RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS !
There is no doubt that freedom of expression is a fundamental right in any democratic and pluralistic society. On the other hand, the right of all citizens to be treated with equality, dignity and respect, and to be protected from hate crimes is also an equally important fundamental right. Finding the appropriate balance between th
There is no doubt that freedom of expression is a fundamental right in any democratic and pluralistic society. On the other hand, the right of all citizens to be treated with equality, dignity and respect, and to be protected from hate crimes is also an equally important fundamental right. Finding the appropriate balance between th
ese rights is a challenge for every democratic society.
In that sense, freedom of expression is not a license to hate. In other words, freedom of expression does not mean the right to vilify. Furthermore, freedom of expression is also not sacrosanct. It is an established norm that no right is absolute. The modern concept of rights is that different rights and freedoms should mutually reinforce each other to build a strong and durable human rights system. There is no hierarchy of rights, with some rights of more importance than others. Rights work together towards a common purpose.
International conventions protecting human rights :-
In fact, the 1993 UN Vienna Declaration states that “all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. The international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis.” On the other hand, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms that the exercise of any right must be done in a manner consistent with the protection of other rights.
I wish to recall further that while international human rights instruments carefully protect freedom of expression, they also provide limits on extreme forms of expression. Indeed, as we all know, Article 19, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities and that it may therefore be subject to certain restrictions. (These restrictions are enumerated as “respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order or of public health or morals.” I believe these restrictions are self-explanatory.) Finally, Article 20 of the covenant makes it mandatory for all states to enact legal provisions to protect citizens from incitement to hatred and discrimination.
On the other hand, Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) specifically requires states to take active measures to combat racial hatred and discrimination. In summary, we can assert that the international norms (as well as most national legislation) place legal limits on hate speech and discrimination. What is needed is effective and general implementation of these measures.
In that sense, freedom of expression is not a license to hate. In other words, freedom of expression does not mean the right to vilify. Furthermore, freedom of expression is also not sacrosanct. It is an established norm that no right is absolute. The modern concept of rights is that different rights and freedoms should mutually reinforce each other to build a strong and durable human rights system. There is no hierarchy of rights, with some rights of more importance than others. Rights work together towards a common purpose.
International conventions protecting human rights :-
In fact, the 1993 UN Vienna Declaration states that “all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. The international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis.” On the other hand, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms that the exercise of any right must be done in a manner consistent with the protection of other rights.
I wish to recall further that while international human rights instruments carefully protect freedom of expression, they also provide limits on extreme forms of expression. Indeed, as we all know, Article 19, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities and that it may therefore be subject to certain restrictions. (These restrictions are enumerated as “respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order or of public health or morals.” I believe these restrictions are self-explanatory.) Finally, Article 20 of the covenant makes it mandatory for all states to enact legal provisions to protect citizens from incitement to hatred and discrimination.
On the other hand, Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) specifically requires states to take active measures to combat racial hatred and discrimination. In summary, we can assert that the international norms (as well as most national legislation) place legal limits on hate speech and discrimination. What is needed is effective and general implementation of these measures.
No comments:
Post a Comment