The aim of the paper is to compare on the one hand the case law of the European Court of Human Rights which allows the states to exercise relatively wide scope of powers in prosecuting hate speech, and on the other hand the Slovenian legal regulation and in particular its implementation which only rarely considers hateful comments as problematic. The paper analyses this problem and exposes the reasons for such state of affairs. These are associated with indulgent attitude (of the state prosecution in particular) towards the hate speech problem, and as a possible reason for this it identifies the historical role of the state prosecution in prosecuting the so-called verbal delict from the times of former Yugoslavia.
F.23 Development of new system-wide, normative and programme solutions, and methodsCOBISS.SI-ID: 1206125
The purpose of the round table was to address the types of responses to hate speech. The ways of responding to it are varied - from calling for prosecution and the aggravation of sanctions, to the standpoint that it is better to ignore individual incidents, since public condemnation of individual cases provides more publicity, which has, due to the absence of law enforcement, counterproductive effects. Nevertheless, the lack of any response was perceived as problematic, and various initiatives were created that fill the resulting empty space. The invited speakers and speakers have tried to answer questions such as why there is no prosecution of hate speech and what can be done in his absence by the police, the prosecutor's office, civil society organizations, the research sphere.
F.24 Improvements to existing system-wide, normative and programme solutions, and methodsCOBISS.SI-ID: 1983822
In 2017, the Slovene Internet Governance Forum (SloIGF), which aims to facilitate and promote an inclusive, equal and open debate on Internet-related public policies, hosted a second section titled "Fighting against extremism and hate speech on the Internet". At the discussion, the discussants addressed the limits of freedom of expression and the definition and recognition of hate speech. Questions have been addressed such as, for example, what are the international legal standards in this field, why it is important to address the problem of hate speech and extremism, and how to maintain the openness of the Internet and the freedom of expression on the Internet while at the same time constraining the spread of extremism and hate speech on the Internet.
F.24 Improvements to existing system-wide, normative and programme solutions, and methodsCOBISS.SI-ID: 1217901