Europe's monitors of hate

On its way to the USA

[Reprinted from Issues & Views November 19, 2001]

In several European countries laws have been devised so that government officials get to define "hate" and hold the power to designate a person's article or book or website or speech a thing of "hate."

Once the designation is made, these officials then get to prosecute and punish the targeted "hater." In Germany and France there are people currently spending time in prison for having written or spoken words that were deemed "hurtful" to particular groups or "likely to spread hatred."

This hate watch policy is close to being formally institutionalized throughout Europe now that the 43 countries that make up the "Council of Europe" have signed on to a "cybercrime" treaty--i.e., the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention-- which is to be ratified on November 23.

Supposedly, the treaty was conceived to deal with Internet crime such as credit card fraud, virus attacks, stolen patents and trademarks, website hacking, etc. However, the ever-vigilant monitors of hate saw their chance to create a special "cyberhate" Protocol, which they are now trying to tack onto the original treaty. According to a Council of Europe statement, the Protocol would "eliminate racist websites from the internet and define and criminalize hate-speech on computer networks."

And just in case some clever website owner chooses to locate his site in a foreign country whose laws are more conciliatory, the Protocol will deal with him by making such across-borders hosting illegal. This is designed to foil those "haters," so says the Council of Europe statement, who try to "hide behind American laws protecting freedom of speech."

Although the United States has signed the initial treaty as a partner state, American officials are, at least for the moment, opposing the attachment of the special Protocol to the treaty, explaining that the stipulations within it would make it unconstitutional on U.S. soil. This response has angered some French officials, who have protested that the American decision opens up the U.S. as a potential haven for people who might seek "technological asylum."

By the way, the primary stated goal of this Council of Europe is the "protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms," with freedom of speech obviously not being among them.

Copyright © 2008 Issues & Views