Human Rights Groups Unite to Support Non-Judicial Methods to Combat Racist Hate Speech

New York City – Today, as the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination gathers in Geneva to host a discussion on racist hate speech, Human Rights First and a number of other organizations have issued a joint statement that details the importance of fighting hatred in the public discourse through non-legal methods. The statement notes that “the debate over how to regulate hate speech is a distraction from immediate, effective and practical non-legal options for addressing racist hate speech.”

“There is a trend to constantly identify new legal means to fight hatred, but instead states should assess how to make existing commitments more effective,” said Human Rights First’s Joelle Fiss. “This discussion is an important opportunity for states and those with a shared interest in ending racist hate speech to come together and access best practices moving forward.”

The committee’s agenda today includes a focus on the concept of racist hate speech and its evolution over time, combating racist hate speech, the work of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, racist hate speech and freedom of opinion and expression, and racist hate speech in political life, as well as in the media including the internet.

United Nations bodies, specialized agencies, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as academic experts will participate in today’s discussion. The statement signed by Human Rights First – as well as the American Civil Liberties Union, American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, Human Rights Campaign, Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights, and the Leadership Conference on Civil – will be part of that dialogue.

STATEMENT TO THE

COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

THEMATIC DISCUSSION ON “RACIST HATE SPEECH”

August 28, 2012

As organizations dedicated to combating racism and bigotry in all forms, we have worked for decades to counter the propagation of racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, homophobia, anti- Muslim bigotry, and all forms of prejudice in public discourse, including on the Internet.

There is no question that the fomenting of hate in the public discourse impairs the ability of members of targeted communities to be treated equally, with dignity and free from harassment. Hate speech also increases the overall level of fear of the targeted community, as a whole.

However, the debate over how to regulate hate speech is a distraction from immediate, effective and practical non-legal options for addressing racist hate speech.

Unfortunately, racism, discrimination and hate crimes are a fact of everyday life across Member States, even where robust laws banning hate speech are in place.  Therefore, the value of penalizing hate speech as a means to effectively reduce violence targeted against victims of that hate speech, is highly questionable.

At the same time, there is much that governments, political leaders and other public figures can do to counter and marginalize hate speech.  In fact, such actions can have far more reach and effectiveness in actually transforming and shaping attitudes than a legal focus on punishing and limiting speech.

Political leaders have the most immediate and significant opportunity to set a national tone against racist incitement and to promote values of respect for diversity. Indeed, nothing gives a greater sense of security to vulnerable communities than seeing the unequivocal public rejection of racism.  This signals that the government takes seriously all people’s right to live free of harassment.  Even without hate speech or even hate crimes laws, where there is political will, when local and national officials marginalize and reject hate, people are more secure.

Short URL: http://www.newsnet14.com/?p=107668