The Internet, Internet Intermediaries and Hate Speech: Freedom of Expression in Decline?

To elucidate issues at stake, the paper will look at the meaning of hate speech, the online landscape in terms of the prevalence and removal of hate speech and recent legal and policy developments in the sphere of private regulation in Europe, critically weighing up the pros and cons of this strategy. [...] In fact, the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression held that ‘the threshold of the types of expression that would fall under the provisions of Article 20 (2) should be high and solid’.8 Both Article 4 and Article 20(2) have a series of reservations imposed by several countries on the grounds of freedom of expression concerns. [...] Illustrative of this, for example, is France’s reservation of Article 4 ICERD and Luxembourg’s reservation of Article 20 ICCPR respectively: In relation to Article 4 (ICERD): With regard to article 4, France wishes to make it clear that it interprets the reference made therein to the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention. [...] 53 The Court also noted that the sanction imposed by the national court was ‘moderate’.54 In reaching the above position, the Court acknowledged the significance of the Internet which facilitates the dissemination of information but also underlined that it is ‘mindful of the risk of harm posed by content and communications on the Internet’.55 In sum, the ECtHR found that Delfi, a large professiona. [...] In relation to criminal penalties, the position of the United Nation’s Special Rapporteur on the Protection and Promotion of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression is reiterated, namely, that ‘only serious and extreme instances of incitement to hatred […] should be criminalized’.63 Also, the Rabat Plan of Action underlines that ‘criminal sanctions related to unlawful forms of expression sh.