto é, situações em que há a colisão entre direitos e deve-se chegar à conclusão de qual deles deve preponderar.

From Sisyphus’s Dilemma to Sisyphus’s Duty? A Meditation on the Regulation of Hate Propaganda in Relation to Hate Crimes and Genocide

Un résumé en français est également disponible.

Saving schools from abomination and abnormal sex : a discourse analysis of online public commentary about 'queering' school spaces

Homophobic hatred: these words summarise online commentary made by people in support of a school that banned gay students from taking their same sex partners to a school formal. With the growing popularity of online news sites, it seems appropriate to critically examine how these sites are becoming a new arena in which people can express personal opinions about controversial topics. While commentators equally expressed two dominant viewpoints about the school ban (homophobic hatred and human rights), this paper focuses on homophobic hatred as a discursive position and how the comments work to confirm the legitimacy of the schools’ decision. Drawing on the work of Foucault and others, the paper examines how the comments constitute certain types of subjectivity drawing on dominant ideas about what it means to be homophobic. The analysis demonstrates the complex and competing skein of strategies that constitute queering school social spaces as a social problem.

The Black Label: trade mark dilution, culture jamming, and the no logo movement

This article considers the ongoing debate over the appropriation of well-known and famous trade marks by the No Logo Movement for the purposes of political and social critique. It focuses upon one sensational piece of litigation in South Africa, Laugh It Off Promotions v. South African Breweries International (Finance) B.V. t/a Sabmark International. In this case, a group called Laugh It Off Promotions subjected the trade marks of the manufacturers of Carling Beer were subjected to parody, social satire, and culture jamming. The beer slogan “Black Label” was turned into a T-Shirt entitled “Black Labour/ White Guilt”. In the ensuing litigation, the High Court of South Africa and the Supreme Court of Appeal were of the opinion that the appropriation of the mark was a case of hate speech. However, the Constitutional Court of South Africa disagreed, finding that the parodies of a well-known, famous trade mark did not constitute trade mark dilution. Moseneke J observed that there was a lack of evidence of economic or material harm; and Sachs J held that there is a need to provide latitude for parody, laughter, and freedom of expression. The decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa provides some important insights into the nature of trade mark dilution, the role of parody and satire, and the relevance of constitutional protections of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Arguably, the ruling will be of help in the reformation of trade mark dilution law in other jurisdictions – such as the United States. The decision in Laugh It Off Promotions v. South African Breweries International demonstrates that trade mark law should not be immune from careful constitutional scrutiny.

A tutela penal dos discursos potencialmente ofensivos

O presente trabalho tem como ponto de partida os problemas que podem advir doexercício potencialmente danoso da liberdade de expressão. Desta forma, foram estabelecidas, inicialmente, as premissas sobre as quais se deve fundamentar o Direito Penal no seio de um Estado Democrático de Direito. Posteriormente, foram analisados os contornos do bem jurídico limitado pela eventual intervenção penal, bem como as características e principais formas de manifestação do problema, tendo sido estabelecido, ainda, um panorama do tratamento jurídico-penal conferido ao problema nos Estados Unidos, na Alemanha, na Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos e no Brasil. Da análise restou comprovado que há uma tendência majoritária à admissibilidade da intervenção penal sobre o problema, limitando discursos potencialmente danosos como forma de promover uma sociedade mais pluralista e tolerante. Partindo-se desta constatação, buscou-se elaborar uma proposta dogmática que possa servir como mecanismo de limitação do poder punitivo, estabelecendo-se critérios minimamente satisfatórios para a aferição da potencialidade lesiva de um discurso. Por fim, apresentou-se uma análise crítica a respeito de tais processos criminalizatórios, já que constituem mera tentativa de promoção de minha exposição valores por meio do Direito Penal, o que não poderia ser admitido num Estado Democrático de Direito.

Jurisdiction and the Internet: Regulatory Competence over Online Activity

null RAE2008

Liberdade de expressão e discurso do ódio: um exame sobre as possíveis limitações à liberdade de expressão

In a view to determining the outlines of the Freedom of Speech and to specify its contents, we face hate speech as an offensive and repulsive manifestation, particularly directed to minority groups in contemporary society. Thus, the study sought to promote, in the foreground, a study of the Freedom of Speech, in the liberal molds. Considered this way, Freedom of Speech will tend to accept hate speech as a legitimate manifestation, albeit at the injury of the victims. On the other hand, when we are dealing with the exhaustion of the liberal paradigm and the affirmation of the Welfare State, we note the recognition by the social state of the asymmetries and commitment to redistributive justice. The Freedom of Speech, warded by welfare state will tend to suffer major restrictions on its self-determination power, rejecting hate speech.

O discurso do ódio: a cultura do medo e a influência midiática sobre a (in)efetividade dos direitos fundamentais

Pós-graduação em Direito - FCHS

Transcultural satire in German fiction of Turkish migration: Self-deprecation, ethnic impersonation, intertexuality

My dissertation presents a study of satire in contemporary German Fiction of Turkish migration. Engaging with a body of works hitherto neglected in scholarship, I examine how satirical texts, films, and plays intervene critically in discourses on post-unification German national identity. Drawing on the seminal work of scholars such as Leslie Adelson, Tom Cheesman, B. Venkat Mani, Petra Fachinger, and Deniz Göktürk, my dissertation expands the scholarship of Turkish German Studies by linking a discussion of satire as a critical rhetoric to the question of how we talk about what it means to be German.

Chapter one offers a novel framework of the satirical vis-à-vis standard conceptions of satire and deconstructionist theories of reading. I understand satire as a form of rhetoric that creates moments of ambiguity by bringing together intersectional categories like gender, ethnicity, race, religion, in order to challenge the audience’s practices of interpreting cultural otherness. Chapter two examines the use of ethnic self-deprecation as one such strategy in Osman Engin’s short stories and his first novel, Kanaken-Ghandi through the lens of Bakhtinian polyphony and Judith Butler’s work on hate speech. Engin, I argue, employs ethnic selfdeprecation as a narrative strategy to straddle the line between deconstructing and re-affirming cultural stereotypes. Investigating the role of ethnic impersonation in Hussi Kutlucan’s film Ich Chef, Du Turnshuh, the third chapter turns to the question of ethnicity as a visual signifier for the negotiation of cultural inclusion and exclusion in post-1990 film. In dialogue with Katrin Sieg’s work on ethnic drag and Amy Robinson’s theory of passing, I show how the film challenges ethnically-coded narratives of Germanness. In the final chapter on Nurkan Erpulat and Jens Hillje’s play Verrücktes Blut, I discuss how intertextuality and adaptation (Hutcheon, Genette) of different story and character worlds are used to create moments of ambiguity and overdeterminacy in the play, in order to challenge the audience’s perception of what an inclusive German society might look like.

Discurso do ódio no Estado Democrático de Direito : o uso da liberdade de expressão como forma de violência

Tese (doutorado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Direito, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, 2015.

Igual consideração e respeito, independência ética e liberdade de expressão em Dworkin : uma reconciliação entre igualdade e liberdade e a possibilidade do discurso do ódio em um ordenamento coerente de princípios

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Direito, Pós-Graduação Stricto Sensu em Direito, 2016.