U.N. "expert" wants Japan to ban "hate" speech

[Viking11]

U.N. rapporteur urges Japan to consider law banning hate speech | The Japan Times

Japan should enact a law banning hate speech to protect the nation’s ethnic minorities, according to a United Nations expert who said such a change would not impact freedom of speech.

“The international law makes it quite clear that in certain circumstances (hate speech) must be prohibited,” Rita Izsak, a U.N. special rapporteur on minority issues, said at a symposium held in Tokyo late last month.

Izsak claimed restricting hate speech with penal sanctions can be justified as long as it is legitimate and such curbs are necessary and proportionate to protect the self-esteem of targeted groups.

“If hate incidents are not tackled quickly and effectively, targeted groups may experience permanent damage to their self-esteem and sense of belonging within their societies,” she warned. “If you look at genocide . . . the first stop in this line is always hate speech.”

 

[Redress]

U.N. rapporteur urges Japan to consider law banning hate speech | The Japan Times

Japan should enact a law banning hate speech to protect the nation’s ethnic minorities, according to a United Nations expert who said such a change would not impact freedom of speech.

“The international law makes it quite clear that in certain circumstances (hate speech) must be prohibited,” Rita Izsak, a U.N. special rapporteur on minority issues, said at a symposium held in Tokyo late last month.

Izsak claimed restricting hate speech with penal sanctions can be justified as long as it is legitimate and such curbs are necessary and proportionate to protect the self-esteem of targeted groups.

“If hate incidents are not tackled quickly and effectively, targeted groups may experience permanent damage to their self-esteem and sense of belonging within their societies,” she warned. “If you look at genocide . . . the first stop in this line is always hate speech.”

Did you know this is not even current events? Hint: the date is in the URL...

 

[Henrin]

Did you know this is not even current events? Hint: the date is in the URL...

It should however be noted that Japan never listened to them on the issue.

 

[Redress]

It should however be noted that Japan never listened to them on the issue.

Not exactly true. Since the UN report from I think 2014, they have considered 2 bills on the topic(neither passed, but the later may still be under consideration). Now, neither bill is an outright ban on hate speech, but it is an attempt to curb inciting speech. Japan has had some problems recently with nasty protests against Korean immigrants(in a region of Tokyo and Osaka), and some at least would like to be able to crack down on the people inciting the violence. A more broad on hate speech however would violate the Japanese constitution.

 

[joG]

Not exactly true. Since the UN report from I think 2014, they have considered 2 bills on the topic(neither passed, but the later may still be under consideration). Now, neither bill is an outright ban on hate speech, but it is an attempt to curb inciting speech. Japan has had some problems recently with nasty protests against Korean immigrants(in a region of Tokyo and Osaka), and some at least would like to be able to crack down on the people inciting the violence. A more broad on hate speech however would violate the Japanese constitution.

Banning hateful speech or even most incitement is a very slippery slope and easily worse for society than allowing it and encouraging debate.

 

[Redress]

Banning hateful speech or even most incitement is a very slippery slope and easily worse for society than allowing it and encouraging debate.

I agree, and so does Japan. What they are looking at is inciting speech, which is somewhat more problematic, though there are still problems with banning it.

 

[TheParser]

1. I know that this is a very old thread.

2. But since it has not been closed, I have a contribution.

3. I have just returned from reading the Japan Times online.


a. A prominent magazine is in hot water because it recently said some unkind things about people who live in a nearby peninsula nation.


b. It has apologized.


c. Some prominent Japanese writers have announced that they will no longer contribute articles to that magazine.

 

[snakestretcher]

U.N. rapporteur urges Japan to consider law banning hate speech | The Japan Times

Japan should enact a law banning hate speech to protect the nation’s ethnic minorities, according to a United Nations expert who said such a change would not impact freedom of speech.

“The international law makes it quite clear that in certain circumstances (hate speech) must be prohibited,” Rita Izsak, a U.N. special rapporteur on minority issues, said at a symposium held in Tokyo late last month.

Izsak claimed restricting hate speech with penal sanctions can be justified as long as it is legitimate and such curbs are necessary and proportionate to protect the self-esteem of targeted groups.

“If hate incidents are not tackled quickly and effectively, targeted groups may experience permanent damage to their self-esteem and sense of belonging within their societies,” she warned. “If you look at genocide . . . the first stop in this line is always hate speech.”

Good. We've seen the results of hate speech inciting and triggering horrible violence. Ask your local friendly dictator how it works.

 

[snakestretcher]

Banning hateful speech or even most incitement is a very slippery slope and easily worse for society than allowing it and encouraging debate.

"Slippery slope" to what; decency, respectfulness and politeness? How alarming. The last thing morons who indulge in hate speech want to do is debate. I suggest most are incapable of stringing a coherent sentence together, although "Jews will not replace us!" was an outstanding joint mental effort. Must've taken them months of nosebleed-inducing strain to come up with that.