Hate speech is a big danger to society and the law should deal with it firmly

Hate speech is defined as any expression that maligns, threatens, or insults individuals or groups based on race, colour, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits.

The law recognises that hate speech can contribute to a broader pattern of harassment and violence.

Hate speech is not protected under clauses on freedom of speech in constitutions of the civilised world and is prohibited and criminalised in many jurisdictions.

It is loosely an exception to freedom of speech in the sense that freedom of speech is the right to say what one wills through any form of communication and media, with the limitation that one must not, in the exercise of this freedom, cause another harm in character or reputation by lying or using misleading words.

Freedom of speech is considered a basic human right and includes freedom of thought, expression, and free press. However, freedom of speech can sometimes transform into hate speech and that is where a line is drawn.

Freedom of speech includes expression both by use of words or symbolic actions. It includes the right to criticise the government and public officials for public and State actions that one disagrees with.

In fact, it includes the right to offend. Everyone has a right to think whatever they will and to form views, opinions, and interpretations of facts and express them.

One even has the right to misrepresent facts as long as this does not threaten, insult, intimidate, or defame others.

The Internet and the advent of social media have contributed to the expansion of the scope of freedom of speech and spawned a proliferation of hate speech as many citizens of the world now have a forum on which to express their views publicly without close scrutiny from the authorities.

Indeed, with the widespread use of social media, many people use smoke screens, false identities, aliases, and pseudonyms to conceal their true identities. It does not help that enforcement of prohibition of hate speech has been weak and spotty.

VIOLENT ACTS

Many people are not mindful of the danger the pattern of unbridled expansion of freedom of speech without social and legal safeguards portends for social order in the long run. Violent acts of hatred are generally preceded by hate speech.

The Holocaust, for instance, was preceded by hate speech and hatred of a people, as were the Rwandan genocide and the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina. This was also the case in Kenya in the post-election violence.

More recently, the attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine in France was about expression of hatred in the guise of freedom of speech.

Although the harmful effects of hate speech may not be immediately apparent, they are cumulative and can influence and indoctrinate the gullible.

Enduring hatred over many years will take a toll on most people. It can limit their opportunities, push them into poverty, isolate them socially, lead to depression or dysfunction, increase the risk of conflict, and endanger their physical health or safety.

So, when those who seem to have an unhealthy obsession with hateful expressions continually post on their social media platforms words that malign others, they are no different from radicals who spread hatred through violence.

Unfortunately, such people have got away with it so many times that they have translated their freedom of speech into hate speech.

The purveyors of hatred must learn to exercise self- discipline, simple decency, and restraint or the law should come down hard on them.

This is because hate speech is personal and a sign of lack of tolerance to diversity. Perhaps it is the result of poor upbringing. The answer to confronting hate speech lies in individual responsibility and behaviour — everyone must share the responsibility of making our society orderly whether by restraint, genuine will and desire, or polished lying.

Society can exist only on the basis that there is some amount of polished lying and that no one says exactly what he thinks, as this would be opening the door to discord and even violence.

No one has the right to go around insulting, threatening, and maligning others. If they cannot restraint their behaviour, the law should force them to do so.

Ms Njogu is an attorney and counsellor at law in Burtonsville, Maryland, USA. ([email protected])