Notas

AutorPaul Coleman
Páginas175-193

Page 175

notas

introducción

1. Lewis Carroll, Al otro lado del espejo (Escolar y Mayo, 2016) traducción de Eduardo Valls Oyarzun, p. 156.

2. Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).
3. ‘Dismay after Indonesian Atheist Charged with Blasphemy’ (Jakarta Globe, 20 January 2012).

4. ‘Indonesia’s Atheists Face Battle for Religious Freedom’, (The Guardian, 3 May 2012).
5. ‘Atheist Alexander Aan gets out of prison’ (Jakarta Globe, 31 January 2014).
6. Pakistan Criminal Code 1860, § 298.
7. For example, see the remarks on behalf of EU High Representative/Vice-President Catherine Ashton, entitled ‘Death Penalty in Pakistan and the case of Asia Bibi’, European Parliament Plenary, Strasbourg, 22 October 2014.

8. ‘Speech should not be criminalized, says OSCE media freedom representative following sentencing of Lithuanian journalist’ (OSCE, 2 July 2012).

9. ‘Russia should reject recriminalizing libel, says OSCE media freedom representative’ (OSCE, 12 July 2012).

10. ‘New charges against journalist further curb free expression in Turkey, says OSCE media freedom representative’ (OSCE, 6 July 2012).

11. ‘OSCE Freedom representative regrets fine imposed on journalist in Kyrgyzstan’ (OSCE, 4 July 2012).

12. UN General comment No. 34, 12 September 2011 (CCPR/C/GC/34) § 47 (referencing Concluding observations on Italy (CCPR/C/ITA/CO/5) and concluding observations on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (CCPR/C/MKD/CO/2)).

13. Adonis v. The Philippines, 26 October 2011, CCPR/C/103/D/1815/2008.
14. ‘Bishop accused of incitement to hatred in homily’ (Irish Independent, 29 January 2012).
15. See General Policy Recommendation No. 7 on National Legislation to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination (13 December 2002), § 18.

16. European Union Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law, Article 1(2).

17. Recommendation No. R (97) 20 of the Committee of Ministers on “Hate Speech”, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 30 October 1997, Principle 4, Appendix to Recommendation No. R (97) 20.

— 175 —

Page 176

176 la Censura maquillada | Paul Coleman

18. Peter Molnar, “Towards Better Law and Policy Against ‘Hate Speech’ – The ‘Clear and Present Danger’ Test in Hungary,” in Ivan Hare and James Weinstein (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy (Oxford University Press, 2009) p.237.

19. ‘Factsheet - Hate speech’, Council of Europe, February 2012, p.1.
20. ‘Countering Online Hate Speech’, UNESCO, 2015, p.8.
21. ‘Factsheet - Hate Speech’, Council of Europe, November 2008, p. 2.
22. Agnes Callamard, ‘Comments and Recommendation on ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 15 on Combating Hate Speech’ (Global Freedom of Expression at Columbia, 20 May 2015), p.4.

23. Ibid.
24. Ibid.
25. ‘Hate Speech and Hate Crimes against LGBT Persons’, Fundamental Rights Agency, 2009, p.1.

26. ‘Homophobia and Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the EU Member States Part II – The Social Situation’, Fundamental Rights Agency, 2009, p.46.

27. ‘Homophobia, transphobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity’, Fundamental Rights Agency, 2010, pp.36-37.

28. Gerard Alexander, ‘Illiberal Europe’, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 2006, p.1.

29. Reichsgericht, Entscheidung in Strafsachen (RGSt), Volume 40, p.416, cited in Winfried Brugger, ‘The Treatment of Hate Speech in German Constitutional Law (Part I)’, (2007) 4 German Law Journal 1, p.14.

30. ACPO and Home Office Police Standards Unit, Hate Crime: Delivering a Quality Service, 2005, cited in Jon Gower Davies, A New Inquisition: Religious Persecution in Britain Today (Civitas, 2010), p.9.

31. Rachel Molschky, ‘Swedish Politician Fined for ‘Hate Speech’ Against Islam’ (Cherson and Mocschky, 2014).

32. Winfried Brugger, ‘The Treatment of Hate Speech in German Constitutional Law (Part I)’, (2007) 4 German Law Journal 1, p.15.

33. Section 332, Criminal Code.
34. Article IX (5) of the “Fundamental Law” (Constitution).
35. UN General Comment No. 34, 12 September 2011 (CCPR/C/GC/34), § 2.
36. Jacob Mchangama, ‘The Sordid Origin of Hate-Speech Laws’, Hoover Institution, Policy Review, No. 170, 1 December 2011, p.1.

37. Verordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat, 28 February 1933, § 1.
38. Lord Justice Sedley, Redmond-Bate v. DPP 163 JP [1999].

capítulo 1

1. Jacob Mchangama, ‘The Sordid Origin of Hate-Speech Laws’, Hoover Institution, Policy Review, No. 170, 1 December 2011, p.1.

2. Johannes Morsink, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting, and Intent (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), p.66.

3. Ibid p. 67.
4. E/800, 28 June 1948, p.28.

Page 177

n otas

177

5. E/800, 28 June 1948, p.42.
6. Belgian representative, Fernand Dehouse. A/C.3/SR.128, 9 November 1948, p.414.
7. A/C.3/SR.129, 10 November 1948, p. 421.
8. Morsink (n 2) at p.68.
9. A/PV.182, 10 December 1948, p.57.
10. A/PV.180, 9 December 1948, p.54.
11. Ibid.
12. Morsink (n 2) at p. 93.
13. E/CN.4/SR.34, 12 December 1947, p. 9.
14. E/CN.4/AC.1/3/Add.1, 11 June 1947, pp.377-378.
15. Ibid.
16. E/CN.4/52, 6 December 1947, p. 6.
17. Morsink (n 2) p.70.
18. E/CN.4/AC.2/SR/9, 10 December 1947, pp. 6-7.
19. Morsink (n 2) p.72.
20. Mchangama (n 1) p.4.

capítulo 2

1. Marc Bossuyt, Guide to the “Travaux Preparatoires” of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Springer, 1987), pp. 403-411.

2. Report of the Commission on Human Rights, Second Session, E/600, 17 December 1947, p.35. (Emphasis added.)

3. E/CN.4/AC.1/SR.28. See Bossuyt (n 1) p.403.
4. E/CN.4/SR.377, 16 October 1953, p.4. See Stephanie Farrior, ‘Molding The Matrix: The Historical and Theoretical Foundations of International Law Concerning Hate Speech’, (1996) 14 Berkeley Journal of International Law 1, § 25.

5. A/C.3/SR.1079, 20 October 1961, §9; E/CN.4/SR.377, 16 October 1953, § 26.
6. Eleanor Roosevelt, Commission on Human Rights, Sixth Session, E/CN.4/SR.174, 6 May 1950, p.6.

7. Sixteenth Session of the General Assembly, A/5000, 5 December 1961, p.13.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid p.14.
10. Farrior (n 4) § 31.
11. Jacob Mchangama, ‘The Sordid Origin of Hate-Speech Laws’, Hoover Institution, Policy Review, No. 170, 1 December 2011, p.5.

12. See Theodor Meron, ‘The Meaning and Reach of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination’, (1985) 79 American Journal of International Law 283, p.283.

13. While the article calls for prohibition by law, the monitoring body of the treaty has held this to mean criminal law. Farrior (n 4) § 51.

14. Tony Mendel, ‘Does International Law Provide for Consistent Rules on Hate Speech?’, in Michael Herz, and Peter Molnar (eds), The Content and Context of Hate Speech: Rethinking Regulation and Responses (Cambridge University Press, 2012), p.47.

15. Natán Lérner, The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Sijthoff & Noordoff, 1980), p.43.

Page 178

178 la Censura maquillada | Paul Coleman

16. Morris Abram. E/CN.4/Sub.2/SR.418; Natán Lérner, The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Sijthoff & Noordoff, 1980), p.51.

17. E/CN.4/Sub.2/L.308, Add.1/Rev.1/Corr.1.
18. E/CN.4/Sub.2/L.314.
19. Amendments A/C.3/L/1220, A/C.3/L/1210 and A/C.3/T/1208. See Natán Lérner, The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Sijthoff & Noordoff, 1980), p.45.

20. Third Committee, A/C.3/SR.1315, 22 October 1965, § 1.
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Ibid § 2.
25. Ibid §§ 4-17, 20.
26. Mrs. Sekaninova, ibid § 6.
27. Mr Ospina, A/PV.1406, 21 December 1965, §§ 70-72.
28. Mchangama (n 11) pp.6-7.
29. Mr Ospina, A/PV.1406, 21 December 1965, § 112.
30. Ibid §§ 112-122.

capítulo 3

1. This pattern continues into the present. For example, Cyprus’s new “hate speech” law (134(I)/2011) states in the preamble: “For the purpose of harmonisation with the act of the European Union entitled ‘Framework Decision 2008/913 / JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.’”
2. § 3(1), Law No. 654/1975, as amended.
3. Article 2, ‘Law of July 30, 1981 on the punishment of certain acts inspired by racism or xenophobia’, as amended.
4. See ‘Blasphemy, insult and hatred - Finding answers in a democratic society’, (Venice

Commission, 2010) p.163.
5. For example, in 2009, a European Parliament resolution stated: “[The Parliament] Welcomes the adoption of Council framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law further to the political agreement of December 2007; points to its position of 29 November 2007(11), which endorsed the proposal; calls on the Commission, after consulting the Agency, to propose similar legislation to combat homophobia;” European Parliament resolution of 14 January 2009 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union 2004-2008 (2007/2145(INI)).
6. ECRI is tasked with providing Member States with “concrete and practical advice on how to tackle problems of racism and intolerance in their country.”
7. ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 7 on National Legislation to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, Council of Europe, adopted on 13 December 2002.
8. Annual Report on ECRI’s Activities, 2013, p.13.
9. ECRI Report on Hungary, (fourth monitoring cycle), 24 February 2009, p.13.

Page 179

n otas

179

10. ECRI Report on Lithuania, (fourth monitoring cycle), 13 September 2011, p.16. (Emphasis added).

11. ECRI Report on Lithuania, (fourth monitoring cycle), 13 September 2011, p.26. C.f.

OSCE Press Release, headlined, ‘Speech should not be criminalized, says OSCE media freedom representative following sentencing...

Para continuar leyendo

Solicita tu prueba

VLEX utiliza cookies de inicio de sesión para aportarte una mejor experiencia de navegación. Si haces click en 'Aceptar' o continúas navegando por esta web consideramos que aceptas nuestra política de cookies. ACEPTAR