기억과 법:홀로코스트 부정
Regulating History Denial
0
조회
0
다운로드
24
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article examines the contemporary juridico-philosophical theories and international, regional or national norms regarding Holocaust denial or hate speech. There are outstanding differences between common law tradition and European continental legal tradition. Most civil libertarians or anarcho-pacifists resolutely support the freedom of speech, citing Millian harm principle or Holmesian argument of the free market of ideas. In contrast, a lot of legal feminists and critical race/ethnical theorists tend to take real inequality in freedom of speech seriously, and try to refute the free market of ideas, and stress the negative impacts of hate speech. Free speech libertarianism has been accepted as one of the cultural symbols for United States of America. Meanwhile, there is a wider consensus at the international level that hate speech or Holocaust denial should be prohibited by law. ICCPR, ICERD, American Convention on Human Rights and EU protocol on the Cybercrime provide for anti-negationist or anti-hate clause. European countries have punished the genocide deniers with the view of purging the national-socialistic past since the Second World War. Generally speaking, decriminalization or criminalization of Holocaust denial depends decisively on the direct experiences of massive human rights violations. In conclusion, decriminalization thesis is not perfect but acceptable in Korea. Considering the history of free speech in Korea, a likely anti-negationist law will oppress paradoxically the creative minorities or left intellectuals just as the National Security Act has done. In practice, anti-defamation law has been extended automatically to history deniers in the extremely fame-seeking korean society. But only the alert citizens, not the governmental censorship can guard and activate the public sphere for free communication. The only solution to a noxious opinion is a good opinion, freely expressed.
Abstract
This article examines the contemporary juridico-philosophical theories and international, regional or national norms regarding Holocaust denial or hate speech. There are outstanding differences between common law tradition and European continental legal tradition. Most civil libertarians or anarcho-pacifists resolutely support the freedom of speech, citing Millian harm principle or Holmesian argument of the free market of ideas. In contrast, a lot of legal feminists and critical race/ethnical theorists tend to take real inequality in freedom of speech seriously, and try to refute the free market of ideas, and stress the negative impacts of hate speech. Free speech libertarianism has been accepted as one of the cultural symbols for United States of America. Meanwhile, there is a wider consensus at the international level that hate speech or Holocaust denial should be prohibited by law. ICCPR, ICERD, American Convention on Human Rights and EU protocol on the Cybercrime provide for anti-negationist or anti-hate clause. European countries have punished the genocide deniers with the view of purging the national-socialistic past since the Second World War. Generally speaking, decriminalization or criminalization of Holocaust denial depends decisively on the direct experiences of massive human rights violations. In conclusion, decriminalization thesis is not perfect but acceptable in Korea. Considering the history of free speech in Korea, a likely anti-negationist law will oppress paradoxically the creative minorities or left intellectuals just as the National Security Act has done. In practice, anti-defamation law has been extended automatically to history deniers in the extremely fame-seeking korean society. But only the alert citizens, not the governmental censorship can guard and activate the public sphere for free communication. The only solution to a noxious opinion is a good opinion, freely expressed.
참고문헌 (49)
- Neil Kritz, "Transitional Justice Vol. 1-3" (1995), Foundation of Peace Press
- Report of the Secretary-General on the rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, , the Security Council, 616~ (2004)
- "인권침해자의 불처벌에 대한 투쟁을 통해 인권을 보호하고 신장하기 위한 일련의 원칙", 민주법학, 11, pp.164~ (1996)
- Henry J. Steiner, "International Human Rights In Context, 3.ed", pp.639~ (2008), Oxford U.P
- "."[URL]
- Daniel Goldhagen, "Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust" (1996), New York: Alfred A. Knopf
- Norman G. Finkelstein, "The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering" (2000), Verso
- "Holocaust Denial in Australia"[URL]
- Michel Rosenfeld, "Hate Speech In Constitutional Jurisprudence: A Comparative Analysis", Cardozo L. Rev, 24, pp.1524~ (2003)
- Claudia E. Haupt, "Regulating Hate Speech", B.U. Int’l L.J, 23, pp.314~ (2006)
- Tarlach McGonagle, "Combating racially motivated crime and hate crimes through legislation, Roundtable Discussion, organised by Irish Human Rights Commission & Amnesty Internation" (2005), Dublin Castle
- Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, "Rechtsextremistischer Revisionismus", ~ (2001)
- Mariano Mello, "HAGEN V. AUSTRALIA; A SIGN OF THE EMERGING NOTION OF HATE SPEECH IN CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW", Loy. L.A. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev, 28, pp.365~ (2006)
- "Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza & Hassan Ngeze, INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA TRIAL CHAMBER I CASE NO. ICTR-99-52-T"[URL]
- 국가인권위원회(발간), "유엔인권조약감시기구의 일반논평 및 일반권고 2", 시민적 및 정치적 권리위원회, 2006, pp.24~
- 국가인권위원회(발간), "유엔인권약감시기구의 일반논평 및 일반권고 3", 인종차별철폐위원회, 22~ (2006)
- Alexsander Tsesis, "Prohibiting Incitment on the Internet", Va. J.L. & Tech, 7, pp.5~ (2002)
- Gregory S. Copoper, "A Tangled Web We Weave: Enforcing International Speech Restrictions In Online World", U. Pitt. I. Tech. L. & Pol’y, 8, pp.2~ (2007)
- Ronald J. Krotoszynski, "A Comparative Perspective on the First Amendment: Free Speech, Miltant Democracy, And The Primacy of Dignity As A Preferred Constitutional Value In Germany", Tul. L. Rev, 78, pp.1549~ (2004)
- Günter Bertram, "Der Rechtsstaat und seine Volksverhetzungs-Novelle", ~1476 (2005)
- Stefan Huster, "Das Verbot der Auschwitzlüge, die Meinungsfreiheit und das Bundesverfassungsgericht", pp.488~ (1996), NJW
- Robert Kahn, "Cross-burning, Holocaust Denial, and The Development of Hate Speech Law in the United States and Germany", U. Det. Mercy L. Rev, 83, pp.189~ (2006)
- "BVerfGE", ~
- "EuGRZ", ~
- Winfried Brugger, "Verbot oder Schutz von Haßrede?", pp.403~ (2003), AÖR
- Richard J, "Evans, Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial" (2002), Basic Books
- "."[URL]
- Catriona McKinnon, "Toleration", pp.156~ (2006), New York: Routledge
- "Some Elementary Comments on the Rights of Freedom of Expression"[URL]
- "The Price of Free Speech: Campus Hate Speech Codes"[URL]
- Emanuela Fronza, "THE PUNISHMENT OF NEGATIONISM ; THE DIFFICULT DIALOGUE BETWEEN LAW AND MEMORY", Vermont L. Rev, 30, pp.621~ (2006)
- Peter Singer, "David Irving has a right to free speech, too" (2006), Jerusalem Post
- Kathleen E. Mahoney, "Hate Speech: Affirmation or Contradiction of Freedom of Expression", U. Ill. L. Rev, pp.789~808 (1996)
- Richard Delgado, "Are Hate-Speech Rules constitutional Heresy? A Reply to Steven G", U. Pa. L. Rev, 146, pp.865~878 (1998)
- Mari J. Matsuda, "Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim’s Story", Mich. L. Rev, 87, pp.2320~2381 (1989)
- William A. Schabas, "Hate Speech in Rwanda: The Road to Genocide", McGill L.J, 46, pp.141~171 (2000)
- William A. Schabas, "Hate Speech in Rwanda: The Road to Genocide", McGill L.J, 46, pp.141~171 (2000)
- Kevin Boyle, "Hate Speech-The United States Versus the Rest of the World?”", Me. L. Rev, 53, pp.487~502 (2001)
- Catharine MacKinnon, "Feminism Unmodified", pp.~206 (1987), Harvard U.P.
- Ronald Dworkin, "Freedom’s Law", pp.219~ (1996), Harvard U. P.
- Alexander Bickel, "Domesticated Civil Disobedience: The First Amendment, from Sullivan to the Pentagon Papers", THE MORALITY OF CONSENT, 55, pp.72~73
- Peter R. Teachout, "Making Holocaust Denial A Crime: Reflection on European Anti-negationist Laws From The Perspective of U.S. Constitutional Experience", Vermont L. Rev, 30, pp.669~ (2006)
- Kenneth Lasson, "Holocaust Denial and The First Amendment: The Quest For Truth In a Free Society", Geo. Mason L. Rev, 6, pp.70~ (1997)
- Gordon Allport, "The Nature of Prejudice", pp.14~ (1954), Addison-Wesley
- Catharine A. MacKinnon, "Toward A Feminist Theory of The State", pp.206~ (1989), Harvard U.P
- Klaus Günther, "The Denial of Holocaust: Employing Criminal Law to Combat Anti-Semitism in Germany", Tel Aviv University Studies in Law, 15, pp.51~ (2000)
- Winfried Brugger, "Ban on or Protection of the Hate Speech? Some Observation Based on German and American Law", Tul. Eur. & Civ. L.F, 17, pp.17~ (2002)
- "Resolution 1577(2007) Towards Decriminalization of Defamation"[URL]