Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union Citizens of the European Union enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration. Currently, all members of the European Union are signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights in addition to having various constitutional and legal rights to freedom of expression at the national level. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been legally binding since December 1, when the Treaty of Lisbon became fully ratified and effective.
It made certain acts motivated by racism or xenophobia illegal. It is also known as the Moureaux Law.
The Belgian Holocaust denial law, passed on 23 Marchbans public Holocaust denial. Specifically, the law makes it illegal to publicly "deny, play down, justify or approve of the genocide committed by the Nazi German regime during the Second World War.
The offense is punishable by imprisonment of up to one year and fines of up to EUR. Brazil[ edit ] In Brazilaccording to the Brazilian Constitutionracism is an "Offense with no statute of limitations and no right to bail for the defendant.
Hate speech laws in Canada In Canadaadvocating genocide against any "identifiable group" is an indictable offence under the Criminal Code and carries a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment. There is no minimum sentence. It can be prosecuted either as an indictable offence with a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment, or as a summary conviction offence with a maximum sentence of six months imprisonment.
There are no minimum sentences in either case. The landmark judicial decision on the constitutionality of this law was R. An "identifiable group" is defined for both offences as "any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression or mental or physical disability".
Council of Europe[ edit ] The Council of Europe has worked intensively on this issue. While Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights does not prohibit criminal laws against revisionism such as denial or minimization of genocides or crimes against humanityas interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights ECtHRthe Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe went further and recommended in that member governments "take appropriate steps to combat hate speech" under its Recommendation R 97 Croatia[ edit ] The Croatian Constitution guarantees freedom of speechbut the Croatian penal code prohibits discrimination and punishes anyone "who based on differences of race, religion, language, political or other belief, wealth, birth, education, social status or other properties, gender, skin color, nationality or ethnicity violates basic human rights and freedoms recognized by the international community.
Ethnic agitation is punishable with a fine or up to 2 years in prison, or 4 months to 4 years if aggravated such as incitement to genocide. Certain politicians, including Member of Parliament and the leader of the Finns Party Jussi Halla-ahoconsider the term "hate speech" problematic because of the lack of an easy definition.
The law prohibits declarations that justify or deny crimes against humanity—for example, the Holocaust Gayssot Act.
Thus for instance it is illegal to publicly call certain ethnic groups "maggots" or "freeloaders". On June 30,Germany approved a bill criminalizing hate speech on social media sites.
Anyone who in a ridiculing, slanderous, insulting, threatening or any other manner publicly assaults a person or a group of people on the basis of their nationality, skin colour, race, religion or sexual orientation, shall be fined or jailed for up to 2 years.
In this context "assault" does not refer to physical violence but only to verbal assault. Hate speech laws in India Freedom of speech and expression is protected by article 19 1 of the constitution of India, but under article 19 2 "reasonable restrictions" can be imposed on freedom of speech and expression in the interest of "the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence".
The statements are said to be an example of similar messages intolerance being preached throughout the country by radical clerics. Article 4 of the convention sets forth provisions calling for the criminalization of hate speech. But the Japanese government has suspended the provisions, saying actions to spread or promote the idea of racial discrimination have not been taken in Japan to such an extent that legal action is necessary.
The Foreign Ministry says that this assessment remains unchanged. Participants called on the Japanese government to "sincerely adhere" to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Sexual minorities and the disabled also participated in the march.
However, it does not ban hate speech and sets no penalty for committing it. Blasphemy law in Jordan Several Jordanian laws seek to prevent the publication or dissemination of material that could provoke strife or hatred: The publicization of ideas based on racial superiority, racial hatred and the instigation of racial discrimination against any person or group constitute punishable offences.
Article 20 of the Audiovisual Media Act No. It is illegal to publish material likely to stir up hatred or to make propaganda with a view to setting citizens against one another. Article 40 a iv of the Print and Publications Act No.
Malta[ edit ] The Maltese criminal code through Articles 82AD prohibits in substance hate speech comprehensively as follows: Whosoever publicly condones, denies or grossly trivialises genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, citizenship, descent or national or ethnic origin when the conduct is carried out in a manner - a likely to incite to violence or hatred against such a group or a member of such a group; b likely to disturb public order or which is threatening, abusive or insulting, shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for a term from eight months to two years: Provided that for the purposes of this article "genocide","crimes against humanity" and "war crimes" shall have the same meaning assigned to them in article 54A Provisions which transpose the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court into Maltese Law.
Whosoever aids, abets or instigates any offence under articles 82A to 82C, both inclusive, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to the punishment laid down for the offence aided, abetted or instigated.
Netherlands[ edit ] The Dutch penal code prohibits both insulting a group article c and inciting hatred, discrimination or violence article d.
The definition of the offences as outlined in the penal code is as follows: Section 61 Racial Disharmony makes it unlawful to publish or distribute "threatening, abusive, or insulting Section Inciting Racial Disharmony lists offences for which "racial disharmony" creates liability.Some school policies to deal with harassment and bullying "stretch the definition of harassment to encompass protected speech and threaten the delicate balance the Supreme Court has struck between the right to equality and the First Amendment right to free speech.".
When I moved to the South as a teenager I got a glimpse of race relations up close for the first time in my life, and one thing that quickly became surprisingly .
Free speech has officially failed. Reports are pouring in that the politically-correct politics surrounding the term ‘white privilege’ are gaining traction at many universities. Plenty of professors at various colleges across the nation are confronting students with racial and ethnic issues, and.
Intonation Patterns in the English Spoken by English Mentors - The scope of the study The Informants have been selected from APIIITs. This study has been restricted to the analysis of 30 informants, out of which 19 are male and 11 are female.
Proponents of hate speech legislation in the United States have argued that freedom of speech undermines the 14 th Amendment by bolstering oppressive narrative which demeans equality and the Reconstructive Amendment’s purpose of guaranteeing equal protection under the law.
The Education Issues Page is a discussion of what's wrong with public education in America today, with an emphasis on the liberalism and political correctness involved in public education. The quality of education is going down while the price keeps going up.