24 April 2024
Rallying under a Nazi Swastika Flag
On April 5th, 2024, the Helsinki Court of Appeal held that rallying under a Nazi swastika flag constituted an offense of incitement to hatred, namely, agitation against a group of population. Contrary to German law, Finnish law does not include any specific prohibition of symbols of this kind. It therefore leaves it open under which circumstances the public use of symbols such as those linked with the Nazi regime in fact constitute a criminal offense. Against this background, the Court of Appeal’s conclusion is to be welcomed. Had the outcome been different, this would have triggered a set of difficult questions of how to amend the regulatory framework in order to address this issue. The judgment may, however, still be appealed. Continue reading >>
0 
09 February 2024
Exercising Power from the Outside
Since 2019, anti-Islam non-parliamentary activists have explored the limits to freedom of speech in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands through their provocative Quran desecration acts. Using the non-parliamentarian arena to exercise power from a position of minority, the far-right activist Rasmus Paludan and his party were able to effectively push the Danish constitutional boundaries, while at the same time affecting the geopolitical situation. While the protests so far only have had legal repercussions regarding blasphemy and freedom of speech in Denmark, it clearly demonstrates that non-parliamentary far-right activists also hold certain legislative powers. Continue reading >>
0
18 October 2023
A Step Forward in Fighting Online Antisemitism
Online antisemitism is on the rise. Especially since the recent terror attack by Hamas in Southern Israel, platforms like X are (mis)used to propel antisemitism. Against this backdrop, this blog post analyses the legal framework for combatting online antisemitism in the EU and the regulatory approaches taken so far. It addresses the new Digital Services Act (DSA), highlighting some of the provisions that might become particularly important in the fight against antisemitism. The DSA improves protection against online hate speech in general and antisemitism in particular by introducing procedural and transparency obligations. However, it does not provide any substantive standards against which the illegality of such manifestations can be assessed. In order to effectively reduce online antisemitism in Europe, we need to think further, as outlined in the following blog post. Continue reading >>25 May 2023
Strong on Hate Speech, Too Strict on Political Debate
Online hate speech is a topic that has gained importance in recent years. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) made an important ruling in this context on 15 May 2023 in Sanchez v. France. From a democratic theory and individual rights’ perspective, I would endorse the first decision because it tackles the so-called “silencing” and “desensitization effect” of hate speech. The second decision, however, runs the risk of adversely affecting free political debate, especially when individual politicians are called upon to delete comments by third parties. Continue reading >>
0
18 September 2020
Über Hass schreiben
Ein feministisches Buch und der Versuch eines Regierungsmitarbeiters, dessen Verbreitung zu unterbinden, erregen die Gemüter in Frankreich. Die Rede ist von Misandrie (Männerhass) einerseits und Zensur andererseits. Der Beitrag erläutert die Geschehnisse und fragt, welche Lehren daraus für die Cancel Culture-Debatte (auch) in Deutschland zu ziehen sind. Continue reading >>
0
18 February 2020
Private (Transnational) Power without Authority
On 9 September 2019 Facebook banned from its platforms all pages and profiles related to the Italian far-right organization “CasaPound”, for the violation of its Community Standard no. 12 (hate speech and incitement to violence). On 11 December 2019, the Tribunal of Rome (ToR) adopted the precautionary measure ordering Facebook Ireland Ltd. to restore the pages and their content and to pay the losses. The decision raises significant issues in several respects and might serve as a model to courts beyond Italy. Continue reading >>23 December 2019
Worüber man nichts sagen kann, darüber soll man schweigen
Kurz vor Weihnachten hat das Landesverfassungsgericht Mecklenburg-Vorpommern eine Entscheidung gefällt, die zum Widerspruch herausfordert, ja zur demokratischen Pflicht macht. Das Urteil vom 19. Dezember 2019 zeigt in exemplarischer Weise, wie wichtig gerade in diesen Tagen die Aufgabe der Justiz ist, einer Erosion von demokratischen Grundprinzipien entgegenzutreten. Es ist schmerzhaft, wenn sie diese Aufgabe so spektakulär verfehlt, wie in diesem Falle. Continue reading >>17 December 2019
Democratic (Dis)Armament
On 3 September 2019, the Slovak Supreme Court ruled against an MP of the far-right political party Kotleba – People’s Party Our Slovakia. Due to the conviction, Mr Mazurek lost his seat and another candidate of the PPOS took his place. Depending on the factors considered, the case can be seen either as armament or as disarmament of democracy in Slovakia. Continue reading >>
0
23 June 2019
Grundrechtsentzug gegen Rechtextremisten – Die stumpfe Waffe der streitbaren Demokratie
Bundesinnenminister Seehofer möchte den Vorschlag prüfen, Demokratiefeinden Grundrechte zu entziehen. Einen entsprechenden Vorstoß hatte der ehemalige CDU-Generalsekretär Peter Tauber unternommen. Diese Drohung ist indes nicht viel Anderes als eine symbolische Geste, noch dazu eher eine der Gelegenheit denn der Stärke. Gegen Demokratiefeinde müssen andere Konzepte her. Continue reading >>09 January 2018