By: Sara Bertoncelj / Nova24tv
At her hearing before the competent parliamentary committee, the candidate for the position of Minister of Digital Transformation, Emilija Stojmenova Duh, announced, among other things, that the new government would persecute hate speech online. The competent parliamentary committee supported the proposal of Stojmenova Duh for the position of minister, with nine votes in favour and four votes against. “When Stojmenova starts to persecute hate speech online, do you think she will start with those who hate Janez Janša and threaten him? Because, except on the far left, I somehow cannot find many posts with hate speech,” a user commented on the announcement of the persecution of hate speech on Twitter.
“Hate speech is hate speech, whether it comes from the left or from the right. Insults and mean words hurt, regardless of whether they come from the north, south, east or west. Turning off someone else’s light does not make you shine any brighter,” Emilija Stojmenova Duh, the future Minister of Digital Transformation, said about a year ago. This week, she surprised everyone as she came to the hearing before the competent committee with a large binder, which is a bit unusual for the Minister of Digital Transformation.
Of course, there are different interpretations of hate speech in public – some believe that this term describes just any obscene post, which is at least to some extent also a subjective assessment. “Given that hate speech is not a concept from the Criminal Code, but a broad phrase that covers everything anyone does not like, and because the future minister comes from a party with a proud authoritarian tradition, the fear that they will attack freedom of speech is legitimate,” Dr Žiga Turk commented on Stojmenova Duh’s statement.
Many believe that any restriction on freedom of expression can eventually lead to dictatorship, which includes the restriction of hate speech. The United States of America advocate the “slippery slope” argument, which explains that banning certain forms of speech lays the groundwork for further bans. “In today’s world, it is not clear what the difference is between so-called hate speech and non-hate speech, so such premature accusations are something that is very dangerous for our democracy,” said political analyst and university professor Dr Boštjan M. Turk, who explained that here, we would proceed from the principle that every speech is constructive, except for that which does not concern mattes prescribed by the Constitution. He added that this is an extremely bad prospect for Slovenia. Turk believes that no one wants to step into the shoes of the censor, as such people have been inscribed in Slovenian historical memory as something negative.
Turk reminded everyone of France Prešeren and his attitude towards Jernej Kopitar: “We can see that the former rightly accused the latter of censoring his texts, and so Prešeren’s poem A Toast was also censored.” According to Turk, a person who values themselves will not resort to censorship or encroach on the right of others to freedom of expression. In today’s world, the category of freedom of expression remains the first category, and hate speech is something that is used to restrict the right to freedom of expression. “There is no way this can end well,” Turk warned.
The Bachelor of Slavic studies and French literature also noticed that Stojmenova Duh has insufficient knowledge of Slovenian – that is, the language that is the official language of the Republic of Slovenia and the language in which all communication, including hate speech, happens. However, Stojmenova is not an isolated case, the same can be said with Svetlana Slapšak, who is no stranger to serious factual errors. “The phalanx of these people is a very bad prospect for what we Slovenians need the most – and that is relaxedness, freedom, and the fact that we can decide on our own destiny, not that it is decided by some censor.”
The persecution of hate speech is in no way welcome or justified because hate speech immediately collides with the category of freedom of public speech. The only exceptions are things that are subject to the Criminal Code, such as encroaching on the integrity of an individual, serious threats, incitement to violence, and the like. Such things should, of course, be sanctioned, but one cannot make the principle of persecuting hate speech into their ministerial programme. “Because then they will de facto persecute freedom of speech,” said the Vice-Dean of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts, who knows what it is like to be persecuted for your words – even if they are true. There can be no double standards when it comes to freedom of speech, as it is a universal human right, enshrined in the Constitution. If we replace freedom of speech with hate speech, we end up in a dictatorship – and let’s not forget that Hitler and Stalin did that already.
However, Stojmenova Duh is not the only one who announced censorship. According to the Slovenian Press Agency, Oštro will start checking the facts on Facebook and Instagram in the coming weeks. When Oštro assesses certain content as inaccurate, it will show it lower on the Facebook news channel, which significantly reduces the said content’s distribution. This stops the spread of inaccurate information and reduces the number of people exposed to it, the company claims. The reach of pages and domains that will be repeatedly flagged for sharing fake news will be reduced, and they will be prevented from monetising through ads. “This is nothing but ordinary media censorship. What the regime will not like will be moved into some dark corner of the internet. But if the truth still comes to light, despite the censorship… Then you will go to prison for three months. This is the time of freedom,” commented one reader on the Siol web portal. Of course, it is already clear whose contents Anuška Delić will prosecute or label as false. Yes, this, too, is freedom.
