In the article "An attempt of different interpretation of Article 297 CC-1", the author suggests, that the current interpretation of this legal provision in practice is obsolete and inappropriate for the modern life circumstances. In summarizing the case-law of the ECtHR, the author then presents the arguments for a modern, wider interpretation of this offense from the theoretical and practical viewpoint, so that this legal provision could be understood in an alternative way, by assessing the potential (rather than the concrete) threat to secured legal goods, and by allowing persons against whom the offense is committed, the recognized position of the victims.
F.30 Professional assessment of the situationCOBISS.SI-ID: 16326993
In the introduction, article is describing constitutional starting points, relevant for distinction between misdemeanors and felony. Then author grammatically and teleologically compares the norm of criminal offense from Article 297 of the Criminal Code of Republic of Slovenia (KZ-1) with the provisions of the Protection against Discrimination Act (ZVarD), the Mass Media Act (Zmed), and the Protection of Public Order Act (ZJRM-1). He is noting that the legal elements of the felony from Article 297 of KZ-1 don’t overlap with provisions of ZVarD and Zmed, which does not apply to the provisions of ZJRM-1. The latter are sanctioning the perpetrator’s behavior or conduct directed against general safety of public order and peace. But predicted form of committing an offense from the provisions of ZJRM-1 can also be those which interfere with the physical (and mental) integrity of another person. Both ways it coincides with the regulation of felony in Article 297 of KZ-1. Norms are also overlapping in terms of form of culpability of the perpetrator’s liability, his motivation to act, the place of execution of an act and the form of committing it. Author concludes that some misdemeanor norms in their meaning completely overlap with legal elements of felony and that there is no dividing line between them. He also notes that some misdemeanor acts, due to the occurrence of prohibited consequences, are significantly more dangerous for society than those which could only endanger public order and peace within the incrimination from KZ-1, but is, nevertheless, milder criminal sanction envisaged for them.
F.30 Professional assessment of the situationCOBISS.SI-ID: 16735057
Because prepaid services are on the rise, the author in the article "Is the preservation of traffic data of the users of prepaid services legal?" disputes about whether there is a satisfactory legal basis in Slovenia for storing traffic data of users of those services. The author concludes that the storage of traffic data of users of prepaid services is generally not allowed due to inadequate legal regulation, which prevents the authorities from investigating and prosecuting perpetrators of criminal acts of public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance under Article 297 of the CC-1.
F.30 Professional assessment of the situationCOBISS.SI-ID: 16238929
The handbook is introducing the procedures for reporting hate speech on social networks. Initially, the guidelines of social networks for dealing with hate speech are summarized and general advices for reporting content are given. Options for users of social networks to take action are presented more detailed on the examples of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Additionally, other methods of responding available to users to combat hate speech are described. Advices for editorial moderation of users’ contributions on online forums and groups on social networks and advices for counter-narrating against hate speech are briefly presented.
F.17 Transfer of existing technologies, know-how, methods and procedures into practiceCOBISS.SI-ID: 295352832
Andrej Motl and Neža Kogovšek Šalamun, PhD, participated at the event on the subject of freedom of speech and hate speech, hosted by the Slovenian president Borut Pahor at the Presidential palace in Ljubljana on December 13th 2018. With the intention of exchanging expert opinions regarding current regulation of this field and understanding appropriate distinction between freedom of speech and hate speech, the president invited 16 experts from various fields to the event. Andrej Motl from University of Ljubljana - Faculty of Social Sciences mainly focused on challenges related to the legal position that was adopted by The Office of the State Prosecutor General in 2013. He noted that due to very strict criteria for criminal prosecution, many very problematic cases of hate speech are not being addressed. And as one of the problems, he also pointed out that the directions of the prosecutor's office somewhat extend to the social understanding of hate speech. In her contribution, Neža Kogovšek Šalamun, PhD, focused on the issue of absence of criminal prosecution in the worst forms of public incitement of hate speech, violence or intolerance, on the problem of state prosecution playing the role of a ''goalkeeper'' and on the absence of legal remedy in the case of dismissed charges. She noted that all this results in complete absence of judiciary's answers to the problem.
F.18 Transfer of new know-how to direct users (seminars, fora, conferences)