Hate speech Bill: “It’s unconstitutional” – Centre for Constitutional Rights says

A week after written submissions on the Prevention and Combatting of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill were closed, the Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR) became the latest organisation to speak out against the proposed set of laws.

What does the hate speech Bill propose?

The Bill, in summary, seeks to offer protection to victims of hate crimes and defamatory speech.

Read – Here’s what you need to know about South Africa’s Hate Speech Bill

With regards to the latter, the Bill proposes a statutory criminal offence to those who use foul words to discriminate against others based on their race, gender, sexuality, religion, ethnicity or age.

The difference between hate speech Bill and crimen injuria

In essence, South Africa already has a set of laws in place to protects victims of discrimination.

Take, for instance, the case of the State vs Vicki Momberg. She was convicted of crimen injuria and is currently in court appealing her three-year jail sentence that was handed down on her in 2018.

This is after she was caught on camera hurling out the k-word to police officers more than 40 times.

Read – Vicki Momberg on the verge of being dropped by her attorney

Under this law, according to the South African Pagan Rights Alliance, criminal charges can be laid on those who are found “verbally insulting or abusing, stalking, or threatening to harm someone, or making known, a person’s privileged or private information without their prior consent”.

Organisations that have spoke out against hate speech Bill

This proposed hate speech Bill also covers the above-mentioned offences. The area of contention in the Bill that has seen organisations such as the FW De Klerk Foundation (FWDKF), as well as the Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF), calling for its revision has to do with general defamatory slurs and the aspect of age.

Read – Angelo Agrizzi set to face hate speech charges after using the “K-word”

AfriForum and the FW de Klerk Foundation

A jail term for calling some an “old fart” is ridiculous, the lobby group, AfriForum, said.

“The grounds on which hate speech can be committed, according to the bill, are too far-reaching and include age, for example. The consequence is that mocking someone based on their age (such as calling someone an “old fart”) could amount to a criminal offence punishable by three years in jail.
“Our position is that speech can only be hate speech if it contains a direct call for action to be taken against a person or group of persons, based on the four grounds listed in the Constitution – race, ethnicity, gender or religion,” the lobby group added.

The FWDKF noted that while it may be important to distinguish between hate and ordinary crimes, it is highly erroneous to institute criminal charges on the basis of slurs and age-related discrimination.

Read – Jail time for calling someone an “old fart”? AfriForum tackle new hate speech bill

Helen Suzman Foundation and the Centre for Constitutional Rights

Moreover, the HSF warned that there needs to be a balance between protecting victims of hate crimes and allowing for the freedom of expression.

“Freedom of expression is a cornerstone right of our constitutional democracy. It is important to recognise the distinction between prohibited grounds and unprotected grounds of expression.” the organisation noted in its submission.

Christine Botha from the CCR echoed these sentiments, challenging Parliament’s portfolio committee on justice and correctional services to protect the right to freedom of expression.

Read – More hate speech charges for Julius Malema: Sanef blast Juju for “threats”

“Even though it is a much-imporved version of the 2016 bill, the current understanding of hate speech does not relate to hate speech as according to our Constitution,” she said.

After organisations and civil society made their submissions on the Bill, there is much to ponder for the portfolio committee, which is expected to revise the set of laws.