Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/761508
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 11 DECEMBER 2016 News Update definition of hate speech, students urge legislators MIRIAM DALLI MALTESE students have urged policymakers and stakeholders to tweak the traditional definitional of hate speech, in order to ref lect the digital era. A solution to protect people from hate speech must be found in balance with protecting the fundamental human right of freedom of expression: thus, the European Law Students' Associa- tion (ELSA) Malta argued, the line between such right and its limita- tions should be clarified. In a policy paper published on Human Rights Day, marked yes- terday, ELSA argued that con- sultative meetings dealing with hate speech should be organised more frequently, in an attempt to reach consensus on a concrete definition of hate speech and hate speech online. Hate speech is not easily defined, and while posting malicious on- line comments that insult a per- son or a group of people might seem hateful, it is not the function of hate speech regulations to pro- tect against hurt feelings, ELSA students argued. However, the association also pointed out that the European Court of Human Rights has noted that it may be considered neces- sary "to sanction or even prevent all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred based on intolerance". The Council of Europe's Com- mittee of Ministers' Recommen- dation has defined hate speech "as covering all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance, in- cluding: intolerance expressed by aggressive nationalism and eth- nocentrism, discrimination and hostility against minorities, mi- grants and people of immigrant origin". In Malta, hate speech is seen in the Criminal Code as an intent "to stir up violence or hatred against another person or group on the grounds of gender, gender iden- tity, sexual orientation, race, col- our, language, ethnic origin, reli- gion or belief or political or other opinion" and is punishable by law. The Criminal Code, the stu- dents argue, is more inclined to preventing violence against the dignity of the persons targeted than limiting one's freedom of ex- pression by punishing those who resort to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour. "It is clear that there exists a strong legal framework that is po- tent enough to prevent violence but at the same time open to en- gagement in constructive dia- logue that needs to be undertaken in any democratic society in order to have social progress," the stu- dents argue in their policy paper. "However, the question of how these provisions of law are applied to the Internet and social media remains an unanswered ques- tion." The underlying problem, they argued, was the regulatory bodies of the Internet and social media. The students go on to urge par- liament to fully implement and transpose the EU framework de- cision on combating racism and xenophobia. They propose im- proving recording and data col- lection of hate crime incidents whilst also calling for "self-regu- lation for journalists which gives ethical standards to journalists". Among others, the students also suggest "removing a given number of websites from the internet" and the setting up of a more effective platform for victims to report hate speech. But education remains more im - portant, which sees the state and organisations collaborating on campaigns to combat hate speech. "Education in all its various forms, be it formal and informal, plays a crucial role in the pre- vention of intolerance and hate speech," ELSA argued. "It is im- portant to impact, at an early age, the fundamental values of democ- racy which constitute the social fabric of society." School curricula, the students said, should foster an inclusive ed- ucation whilst educators need "to be trained and given the tools to overcome their own prejudices". The students suggest 'removing a given number of websites from the internet'