Sovražni govor med pravico do svobode govora in negativnimi družbenimi posledicami

Törnar, Jasna (author), Škerlep, Andrej (mentor)

V demokraciji javna sfera odpira prostor javnega komuniciranja o pomembnih temah, o katerih mora družba, posebej politične institucije, odločati. Javno komuniciranje je možno, če obstaja svoboda govora, ki omogoča izmenjavo različnih mnenj, interesov in pogledov na svet, kar z drugimi besedami pomeni, da mora javno komuniciranje potekati čim bolj neovirano, brez cenzure in ideološkega omejevanja. Zaradi pomembnosti javne sfere mora družbeni red ščititi svobodo govora in pojave t.i. »sovražnega govora« opredeliti in sankcionirati le tedaj, kadar ima tovrstni govor za družbo, družbene skupine in državljane očitne negativne posledice. Nekateri poskušajo kot sovražni govor opredeliti tiste javne diskurze, s katerimi se ne strinjajo, kar je preširoka opredelitev. Na drugi strani pa bi nekateri radi zanikali obstoj sovražnega govora, kljub temu, da nekateri javni diskurzi direktno napadajo dostojanstvo in družbeno identiteto nekaterih družbenih skupin, posebej tistih iz obrobja družbe, ali pa celo pozivajo k nasilju. Z vidika človekovih pravic in svoboščin, na katerih je utemeljena ustavna ureditev, je svoboda govora, tudi kritičnega in neprijetnega, temeljna vrednota javnega komuniciranja, vendar le do tiste mere, ko začne javni diskurz direktno napadati, zanikati, izničevati ali celo pozivati k nasilju proti nekaterim družbenim skupinam. V študiji primera o sovražnem govoru v odnosu do nezakonitih migrantov, pokažem na mejne primere javnega govora, ki prestopijo mejo in jih lahko označimo za sovražni govor. A kljub temu ugotavljam, da sodna praksa v Republiki Sloveniji ne sankcionira sovražnega govora.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: komunikologija, javna sfera, sovražni govor, svoboda govora
• Work type: Bachelor thesis/paper
• Organization: FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
• Year: 2019
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-110255
• COBISS.SI-ID: 36447581
• Publication date in RUL: 13.09.2019

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: Hate speech between the right to freedom of speech and negative social consequences

Abstract

In democracy the public sphere opens up a space of public communication around important topics that need to be resolved by society and political institutions. Public communication is possible only when there is freedom of speech that allows for exchange of different opinions, interests and viewpoints, which means that public communication has to be unlimited by censorship and ideologies. Because of the importance of public sphere the social order must protect the freedom of speech and the phenomena of hate speech define and sanction only when there are obvious negative consequences. Some are trying to define as hate speech all those public discourses with which they disagree with, which is too broad of a definition. On the other side there are those who claim there is no hate speech when at the same time there are those discourses that directly attack dignity and social identity of certain social groups and even call for violence, especially towards those from the periphery of society. From the viewpoint of human rights and freedoms on which we base our constitutional arrangement, the freedom of speech is the fundamental value even when it states critical and unpleasant viewpoints but not in cases of direct denial, nullifying and calling for violence towards certain social groups. In case study I show cases of speech that cross the boundary of free speech and reside in the domain of hate speech. Yet at the same time I find that judicial practice in the Republic of Slovenia is not sanctioning cases of hate speech.

• Keywords: communications, hate speech, freedom of speech, public sphere