2. Freedom of Speech: Legislation and Interpretation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Free speech, tolerance, offence and diversity: A comparative study of France and Denmark using the cases of Dieudonné and Yahya Hassan Charlotte Karen Elliott-Harvey Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds School of Media and Communication February 2018 i Declaration of authorship The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own, except where work which has formed part of jointly authored publications has been included. The contribution of the candidate and the other authors to this work has been explicitly indicated below. Footnote 13 in Chapter 2 of the thesis - Freedom of speech: legislation and interpretation - makes reference to a section of a multiple-authored working paper. The candidate wrote all the main sections of the working paper, and one of the co-authors, Alisha Patel, provided edits of these. Each of the co-authors wrote their respective sections: “4.1. Egypt: Hate speech in the post‑January 25th Uprising (Yosra El Gendi)”; “4.2. Kenya: Responses to electoral violence: The problem of hate speech, peaceocracy and censorship (Alisha Patel)”; “4.3. Serbia: Hate speech and a legacy of the past (Davor Marko)”; “4.4. South Africa: Reflections on hate speech (Wallace Chuma)”. The section referenced is “4.2. Kenya: Responses to electoral violence: The problem of hate speech, peaceocracy and censorship (Alisha Patel)”, pages 16-20 in: Elliott, C., Chuma, W., El Gendi, Y., Marco, D. and Patel, A. 2016. Hate speech: Key concept paper. MeCoDEM Working Paper Series. [Online] Available from: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers/. The candidate confirms that appropriate credit has been given within the thesis where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. The right of Charlotte Karen Elliott-Harvey to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by Charlotte Karen Elliott-Harvey in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. © 2018 The University of Leeds and Charlotte Karen Elliott-Harvey ii Acknowledgements I would firstly like to thank each of this project’s interview participants: thank you all for volunteering your time to contribute to this thesis by discussing your thoughts and opinions with me. I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisors, Professor Katrin Voltmer and Dr Katy Parry. Thank you for your guidance, support and reassuring words over the course of this journey. I will remember fondly our supervision sessions which were always filled with plenty of shared laughter. You have each contributed in so many ways to my intellectual and professional development, and it has been a privilege to be guided and inspired by you. I have been truly fortunate to have you as my supervision team. Thank you to my peers and colleagues at the School of Media and Communication, which fosters a unique environment of academic rigour and relaxed camaraderie. I am grateful to have been a part of the School and our academic community. Thank you to my family and friends, for your encouragement as I undertook my studies, and especially to Jennifer for your love and friendship. I would also like to thank my partner and husband, Richard, for being so confident in my abilities and for always being there to cheer me on when I need it most. Lastly, I would like to thank my parents, Dr David Elliott and my late mother, Mrs Margit Elliott. I hope that I have reflected your spirit of adventure, one that brought you together. Thank you for everything that you have provided for me, and for supporting me in achieving this dream. iii Abstract This thesis examines how notions of freedom of speech, tolerance, and diversity are negotiated and tested by media controversies prompted by provocative speech acts. The study draws upon two cases from the creative realm: French comedian Dieudonné and Danish poet Yahya Hassan, both of whom have engaged in transgressive speech acts. As country cases, France has a history of immigration and cultural diversity, but Denmark is relatively new to this; yet in recent years, both have engaged in debates about freedom of speech and minority groups. The ways that these issues are then addressed sheds light on how changing societies respond to controversy. This is where the research questions are located: How are the parameters of freedom of speech, tolerance and offence renegotiated in times of change? How do such renegotiations take shape in different national contexts, such as in France and Denmark? How do provocative speech acts in the creative realm test the boundaries of freedom of speech? Finally, how do nationhood, identity and diversity impact public debates about these provocative speech acts? Using a Thematic Analysis of 95 articles from one centre-left and one centre-right newspaper per country about the cases, as well as 21 in-person interviews held in Paris and Copenhagen with activists, journalists, politicians, lawyers and artists, the findings highlight how an expressive act might originate from one individual, but it can create tensions in different ways as it travels through various modes of interpretation and social discourse. What the findings show is that this mediated dynamic tests democratic values such as freedom of speech, because its parameters are being challenged, questioned, or renegotiated through these types of embodied communication, and they reveal how consensus on the acceptable parameters of speech must shift in order to accommodate the diversification of culture in each country context. iv Table of contents Declaration of authorship ................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... ii Abstract ............................................................................................................................ iii List of figures ...................................................................................................................viii List of tables .....................................................................................................................viii List of abbreviations.......................................................................................................... ix 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2. Freedom of speech: legislation and interpretation ........................................................ 8 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 8 2.1.1. Defining freedom of speech ........................................................................... 9 2.2. Legislation ................................................................................................................ 12 2.2.1. Landmark legislation .................................................................................... 13 2.2.2. National legislation of France and Denmark ............................................... 16 France and the Gayssot Act ......................................................................... 17 Denmark and the “racism paragraph” ........................................................ 18 2.2.3. The challenges of legislation ........................................................................ 20 2.3. Interpretation .......................................................................................................... 21 2.3.1. Absolute value .............................................................................................. 22 “Fighting words”........................................................................................... 24 2.3.2. Pluralism ........................................................................................................ 25 Counter-speech ............................................................................................ 27 2.3.3. Right under responsibility ............................................................................ 28 Extreme speech and hate speech ................................................................ 30 Censorship .................................................................................................... 31 Self-censorship ............................................................................................. 32 2.4. From “The Satanic Verses” to “Je Suis Charlie”...................................................... 33 2.5. Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 35 3. Communication and social performance ...................................................................... 37 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 37 3.2. Social performance .................................................................................................. 38 3.3. Mediation and controversy ..................................................................................... 40 3.4. Humour and satire ................................................................................................... 43 3.4.1.