‘Ruling party on Justice Committee vote for worst options for Hate Speech Bill’

By Philip Rosenthal — ChristianView Network

On Tuesday morning the ruling party voted for each of the seven worst possible options for the Hate Speech and Hate Crimes Bill- which threatens to shut down controversial free speech like mainland China did to Hong Kong.

• “harm” is defined broadly to include not just physical but “social, economic and psychological” harm. This means if you advocate a viewpoint others claim is “socially harmful” or call for a
  boycott then you can go to jail. With this vague wording it would depend on the opinion of the judge, which we have seen, for example, in the flag case and Qwelane, is arbitrary.

• They rejected opposition party proposals to strengthen the religious, scientific and media exemptions clause, leaving it so weak to be actually just smoke and mirrors. The exemption clause only protects against the actual harm of the words spoken, not any incitement of others to for example “social harm”. So for example, if a church minister motivated his congregation against “same-sex marriage”, the LGBT lobby could accuse him of inciting “social harm”.

• The maximum penalty for “hate speech” is up to eight years in jail — more than the penalty for house breaking and entry.

• A very broad list of grounds can be used for allegations of “hate speech” rather than the four grounds of unprotected speech in the Bill of Rights.
  

At the previous meeting, the Department of Justice had been asked to define ‘social harm’. They came back with a vague statement, that was not discussed at todays. The EFF expressed concern they failed to explain this. To push the bill through, three members of the ruling party were called in to participate who had missed most of the previous discussion meetings. They thus had unlikely failed to apply their minds to what they were voting on. In all instances they voted with the Department of Justice, except for the penalty which they wanted even harsher than the department had proposed.

In interpreting the Bill, the Deputy Minister of Justice has been ambiguous about his intent. He did indicate intent to criminalise speech like that of Jon Qwelane, and that religious exemption would protect what a church minister said about homosexuality in church not in a pub.

During the deliberations, the DA, ACDP, VF+ and Al-Jamah expressed strong views against the bill in principle, and in favour of a list of options that would have reduced the risk of innocent people going to jail and the chilling effect of hate speech. The EFF supported the bill in principle, but was concerned that someone might accuse them of racist hate speech for opposing apartheid and colonial legacies. They however did not as yet have a specific proposal on how to fix the bill to stop this.

We argue the solution is to scrap the bill, but if this is not agreed, to have a narrow definition of hate speech, with a broad set of exemptions to protect religious, academic and media freedom.

On the positive side, the ruling party did previously agree to remove the vague concept of ‘cultural harm’, when the Department of Justice could not explain what it meant. They also shortened the list of grounds. They also agreed that any regulations must be submitted to parliament 60 days before coming into effect. The offence of hate speech was also edited to change the wording from an “or” to an “and” in line with the Qwelane judgment.

The bill is due to go to the National Assembly for a vote, after which it will go to the National Council of
Provinces, then to the President. A Constitutional Court challenge is likely to follow. The bill will be opposed everystep of the way. A group of Christian leaders have committed to continue to speak out, even if it means going to jail.

LISTEN below to Kingfisher FM interview with Philip Rosenthal of ChristianView Network:

Subscribe to Newsletter

Please help us to keep on publishing news that brings Hope in Jesus:

>> Donate  >> Become a Super Subscriber

VISIT OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL: https://www.youtube.com/gatewaynews100

COMMENTING GUIDELINES
You are welcome to engage with our articles by making comments [in the Comments area below] that add value to a topic or to engage in thoughtful, constructive discussion with fellow readers. Comments that contain vulgar language will be removed. Hostile, demeaning, disrespectful, propagandistic and off-topic comments may also be moved. This is a Christian website and if you wish to vent against Christian beliefs you have probably come to the wrong place and your comments may be removed. Ongoing debates and repetitiveness will not be tolerated. You will also disqualify yourself from commenting if you engage in trolling.