Countering Extremism Vs. Freedom of Online Expression: the Case of Kazakhstan CAP Fellows Paper 201, January 2018

Countering Extremism vs. Freedom of Online Expression: The Case of Kazakhstan CAP Fellows Paper 201, January 2018

Anna Gussarova is director and co-founder of the the result of obvious opposition Central Asia Institute for Strategic Studies (www.caiss. activity by activists, who turned out to protest certain political expert). She previously served as a senior research fellow decisions, in other cases, at the Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies under people broke the extremism law the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, covering unknowingly. transnational and cyber security, violent extremism Though the state puts great and deradicalization issues. She graduated with a major effort into countering religious in American Studies and holds a master’s degree in extremism, the terminology Central Asian Security Studies. She is an alumna of the of the extremism law is vague and confusing. Are extremism European George C. Marshall Center for Security Studies and incitement of hatred (Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany), the Asia Pacific synonymous? Can violations Center for Security Studies (Honolulu, USA), and the of territorial integrity and Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) Institute sovereignty be considered extremism, or are these crimes (Moscow, Russia). Among other things, she has taught connected to separatism? What courses on “Multilateral Diplomacy,” “International indicators for extremism or Terrorism” and “Cyber Technologies and Cyber Security” incitement of hatred should be incorporated into the law? Not at the German-Kazakh University in Almaty since 2012. only should the terminology of The series of terrorist attacks terrorism have led to a significant the law be improved, but public that took place in 2011, 2012 level of securitization within the information campaigns regarding and 2016 in Atyrau, Aktobe and country, in particular challenging it are needed to help citizens Almaty reveal Kazakhstan’s need freedom of online expression. better understand what the law to rethink its internal security prohibits and permits. Otherwise, policies. Strengthening the Since 2014, over 325 Kazakhstani it is likely that simple ignorance of legitimate use of force to ensure citizens have been accused of the content of the law will result domestic security is necessary, inciting national, racial, religious, in a growing number of people yet the state’s current approach and social hatred, receiving being arrested unnecessarily on also demonstrates a major shift prison sentences of between 2 and charges of inciting national or in the balance between citizens’ 7 years. Article 1 of the National religious hatred in the years to civil liberties and security, to Law on Countering Extremism come. the detriment of the former. of 2005 interprets incitement of Indeed, the Kazakh government’s hatred as extremism. Whereas The paper discusses the need efforts to counter extremism and in some cases the charges were to develop public information

CAP Fellows Paper 201 1 campaigns that would educate the government to control that Law on Countering Kazakhstani citizens about expression.1 Leaving human Extremism extremism-related laws and rights rhetoric and debates aside, practices. I start by analyzing the it is necessary to examine existing Article 1 of the Law on Countering legal framework and discussing legislation and terminology in Extremism describes three types the vague terminology employed. order to get a sense of what people of extremism: political, national Next, taking real court cases as can be prosecuted for. and religious. (See Table 1.) examples, I show how the law is Though the document provides applied. Finally, I highlight some The Constitution of Kazakhstan definitions, these types remain popular perceptions of extremism guarantees freedom of vague. It is unclear whether in order to demonstrate ordinary expression,2 but this right is the term “incitement” refers people’s ignorance that they qualified by several laws and de to words, actions, or both; the might be transgressing the law. facto restricted. Two documents— meaning of the word itself is On the basis of these findings, I the Law on Countering Extremism obscure. Nevertheless, the law argue that educating people about and the Penal Code—address sends a clear message that calls extremism would increase their the limitations on freedom of for violence will be treated as knowledge on the subject, thereby expression in the name of state extremism even if physical helping bridge the gap between and societal security. The former actions do not necessarily follow. the law and its application. introduces terminology and outlines behaviors that are treated Threats to the country’s territorial Legal Provisions on as acts of extremism, while the integrity and sovereignty are Extremism in Kazakhstan latter addresses prosecution and considered one of the most its justifications. significant challenges to national The rise of social media has security. Yet this and other actions made it easier for individuals included in the broad category to express themselves online— of “political extremism”— and simultaneously harder for Table 1. Types of Extremism

Political Extremism Violent change of the constitutional system; violation of the sovereignty and integrity of the state; undermining the national security and defense capability of the state; forcible seizure of power or forcible retention of power; creation of, leadership of, and participation in illegal paramilitary formations; organization of armed rebellion and participation therein; incitement of social or class hatred. National Extremism Incitement of racial, national, or tribal hatred, including actions related to violence or calls for violence. Religious Extremism Incitement of religious enmity or hatred, including actions related to violence or calls for violence, as well as any religious practices that threaten the safety, life, health, morals, or rights and freedoms of citizens.

Source: Law on Countering Extremism, Kazakhstan (2005)3

CAP Fellows Paper 201 2 including actions against the consequences of the act. almost twice the figure recorded constitution and violent threats in 2015. Of these, 66 were sent to to national security—could also The vagueness of the terminology court,8 whereas the Kazakhstan be considered under many other used in this statement makes International Bureau for Human categories of crime, for instance enforcing Article 174 difficult. Rights and Rule of Law Public separatism. For all three types of In the case of online freedom Fund reported that 10 and 8 extremism, words are sufficient of expression, for instance, it is activists were prosecuted under for an accusation of incitement of difficult to determine an actor’s Article 174 in 2015 and 2014, hatred, making it easier to charge intentions and distinguish actions respectively.9 The figures even an individual with one of these from words. As such, the wording increased over the course of 2017: crimes. of Article 174 ought to be clarified. in January, local courts registered Indeed, Kazakhstani lawyers and 84 cases of incitement of hatred, Penal Code Provisions human rights activists made and 13 people were arrested,10 several attempts to abolish the whereas in September, the The penalty for the crimes law’s latest amendment in 2015, number of criminal cases reached described above is discussed in on the grounds that the wording 208.11 Overall, the Kazakhstani Kazakhstan’s Penal Code, Chapter was too vague, allowing the courts opened 1,039 Article 174 4, “Crimes against Peace and government to use the law on cases in 2017,12 compared to a Security,” Article 174, “Incitement a case-by-case basis to punish combined 131 in the 2008–2012 of Social, National, Racial, Class, opposition activists.5 period.13 or Religious Hatred.” It reads: The Kazakhstani government Starting in 2014, people in “Intentional actions, directed to pays special attention to calls for Kazakhstan were sporadically incitement of social, national, violation of the country’s territorial arrested for posting certain racial, class or religious hatred, integrity and sovereignty. content on social media, insult of the national honor and For instance, Kazakhstani in particular on Facebook, dignity or religious feelings of policymakers introduced VKontakte and Odnoklassniki. citizens, as well as propaganda new norms on separatism to These individuals were of exclusivity, superiority or the Penal Code following the prosecuted for inciting national, inferiority of citizens on the annexation of Crimea in 2014.6 racial, religious, class, and social grounds of their religion, class, In this regard, Kazakhstan is hatred. national, generic, or racial very much emulating Russia: assignment, if these actions are Russian President Vladimir Putin Aktobe resident Sanat Dossov committed publicly or with the increased the prison sentence for was sentenced to 3 years in prison use of mass media or information separatism from 3 to 5 years.7 for posting negative statements and communication networks, about Russian President Vladimir as well as by production or The Rise in the Number of Putin and his political course on distribution of literature or other People Arrested on Charges Facebook.14 Igor Chuprina from information media, promoting of Extremism Sokolovka village in northern social, national, generic, racial, Kazakhstan received a 5-and- class, or religious hatred, shall The number of cases of extremism a-half-year prison sentence for be punished with 2 to 7 years has grown significantly over the insulting ethnic Kazakhs and of restrictions on freedom or past four years, almost reaching calling for Kazakhstan’s accession imprisonment.”4 the number of those prosecuted to Russia on VKontakte.15 An for terrorism and terrorism- Almaty resident, Shukhrat The sentence can even be related activities. In 2016, 151 Kibirov, was accused of posting extended to 20 years, depending cases of incitement of national, Islamic songs on VKontakte.16 on who committed the crime, religious, racial, and social hatred Sergei Khandogin from the their motivation, and the were registered in the country, northern city of Petropavl was

CAP Fellows Paper 201 3 sentenced to 2 years in prison comments of those purportedly used provocative and offensive for “insulting the dignity of inciting hatred and identifying language to call for violence were Kazakhs by promoting Russian intentionality. Dr. Rakhilya not prosecuted. These examples superiority”17on Odnoklassniki. Krymsakova, one of the expert show that Kazakhstan’s approach authors of Kazakhstan’s 2006 to dealing with this controversial Trends in the Law and Its methodology on identifying issue results in a selective justice Application instances of incitement to hatred, system, making it more difficult believes it should be revised. She for the government to properly To show how inconsistent and explains, “It does not provide the address extremism-related issues controversial are the law and its whole algorithm. The mechanism and cases. application in the country when it of ‘inciting hatred’ is unclear and comes to incitement of national, vague, as people can be arrested Finally, the fact that people will religious, racial, class, and social for posting negative comments no longer be able to comment hatred, I have created a table against certain groups. It is anonymously on online platforms of court cases that have been necessary to indicate a person’s also makes the law’s application publicized and are therefore open followers, readers and listeners, problematic. On November to public scrutiny. (See Appendix as well as their intention to 22, 2017, the Mazhilis of the A.) commit violent actions. However, Kazakhstani Parliament adopted these elements are not clearly amendments to the laws on 18 These cases show how vulnerable defined.” information and communication, a person can be while expressing banning anonymous comments his or her beliefs and ideas online. Another issue with the law’s without registration and SMS- 19 On the one hand, these cases are application is that language based identity proof. This not political, and the victims are specialists—and not political innovation makes people even not known activists or opposition scientists or psychologists— more vulnerable, as their identity representatives. On the other should be the ones identifying hate will be verified and can be hand, the table shows that both speech. More importantly, the provided to government agencies authors and those who repost country’s current methodology by the website’s host. Without materials that incite hatred can on cases of inciting hatred is appropriate methodology, a clear be prosecuted. based on words, not actions, as law, and transparent application the key component of evidence thereof, this amendment could Evidently, therefore, and charges. Alma Mussina, cause more damage when it Kazakhstan’s approach to dealing a prominent Almaty lawyer, comes to incitement of hatred. with extremism is controversial. contends that individuals should The country is trying to balance be prosecuted for incitement to Variations between Regions protecting freedom of expression hatred only when actions cause with securing public order. significant damage or result in The cases also show the However, in most cases of grave consequences. complexity of the situation incitement of national, racial, regarding freedom of online religious, and social hatred, In addition, many cases expression and countering public order has been securitized described in Appendix A provide extremism in the country. People and politicized. It is also difficult no information regarding accused of inciting national to prove whether such comments, people’s reaction to social media hatred are of varying ages and materials and posts intend to posts that purportedly incite different ethnicities. incite hatred or not. hatred. For instance, in some cases in northern Kazakhstan, Whereas western Kazakhstan is When it comes to investigation, provocative hate speech against considered vulnerable to religious 20 the prosecutor requests an the person who incited hatred was extremism, people from the evaluation report assessing the promptly deleted, and people who central and southern parts of the

CAP Fellows Paper 201 4 country, who have diverse ethnic comparison, in 2013, Baurzhan One of the most interesting survey origins, have rarely been arrested Zhanburshin from Aktobe, with findings is that identity issues for inciting hatred. Kazakhstani a group of 13 like-minded people, and inter-ethnic relations remain news platforms reported on just promoted religious hatred22 and very sensitive, both for ordinary two court cases, in Kyzyl-Orda received “only” a 3-year sentence. people and for the government. and Shymkent, providing no A 25-year-old resident of Kyzyl- Ten percent of my respondents names of the arrested, in contrast Orda was sentenced to 2 years indicated that a negative attitude to reports on other parts of the and 10 months’ probation for toward other ethnic groups could country. By contrast, people from inciting religious hatred on social be treated as extremism. A recent northern Kazakhstan have been media, with police officers seizing hate speech report prepared arrested on charges of inciting audio records as evidence.23 A by the MediaNet International national hatred more frequently Temirtau resident was sentenced Center for Journalism and the than those from other parts of for terrorist propaganda on Konrad Adenauer Stiftung shows the country. Historically, this social media and received 3 how Kazakhstanis use hate territory, as well as the Altay years in prison, as well as having speech on Facebook.26 Based on region, was part of Russia. Since his property confiscated.24 In the report, it is clear that most independence in 1991, the issue of November 2017, Mr. Gaisin was Facebook posts containing hate northern Kazakhstan’s possible arrested for writing “Kill Kazakhs speech can be classified as “soft” secession and integration into the like dogs” at the bus stop in discrimination against ethnic or Russian Federation has become a Astana—he received 3-and-a-half religious groups, namely ethnic very sensitive one for Kazakhstani years in prison and treatment for minorities and the country’s policymakers, making it highly alcoholism.25 neighbors, mostly China and politicized. Moreover, anti- Russia. Interestingly, ethnic Russian sentiments and phobias The issue of the eastern and Kazakhs are more likely to use have multiplied in the country northern parts of the country “hard” discrimination tools since the annexation of Crimea in remains very controversial when it comes to hate speech 2014. for Kazakhstani people and is on Facebook, from insulting politicized for the government. other ethnic groups to calling for Kazakhstani citizens convicted of On the one hand, Kazakh violence. separatism usually receive longer policymakers emulate their sentences than those imprisoned Russian colleagues, adopting Another Piece of the for extremism and terrorism- similar laws against extremism, Extremism Puzzle: Lack of related crimes, including Islamist terrorism and separatism. On Education and Awareness propaganda. The court cases the other hand, public opinion described below emphasize surveys demonstrate that people Another important element in how sensitive and politicized remain genuinely sensitive understanding efforts to counter sovereignty and territorial to issues of national identity, extremism and support freedom integrity are for the country; sovereignty, and territorial of online expression is the lack of posting comments on these integrity; Russian actions against education about what constitutes issues is therefore more likely to Ukraine are regularly held up extremism. To illuminate the gap get an individual arrested. For as evidence that Kazakhstan’s between the law, legal practice, instance, in 2015, Igor Sychev, sovereignty and territorial and people’s knowledge (or not) an online community host on integrity should be securitized of extremism, I conducted an VKontakte, received a 5-year lest they be threatened by Russia. online survey (see Appendix prison sentence for posting a The rise of nationalism makes it 2). It consists of three main poll in which residents of Ridder easier to find oneself enmeshed lines of questioning: people’s (an industrial city in eastern in legal controversy and accused perceptions of freedom of online Kazakhstan) could vote for or of extremism. expression, their understanding against joining Russia.21 By

CAP Fellows Paper 201 5 of extremism, and education of national identity and inter- is?”; the second, “Choose one of about extremism. I reached 100 ethnic relations, as exemplified the options you think could be people aged 18 to 60 from across by those related to Igor extremism.” Whereas the first the country, including the cities of Chuprina’s case.28That is, people question is about the terminology Almaty and Astana, who use more do not know—intellectually or of extremism as defined by the than two social media platforms emotionally—where the “red line” law, the second is based on and applications regularly. The that marks incitement of national documented arrests and real court analysis of the survey results is or religious hatred lies. Moreover, cases. The diagram for Question 1 supported by the study of court they are unaware that they can indicates people’s perceptions of cases, which shows people of be prosecuted for publishing what extremism means, based on different ages, ethnicities and comments deemed hateful the National Law on Countering geographic locations getting online. Responses to cases like Extremism of 2005. arrested for incitement of hatred. Chuprina’s and Sychev’s usually include offensive language: “your In Figure 1, it remains difficult to To complement the survey results head is first on a spit, pig” and “go interpret what the 53 percent of and strengthen the argument for to Russia, intruder.”29 people who selected the option increasing public awareness, I “all of the above” meant by it. It analyzed almost 300 comments Here are some of the insights the could be that they really knew the that ordinary people published survey provides for understanding intricacies of the law; equally, it about the court cases, both what people think about freedom could just have been a guess. In on social media—Facebook of online expression, extremism, any case, a significant finding of and VKontakte—and on news and education: the survey is that 18 percent of platforms (TengriNews, Nur.kz, respondents associate extremism Karavan, Ratel, and Today). Some Popular Perceptions of with religious hatred. Yet only 9 of the comments are full of hate Extremism percent indicate that extremism speech and provocations. Others can be something related to either were deleted by moderators To understand people’s national security and defense or for being inappropriate.27 perception of extremism, I asked to incitement of racial, ethnic and However, the overall bent of two questions. The first was tribal hatred. This result might these comments is toward issues “What do you think extremism indicate that people are unaware Figure 1. What Do You Think Extremism Is?

Source: Based on author’s survey CAP Fellows Paper 201 6 Figure 2. Choose One of the Options You Think Could Be Extremism

Source: Based on author’s survey of the fact that policymakers see difficulty determining which violation of sovereignty, territorial political extremism—namely the actions or words online might integrity, or constitutional order, violation of territorial integrity lead to prosecution. Interestingly, as well as ethnic hatred. and national sovereignty— the survey shows that, of the as a significant threat to the various options, people are most Additionally, research on country’s national security. Most likely to associate extremism publicized information about importantly, people are unaware with religious extremism. It may arrests indicates that the majority that they can receive a longer seem that people are aware of of those arrested broke extremism sentence for posting online about the general trends30 in fighting laws unknowingly and denied the abovementioned issues, extremism and terrorism in their guilt, while a minority despite the fact that the number the country, however it is were convicted for intentionally of such arrests is growing rapidly. not that simple. People think expressing an opinion forbidden ISIS propaganda is religious by the law. This is evidenced by the The second diagram helps clarify extremism, but the law connects statements of the accused, which whether people are familiar with it to terrorism—a crime that, were published on online news the court cases—whether they under the Law on Combating platforms. Some people voice follow the news about these Terrorism of 1999, carries a much their innocence in court, one of cases and can recognize specific longer prison sentence. the best examples being Shukhrat cases. The multiple-choice Kibirov’s final statement in court, options provided in the question Based on the survey results, I where he denied his guilt. represent real court cases in argue that people get confused by which people were arrested the terminology and definitions. Only 4 percent of survey for inciting hatred. Survey They are also unaware of existing participants thought offensive participants were able to choose laws and programs related to and provocative statements only one option that they believed countering extremism. Few know could be considered extremism. could be seen as extremism. that extremism can be non- This suggests that overall, When it comes to social media religious and “something else”: people believe that extremism is and extremism, people have great calls for—or action promoting— more about words than actions.

CAP Fellows Paper 201 7 Furthermore, almost 10 percent Even though the survey does not them vulnerable to existing legal of survey participants indicated reveal why people feel unsecure, contradictions nevertheless. that none of the cases could be it shows that they might be afraid Nikita Danilin, a journalist at considered acts of extremism. to express their ideas and beliefs Karavan, one of the country’s This might indicate that people online. One reason for this could oldest newspapers, believes that are unaware of what extremism be rooted in Kazakhstan’s most people get into controversial legal means and what actions may be recent efforts to control the traps due to their legal illiteracy. prosecuted as extremist acts. internet, namely restrictions on He indicates that there are Instead, they categorized these connectivity, malware attacks, actually many more such cases cases as examples of another and arrests of social media users. than are reported.32 offense, such as bullying, harassment, or vandalism. Freedom House, in its report People Want to Know More “Freedom of the Net 2017,” about Extremism People Are Not Safe on Social explains that the country remains Media “not free,” emphasizing that As shown in Figure 4, 80 percent “Kazakhstani authorities [have] of survey participants were One of the most significant used criminal charges against interested in legal literacy and findings of the survey is the social media users in an effort to awareness regarding extremism. popular sense of insecurity on silence dissent and punish online social media. The public does mobilization.”31 People think that it is the not see social media as a tool responsibility of the state to for expressing ideas and beliefs Despite the belief of 11 percent educate them about extremism freely and openly. As seen in of survey participants that they Sixty-six percent of survey Figure 3, 48 percent consider can write and comment freely on participants indicated that it social media unsafe as a platform social media, the vague extremism was the responsibility of the for communication and self- law and outdated methodology government to educate them expression. for its implementation make about extremism.

Figure 3. How Do You Feel and Behave On Social Media?

Source: Based on author’s survey

CAP Fellows Paper 201 8 Figure 4. Are You Interested In Increasing Your Legal Literacy In Matters of Extremism?

Source: Based on author’s survey On one hand, this result is not The Ministry of Education and part of the problem. As such, surprising. People are used to Science, an obvious choice, grassroots education campaigns thinking about the state as a has been going through and initiatives supported by local provider of solutions to existing major reforms: trilingualism, communities and NGOs might be problems; moreover, the state curriculum updates, and revision the best way for Kazakhstan to controls the education system and of the school calendar. It is not bolster its anti-extremism efforts bears responsibility for educating clear how it would be able to while allowing people to safely its citizens. juggle programs on extremism navigate social media and enjoy with the numerous programs freedom of online expression On the other hand, it would be very already on its plate. Ministry of without prosecution. problematic for the government to Justice could be another one, but educate people about extremism. it is even more both judge and A comparative approach may Firstly, the topic is highly party in this question. provide some insight into how politicized and securitized, and other governments are tackling thet state being both judge and Because the extremism law this controversial issue. I party, it is therefore not a neutral remains vague and the outdated therefore turn to an analysis of actor. Secondly, it is unclear mode of investigation makes existing legal practices in the which agency could be tapped to people vulnerable, government world today. educate people about extremism. is probably not the solution but Figure 5. Who Should Educate People About Extremism?

CAP Fellows Paper 201 Source: Based on author’s survey 9 Comparative Cases on “No Penalty, No Ban” Approach office in Tokyo to delete content Security versus Freedom of or suspend an account if hate Expression Having analyzed the existing speech is found. practices, I would elucidate three Balancing security and freedom main approaches to dealing with Japan respects freedom of online is important in many different incitement of hatred online. The expression. The existing legal contexts. Even though freedom first is “no penalty, no ban,” where framework does not allow arrests of speech and expression is the government allows unlimited for online hate speech, unless guaranteed by the Universal freedom of online expression with this speech could lead to physical Declaration of Human Rights, no restrictions or punishment for acts that threaten an individual’s the International Covenant on people, while cooperating with person or life. Civil and Political Rights, and social media companies to curb countries’ constitutions, it can hate speech online. One of the best The “Comprehensive” Approach be restricted by civil or criminal examples here is Japan, which is laws for the protection of national trying to adequately address the Another way to deal with security or public order.33 issue while respecting freedom of incitement of hatred on social expression. media is to take a comprehensive Article 20 of the International approach that combines Covenant on Civil and Political Japan has been criticized by the legislation with clear terminology, Rights (ICCPR) states that “any Secretary General of the United education and awareness, along advocacy of national, racial or Nations for turning a blind eye to with targeting social media religious hatred that constitutes hate speech in terms of regulation companies (not individuals) to incitement of discrimination, and legislation. Finally, in 2016, address incitement of hatred hostility or violence shall be the country adopted the Hate online. This approach has been prohibited by law.”34 At the Speech Act, which neither bans introduced in many European same time, Article 19 of the nor penalizes hate speech; countries, including the ICCPR provides for freedom it targets only threats to an Netherlands and Germany, as of expression, including the individual’s person or life.35 well as the United States. freedom to “seek, receive and Those who were not satisfied with impart information and ideas of the law protested, demanding At the EU level, the European all kinds, regardless of frontiers, that the Tokyo office of Twitter do Court of Human Rights does not either orally, in writing or in print, more to address harassment and provide an accepted or agreed- in the form of art, or through any hate speech on the platform.36 upon definition of hate speech. other media of his choice.” According to Tokyo No Hate However, it offers guidelines by Initiative, 40 million people which prosecutors can decide In some countries, only in Japan currently experience if the hate speech is entitled to statements that constitute a real or contribute to hate speech freedom of speech protections,39 and immediate threat of violence online, particularly on Twitter.37 including whether the speech against a particular person are Japanese society and the Ministry is anti-Semitic or promotes considered to be illegal. In others, of Justice are currently debating intolerance toward Muslims. legislation punishes oral, written the vague terminology of the law. Though ECHR hate speech or symbolic statements that The wording can be interpreted cases are often related to these promote or incite hatred based as labeling hate speech either groups, the overall number of on discrimination. With social “unforgivable,” in the sense of arrests for hate speech remains media platforms, it has become being morally reprehensible, comparatively small. In addition, much easier to incite hatred that or “not allowed,” which would the Council of Europe has could lead to a fine or a prison imply illegality.38 In addition, launched a “No Hate Speech” sentence. the Japanese government is campaign to educate people and cooperating with the Twitter

CAP Fellows Paper 201 10 raise awareness of the issue. States. After the terrorist attacks order, prejudice the image of of September 11, 2001, the U.S. the state or a person, or damage Among the most interesting government introduced the religious beliefs could result in a examples are the Netherlands and PATRIOT Act, which has become 7–14-year prison sentence and a Germany. The first has one of the an instrument to guide responses fine of up to USD$120,000.45 From clearest definitions of incitement to terrorism and violent the government’s perspective, of hatred, making it relatively extremism in the country.42 these measures are a response easy to deal with these criminal Though the law has been to the harassment of religious cases. Article 137 of the Dutch repeatedly criticized for violating minorities—namely Hindus—in Penal Code interprets incitement human rights, the country’s the country. The Prime Minister’s of hatred as follows: counter-terrorism measures internet and communications have been essential to preventing technology advisor mentioned He who publicly, orally, terrorist attacks on American in an interview that Bangladesh in writing or graphically soil since 9/11. This is balanced will not allow terrorists to use intentionally expresses himself against the First Amendment the internet to spread falsehoods insultingly regarding a group of the U.S. Constitution, or multiply the effects of their of people because of their which prevents Congress from actions.46 race, their religion or their life legislatively limiting freedom philosophy, their heterosexual or of speech, including online.43 Egypt, meanwhile, has made homosexual orientation or their Individuals therefore enjoy significant progress on educating physical, psychological or mental freedom of speech and cannot journalists to identify hate speech disability, shall be punished by be prosecuted for posting certain and report on it ethically, using a imprisonment of no more than a content on social media so long as five-point test for hate speech.47 year or a monetary penalty of the their words online do not cause In addition to this, Ethical third category.40 physical actions. Journalism Network, American University in Cairo, and Egypt For its part, Germany is The “Authoritarian” Approach Media Development Program considered one of the most joined together to launch the proactive countries when it comes The third approach— Glossary of Hate Speech.48 In so to dealing with incitement of authoritarian—is widespread doing, Egypt became the first Arab hatred online. The country has a in sub-Saharan African, Asian state to introduce a hate speech stringent law against online hate and Middle Eastern countries. initiative. It will be some time speech; its efforts to eliminate This approach is known for before the effectiveness of this incitement of hatred online also stringent, vague legislation and instrument can be determined, target digital platforms such as a lack of popular education. The but raising awareness among Facebook, Google, YouTube, governments’ efforts to securitize young journalists and media and Twitter. These platforms are an existing problem have led to specialists of how to deal with required to delete hate speech people being arrested for inciting online content that incites hatred and other extremist messages hatred online. and terrorist propaganda is within 24 hours. Failure to do certainly necessary. so results in a USD$5 million to In Bangladesh, for instance, USD$59 million fine.41 Incitement anyone can be prosecuted for As the above examples show, of hatred (Volksverhetzung) publishing “false and obscene” it is extremely difficult for is punishable in Germany if material on the internet or in governments to deal with committed by German citizens digital form.44 A Bangladeshi incitement of hatred and hate abroad or by non-German blogger living in exile in Sweden speech online. That being said, nationals on German territory. mentioned that a comment a legal framework with clear or “like” on Facebook that is terminology, the rule of law, and Another example is the United perceived to threaten law and

CAP Fellows Paper 201 11 education about the issues can all Introduce the Law on Countering in the gaps until the Kazakhstani make a positive difference. Extremism during civic government develops its own education classes in secondary guide. As an additional benefit, Recommendations schools open classroom discussions could significantly reduce the incidence In view of the survey results, According to my survey results, of young people becoming case studies, and comparative Kazakhstani people want to be radicalized. overview of different approaches educated about extremism. And if to the issue, I propose a series the law targets people, rather than Invest in professional training of of recommendations that social media platforms (as is the state officials would help the Kazakhstani case in Germany), people should government counter extremism be educated about controversial Given the country’s outdated and adequately address the issues that may arise when they methodology and expertise issue of incitement of hatred “like,” share, or post certain problems when it comes to while simultaneously respecting content on social media. One of incitement of hatred crimes, it is freedom of online expression. the fundamental ways to educate necessary to significantly increase people is to teach them what the the professionalism and expertise Reformulate the Law on law permits and what it prohibits, of the government agencies that Countering Extremism and and how to manage online risks. tackle this controversial issue on Article 174 of the Penal Code Young schoolboys and schoolgirls a daily basis. use different social media The law’s vague and overlapping platforms, and they should be In this regard, a pilot terminology makes it easy to aware that irresponsible behavior project under the Academy of accuse individuals of a crime, online could potentially result in Public Administration of the but difficult for the government a prison sentence. Introducing Republic of Kazakhstan could to elucidate which crimes these issues into the school provide a starting point for constitute extremism (rather curriculum would also help advanced training of lawyers, than hate speech or incitement increase digital literacy and build judges, law enforcement officials, of hatred). People’s perceptions digital resilience.49 and criminal law faculty. of extremism, highlighted in Simulation games and exercises the survey results, show how The curriculum-based approach on incitement of hatred should difficult it is to understand what should become a key component become a key component of these extremism is and what actions of efforts to prevent extremism trainings. Kazakhstani officials or words online can be treated as and increase legal literacy at large. could consult with the Global acts of extremism. In this regard, Kazakhstan could Freedom of Expression initiative benefit greatly from UNESCO at Columbia University, which It is necessary to establish a guidance tools for policymakers has produced training materials, working group on incitement of and teachers. A Teacher’s Guide manuals, etc. for judges on the hatred that would include many on the Prevention of Violent issue.51 Judicial training is vital, stakeholders: lawyers, members Extremism is a concise and since the judiciary should play of Parliament, representatives practical reference guide for a key role in balancing national of security agencies, language teachers and educators at the security against the protection of specialists, and human right upper primary/lower secondary human rights, including freedom activists. The group’s goal would level; it discusses how to of online expression. One of the be to formulate clear definitions manage classroom discussions project’s exercises52 touches upon of incitement of hatred, hate about controversial issues with the mechanism of how the courts speech and extremism. a view to preventing violent find out whether incitement has extremism.50 The text could be occurred: the courts must find used as a starting point, filling

CAP Fellows Paper 201 12 would result; and a causal link Conclusion safely navigate social media and between the speaker’s intention help the government prevent the and violence. In the long term, Kazakhstan, like many oth- spread of extremism. Raising cit- professional training on the issue er post-Soviet states, has been izens’ awareness and educating would result in respect for the struggling to balance freedom them is the best way to achieve rule of law and equality before of online expression with pub- these goals. the law, thereby ending selective lic order. Vague laws, including justice in Kazakhstan. Penal Code provisions, and their controversial application, on the Launch a comprehensive online one hand, and lack of education hate speech prevention project regarding extremism and hate speech, on the other, make peo- Citizens should know their rights ple vulnerable to existing state and responsibilities, and the approaches to maintaining pub- government should provide an lic order and national security. opportunity for citizens to learn It seems that securitization has them. In this regard, grassroots become an ad hoc solution for literacy campaigns should become very complex issues like territo- a key strategy for preventing rial integrity, sovereignty, and re- people from falling into legal ligious extremism. Even though traps. Social media can serve as the existing legal framework sees a platform for increasing users’ actions as the primary indicator literacy regarding extremism of calls for violence or incitement laws—especially laws that can be of hatred, people get arrested for used against them if they make words that have been posted on- certain comments online. line and which have not necessarily been followed by physical Requiring a glossary of hate actions. speech in the Russian and Kazakh languages would both help people The examples I mentioned above use social media responsibly and show how difficult it is for gov- make it easier for journalists to ernments to balance freedom of do their job professionally. The speech and online expression Egyptian example might provide with national security. Some a good point of departure for such countries have succeeded in do- a project. In addition, hate speech ing so, while others have failed. codes would help people respect Some countries have vague laws freedom of speech. Furthermore, with controversial application; the survey results suggest that others have adopted laws with people want more educational clear definitions and invested in videos and trainings on social raising awareness and educating media to help them learn about people. It is obvious that there extremism. Grassroots initiatives, is no single formula for tackling backed by local communities the issues of incitement of hatred and NGOs, could support the and online expression. That being country’s counter-extremism said, there are certain approaches efforts without sacrificing that have proven to be success- freedom of online expression. ful, primarily relating to people, who should be empowered to

CAP Fellows Paper 201 13 Appendix A. Table of Incitement of Hatred Court Cases53 Case Where Outcome Tatyana Shevtsova-Valova committed acts 2015 Almaty Incitement of national aimed at inciting national enmity and discord hatred and insulting the national honor and dignity of 4-year prison term with citizens, as well as propaganda on the superiority a 3-year probation, plus or inferiority of citizens on the basis of their legal costs of 48,500 nationality, using abusive language. According to tenge (USD$145) her, the case was fabricated and the screenshots were forged to slander her. Anti-Heptyl activist Saken Baikenov was 2015 Astana Incitement of national arrested for inciting national hatred. He admitted hatred on Facebook at the trial that he wrote all the posts posted on Restriction of freedom his behalf on Facebook. He cannot participate in for 2 years political and public events, leave the city without court permission, or go to nightclubs. Mr. Alkhanashvili published and distributed 2015 Petropavl, Incitement of national materials that incite inter-ethnic hatred and Northern hatred enmity, and which offend the national sentiments Kazakhstan 3-year prison sentence of representatives of other ethnic groups. He published such materials against both the Russian-speaking population and Muslims. Sanat Dosov was sentenced for insulting 2016 Aktobe, Incitement of social Russian President Vladimir Putin on Facebook. Eastern hatred During the investigation, he recognized only a few Kazakhstan 3-year prison sentence publications, and assumed that his page had been hacked. Initially, the expert the court called to analyze Dosov’s publications did not find anything criminal. Later, however, the expert reversed his point of view. Dosov established Ikhtiyar public association, which works to prevent religious extremism. Igor Chuprina from September 1, 2014 to May 2016 Sokolovka, Incitement of 20, 2015, under the nickname of Igor Chupa, Northern national hatred published various notes and comments that Kazakhstan and propaganda of indicate his negative attitude toward the Kazakh violation of territorial ethnicity, as well as calling for accession to Russia integrity on VKontakte. 5-and-a-half-year prison sentence Ruslan Ginatullin published materials from 2016 Pavlodar, Incitement of national Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami on his Facebook page Northern hatred and posted a video that negatively characterized Kazakhstan 6-year prison sentence the Russian ethnicity. He was also charged with participation in a criminal organization. Sergei Khandogin used negative words 2017 Petropavl, Incitement of national insulting ethnic Kazakhs and cited materials that Northern hatred distorted historic facts on Odnoklassniki. Kazakhstan 2-year prison sentence

CAP Fellows Paper 201 14 Appendix B. The Survey нию экстремизма? значительной степени – 64% А. Публикация в сообществе В. Проблема крайне актуальна – 1. По вашему мнению, в Вконтакте, предлагающая 29% ограничена ли свобода проголосовать «за» или «против» слова и самовыражения в отсоединения Восточно- 7. Беспокоит ли проблема Казахстане, в том числе? Казахстанской области от экстремизма лично вас? А. Да, ограничена – 35% Казахстана – 10% А. Очень беспокоит – 41% Б. Частично ограничена – 53% Б. Пост на Фейсбуке, критикующий Б. Совсем не беспокоит – 18% В. Нет, не ограничена – 12% политику В. Путина в отношении В. Не думал (-а) об этом – 41% Сирии и Украины – 1% 2. Насколько свободно вы В. Различные записи и 8. Заинтересованы ли вы в чувствуете и ведете себя в комментарии, свидетельствующие повышении своей право- социальных сетях на дан- о негативном отношении к вой грамотности в вопро- ный момент? представителям какой-то сах экстремизма? А. Абсолютно свободно пишу и этнической группы – 10% А. Да, заинтересован (-а) – 80% комментирую пл любой тематике Г. Надписи оскорбительно- Б. Нет, не заинтересован (-а) – 13% – 11% провокационного характера на В. Мне все равно – 7% Б. На считаю социальные сети зданиях, ограждениях и газетных безопасным местом общения и киосках – 4% 9. Какой способ получения самовыражения – 48% Д. Репост на своей странице обучающей информации В. Обсуждаю исключительно выдержек из неопубликованной был бы для вас наиболее профессиональные и личные книги, очерняющей казахский удобным? вопросы в «личке» - 28% народ – 0% А. Видео-ролики – 30% Г. Публикации в социальных сетях Е. Распространение радикальных Б. Онлайн игры-симуляции – 2% угрожают личной безопасности – религиозных видеороликов в В. Передачи на телевидении – 9% 6% социальных сетях (к примеру, Г. Радио-программы – 2% Д. Не думал(-а) об этом раньше – ИГИЛ) – 43% Д. Кампании в социальных сетях 7% Ж. Комментарии по земельным – 23% протестам и намерение Е. Обучающие тренинги – 26% 3. Что, на ваш взгляд, из участвовать в митингах – 0% Ж. Не интересно – 8% нижеперечисленного яв- З. Ничего из выше перечисленного ляется экстремизмом? – 9% 10. Должно ли, по ваше- А. Подрыв национальной И. Все перечисленное – 14% му мнению, государство безопасности и участвовать в повышении обороноспособности – 4% 5. Знаете ли Вы, что за пу- правовой грамотности на- Б. Разжигание сословной и бликацию в сети поста селения в вопросах экстре- социальной розни – 0% определенного содержа- мизма? В. Насильственное изменение ния в социальных сетях А. Да, должно – 66% конституционного строя – 6% (Фейсбук, Вконтакте, Од- Б. Этими вопросами могут Г. Разжигание религиозной розни ноклассники и пр.) вы мо- эффективно заниматься местные и вражды – 18% жете быть лишены свобо- сообщества, НПО и другие Д. Разжигание расовой, ды? институты гражданского общества национальной и родовой розни – А. Да, знаю – 76% – 34% 9% Б. Нет, не знаю – 24% В. Не должно – 0% Е. Все перечисленное – 53% 6. Насколько остро пробле- ма экстремизма проявля- 4. Можно ли отнести, на ется в Казахстане? ваш взгляд, нижеприве- А. Проблемы не существует – 7% денные случаи к проявле- Б. Проявляется, но не в

CAP Fellows Paper 201 15 Notes regnum.ru/news/2279101.html. 3, 2017, https://vlast.kz/no- 9 Igor Savchenko, “Spisok ka- vosti/25574-delo-o-nasidah-za- 1 Collette Davidson, “Navigat- zakhstanskikh politzakluchen- sita-kibirova-zaluetsa-na-proces- ing Hate Speech and Freedom nykh i lits, stolknuvshikhsia s sualnye-narusenia.html. of Expression,” World Asso- politicheskii motivirovannym 17 “Kazakh Man Sentenced to ciation of Newspapers and presledovaniem so storony Ka- Prison for ‘Inciting Ethnic Ha- News Publishers, September zakhstana,” Kazakhstan Interna- tred’ on Social Network,” Radio 28, 2017, http://www.wan-ifra. tional Bureau for Human Rights Free Europe/Radio Liberty org/articles/2017/09/28/nav- and Rule of Law, October 17, Kazakh Service, November 14, igating-hate-speech-and-free- 2017, https://bureau.kz/novosti/ 2017, https://www.rferl.org/a/ dom-of-expression. iz_drugikh_istochnikov/sp- kazakhstan-inciting-ethnic-ha- 2 The Constitution of the Repub- isok_kazakhstanskikh_politzak- tred-social-network/28853648. lic of Kazakhstan, August 30, lyuchennykh/. html. 1995, http://www.parlam.kz/en/ 10 Shibutov, “God posle terakta…” 18 Tsoy, “Stat’ia 174 UK RK…” constitution. 11 Snezhana Tsoy, “Stat’ia 174 Uk 19 “Anonimnye kommentarii v 3 The Law of the Republic of RK. Mozhno li popast’ pod sud internete zapretiat: Mazhilis Kazakhstan No. 31 “O protivode- za kommentarii v sotssetiakh?,” odobril popravki,” TengriNews, istvii eksremizmu,” February 18, FactCheck, November 17, 2017, November 23, 2017, https://ten- 2005, https://online.zakon.kz/ https://factcheck.kz/glavnoe/ grinews.kz/kazakhstan_news/ Document/?doc_id=30004865. statya-174-uk-rk-mozhno-li-po- anonimnyie-kommentarii-in- 4 The Penal Code of the Republic past-pod-sud-za-kommentarij-v- ternete-zapretyat-majilis-odo- of Kazakhstan No. 226-V, July 3, socsetyax/. bril-331676/. 2014, http://adilet.zan.kz/eng/ 12 Ibid. 20 Farkhad Sharip, “Encroaching docs/K1400000226. 13 “Chto takoe sotsial’naia rozn’?” Extremism in West Kazakhstan: 5 “Pravozashchitniki predlagaiut Central Asia Monitor, May A Challenge for ‘Cyber Shield’,” ubrat’ iz UK RK stat’iu o voz- 24, 2013, https://camonitor. Eurasia Daily Monitor 14, buzhdenii rozni,” Informburo, kz/7772-.html. no. 112 (September 14, 2017), January 19, 2016, https://in- 14 Ben Kentish, “Kazakh Man https://jamestown.org/pro- formburo.kz/novosti/pravozash- ‘Given Three-Year Prison Sen- gram/encroaching-extremism- chitniki-predlagayut-ubrat-iz-uk- tence for Insulting Vladimir in-west-kazakhstan-a-challenge- rk-statyu-o-vozbuzhdenii-rozni. Putin’,” Independent, December for-cyber-shield/. html. 31, 2016, http://www.indepen- 21 “V Kazakhstane bloggera 6 “Stat’iu za separatizm v proekt dent.co.uk/news/world/asia/ka- prigovorili k turemnomu zak- novogo UK dobavili deputaty zakhstan-man-three-years-pris- liucheniiu za prizyvy k sepa- Kazakhstana,” Tengrinews, April on-russia-president-vladimir-pu- ratizmu,” Lenta, November 8, 2014, https://tengrinews.kz/ tin-lenin-stalin-a7503306.html. 18, 2015, https://lenta.ru/ kazakhstan_news/statyu-separa- 15 “Za razzhiganie rozni i prizyv news/2015/11/18/ridder/. tizm-proekt-novogo-uk-dobavi- prisoedinit’sya k Rossii osuzh- 22 “Za razhiganie mezhnat- li-deputatyi-253266/. den zhitel’ SKO,” Sputnik Ka- sional’noi rozni zhitel’ Aktobe 7 Tatyana Zamakhina, “Putin zakhstan, December 5, 2016, poluchil tri goda kolonii,” To- uzhestochil nakazanie za prizyvy https://ru.sputniknews.kz/ day, February 19, 2013, http:// k separatizmu,” Rossiiskaya incidents/20161205/1150180/ today.kz/news/proisshestvi- Gazeta, July 22, 2014, https:// za-razzhiganie-rozni-i-pri- ya/2013-02-19/233678-news/. rg.ru/2014/07/22/separa- zyvy-prisoedinitsya-k-rf-osuzh- 23 “Za razhiganie mezhnat- tizm-site-anons.html. den-zhitel-sko.html. sional’noi rozni v sotssetiakh 8 Marat Shibutov, “God posle ter- 16 Daniyar Moldabekov, “Delo o osuzhden zhitel’ Kyzylordy,” akta v Aktiubinske: itogi bor’by nashidakh: zashchita Kibirova Today, April 19, 2017, http:// s terrorizmom v Kazakhstane,” zhaluetsia na prostessual’nye today.kz/news/proisshestvi- Regnum, May 24, 2017, https:// narusheniia,” Vlast, November

CAP Fellows Paper 201 16 ya/2017-04-19/740563-za- dimensions remain important 38 Casey Baseel, “Japanese razzhiganie-mezhnatsionalnoj- and even more sensitive for both Government Gives Examples of rozni-v-sotssetyah-osuzhden- government and people. What Qualifies as ‘Hate Speech’ zhitel-kyizyilordyi/. 31 “Freedom on the Net 2017: in Anti-Discrimination Law,” 24 “Kazakhstanstu za propagandu Manipulating Social Media Sora News 24, February 7, terrorizma v sotssetiakh dali tri to Undermine Democracy. 2017, https://en.rocketnews24. goda kolonii,” Regnum, November Kazakhstan Profile,” Freedom com/2017/02/07/japanese- 2, 2016, https://regnum.ru/ House, https://freedomhouse. government-gives-examples-of- news/society/2200787.html. org/report/freedom-net/2017/ what-qualifies-as-hate-speech- 25 “Nakazan muzhchina, kazakhstan. in-anti-discrimination-law/. ostavivshii oskorbitel’nuiu 32 “Kak vesti sebia v internete, 39 Alina Dian Sharon, “A Web of nadpis’ na ostanovke v Astane,” chtoby ne popast’ v tiur’mu Hate: European, U.S. Laws Clash Sputnik Kazakhstan, November za layki i reposty - advokat on Defining and Policing Online 7, 2017, https://ru.sputniknews. Utebekov,” Caravan, September Anti-Semitism,” The Algemeiner, kz/society/20171107/3691889/ 27, 2017, https://www.caravan. February 28, 2013, http://www. nakazan-muzhchina-ostavivshij- kz/news/kak-vesti-sebya-v- algemeiner.com/2013/02/28/a- oskorbitelnuyu-nadpis-na- socsetyakh-chtoby-ne-popast- web-of-hate-european-u-s-laws- ostanovke-v-astane.html. v-tyurmu-za-lajjki-i-reposty- clash-on-defining-and-policing- 26 “Monitoring iazyka vrazhdy advokat-utebekov-401890/. online-anti-semitism/. v sotsial’nykh setiakh v 33 Ibid. 40 Netherlands Penal Code (in Kazakhstane,” MediaNet, 34 “United Nations Human Dutch), http://wetten.overheid. December 5, 2017, http:// Rights Office of the High nl/BWBR0001854/2017-09- medianet.kz/ru/biblioteka/ Commissioner: International 01#BoekTweede_TiteldeelV_ broshyura-monitoring-yazyka- Covenant on Civic and Political Artikel137c vrazhdy-v-socialnyh-setyah-v- Rights,” UNHROHC, December 41 Melissa Eddy and Marc Scott, kazahstane-489. 16, 1966, http://www.ohchr.org/ “Delete Hate Speech or Pay Up, 27 “Nakazan muzhchina, EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ Germany Tells Social Media ostavivshii oskorbitel’nuiu CCPR.aspx. Companies,” The New York nadpis’ na ostanovke v Astane,” Ak 35 Tomohiro Osaki, “Diet Times, June 30, 2017, https:// Zhayk, November 7, 2017, http:// Passes Japan’s First Law www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/ azh.kz/ru/news/view/48734. to Curb Hate Speech,” The business/germany-facebook- 28 Mikhail Lapshin, “Realnyi Japan Times, May 24, 2016, google-twitter.html. srok za virtual’nuiu perepisku,” https://www.japantimes.co.jp/ 42 Geoffrey R. Stone, “Free Speech Ratel, December 5, 2016, news/2016/05/24/national/ and National Security,” Indiana http://www.ratel.kz/raw/ social-issues/diet-passes-japans- Law Journal 84, no. 3 (Summer realnyj_srok_za_virtualnuju_ first-law-curb-hate-speech/#. 2009): 939-62. perepisku?page=3#comments. WjqlmrpFyhc. 43 “U.S. Constitution, The 29 Viktor Miroshnichenko, 36 “At Twitter’s Tokyo Office, Bill of Rights. Amendment “Ot 5 do 10 let za perepisku v Protestors Stomp on Hateful 1,” National Center for internete,” Ratel, September 17, Tweets,” Advox Global Constitutional Studies, https:// 2016, http://ratel.kz/raw/ot_5_ Voices, September 11, 2017, nccs.net/online-resources/ do_10_let_za_perepisku_v_ https://advox.globalvoices. us-constitution/amendments- internete. org/2017/09/11/at-twitters- to-the-us-constitution/the-bill- 30 A recent program, Countering tokyo-office-protesters-stomp- of-rights-amendments-1-10/ Religious Extremism and on-hateful-tweets/. amendment-1-freedom-of- Terrorism 2017–2020, focuses 37 See the organization’s website: religion-speech-and-the-press. on religion, mainly the Salafi Tokyo No Hate, https://www.no- 44 Saleem Samad, “Bangladesh branch of Islam, though other hate.jp/. New ICT Law Curtails Free Speech

CAP Fellows Paper 201 17 Online,” Freedom Network, tection,” Global Freedom of February 17, 2015, http://www. Expression Initiative, Colum- fnpk.org/bangladesh-new-ict- bia University, 2016, https:// law-curtails-free-speech-online/. globalfreedomofexpression. 45 “Facebook Posts Get People columbia.edu/wp-content/up- Arrested in Bangladesh,” Deutsche loads/2016/01/A-Callamard-Na- Welle, October 6, 2015, http:// tional-Security-and-FoE-Train- www.dw.com/en/facebook- ing.pdf. posts-get-people-arrested-in- 52 Ibid. bangladesh/a-18763933. 53 Based on published materials 46 “Govt. Won’t Allow Use of available on the internet. Internet to Spread Falsehoods: Joy,” Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha (BSS), December 13, 2016. 47 “Hate Speech: A Five Point Test for Journalists”, Ethical Journalism Network, http:// ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/ resources/publications/hate- speech 48 “Glossary of Hate Speech” (in Arabic), Ethical Journalism Network, http://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/wp-content/ -بنجتل-ليلد/uploads/2017/10 pdf.1-1-ةيهاركلا-باطخ 49 “United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organiza- tion: A Policy Review on Building Digital Citizenship in Asia and the Pacific through Safe, Effec- tive and Responsible Use of ICT,” UNESCO, December 16, 2016, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0024/002468/246813e. pdf. 50 “United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi- zation: A Teacher’s Guide on the Prevention of Violent Extrem- ism,” UNESCO, May 4, 2016, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0024/002446/244676e. pdf. 51 Agnes Callamard, “Freedom of Expression and National Security: Balancing for Pro-

CAP Fellows Paper 201 18