Matter of context? On legal and political aspects of understanding totalitarian symbols

Péter Smuck

doi:10.18002/rjule.i10.7439

Authors

Péter Smuck Széchenyi István University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18002/rjule.i10.7439

Keywords:

Freedom of expression, Symbolic speach, Totalitarian symbols, Swastika, Criminal code, ECTHR

Abstract

The ban of symbols of totalitarian regimes is generally accepted in Europe although constituting a remarkable limitation on the freedom of expression. The legitimate reason for this is the historical situation in which the victims of totalitarian regimes still live with us, and the relatively young democracies want to prevent the return of toxic ideas and dictatorships. The peculiarity of symbolic speech is that the symbols used can have multiple meanings, so there may be a need to punish the use of these symbols only in case of promoting totalitarian systems and ideologies. This paper aims to analyse Central European (and the turns in Hungarian) legal regulation and cases arising from the prohibition; pointing out how consistently the courts take into account the context of the use of symbols and the historical background of symbols.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

BITIUKOVA, Natalija: Hate Speech in Lithuania. (2013) http://hrmi.lt/wp-content/uploads/2016/08Neapykantos_kurstymas_EN.pdf

BYCHAWSKA-SINIARSKA, Dominika: Protecting the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. A handbook for legal practitioners. Council of Europe. (2017) Available: https://rm.coe.int/handbook-freedom-of-expressioneng/1680732814

COLE, Brendan: “True Meaning Behind Russian 'Z' Symbol Finally Revealed”. Newsweek, 07.03.2022. Available: https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-z-vremya-symbolmay-day-victory-1698904

dgs/SPIEGEL “The Truth about 88. New Book Reveals Secret Meaning of Neo-Nazi Codes”. Spiegel Online. (2011) Available: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/thetruth-about-88-new-book-reveals-secret-meaning-of-neo-nazi-codes-a-770820.html

BELOVICS, E. - MOLNÁR, G. – SINKU, P.: Büntetőjog 2. Különös rész: A 2012. évi C.törvény alapján (Criminal Law 2: Special Provisions based on Act C of 2012). HVGORAC, Budapest, 2012.

HAVAS, F. (1997). “Nyelviség” (Linguistics) In: Pannon Enciklopédia. https://www.arcanum.com/en/online-kiadvanyok/pannon-pannon-enciklopedia-1/magyar-nyelv-es-irodalom-31D6/a-nyelv-alapjai-3249/a-nyelviseg-havas-ferenc-324B/

KOLTAY, András: “A vajnai-ügy Az Emberi Jogok Európai Bíróságának ítélete a vörös csillag viselésének büntethetőségéről. (The Vajnai case The European Court of Human Rights and the criminality of the red star)” JeMa 2010/1.

McGOLDRICK, James M. Jr.: “Symbolic Speech: A Message from Mind to Mind”. Oklahoma Law Review 2008/1. Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol61/iss1/1

RĂILEANU, R. et al. Annual Report On Hate Speech in Romania 2015–2016. Netrangers -ActiveWatch, Bucharest, 2017. Available at: https://fra.europa.eu/en/databases/antimuslim-hatred/node/6387

STEGBAUER, Andreas: “The Ban of Right-Wing Extremist Symbols According to Section 86a of the German Criminal Code”. German Law Journal, 2007 8(2), pp. 173-184.

SVILIČIĆ, Niksa – MALDINI, Pero: “Visual Persuasion and Politics: Ideology and Symbols of the Totalitarian Regimes’ - Case Study: Hammer and Sickle”. Collegium Antropologicum 2013/2.

TEITEL, Ruti G.: Transitional Justice. New York, Oxford University Press, 2000.

TÖRÖK, Bernát: A szólásszabadság magyar doktrínája az amerikai jogirodalom tükrében (Hungarian doctrine of freedom of expression in the light of American legal literature). Doctoral dissertation, SZTE ÁJK, 2018.

YUDINA, Natalia: Countering or Imitation: The state against the promotion of hate and the political activity of nationalists in Russia in 2017. (2018) Available at: https://www.sovacenter.ru/en/xenophobia/reports-analyses/2018/03/d39029/#_ftnref27