기억과 법:홀로코스트 부정 = Regulating History Denial

다국어 초록 (Multilingual 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.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual 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 (Reference)

1 "인권침해자의 불처벌에 대한 투쟁을 통해 인권을 보호하고 신장하기 위한 일련의 원칙" 11 : 164-, 1996

2 국가인권위원회(발간), "유엔인권조약감시기구의 일반논평 및 일반권고 2"

3 국가인권위원회(발간), "유엔인권약감시기구의 일반논평 및 일반권고 3"

4 Winfried Brugger, "Verbot oder Schutz von Haßrede?" AÖR 403-, 2003

5 Neil Kritz, "Transitional Justice Vol. 1-3" Foundation of Peace Press 1995

6 Catharine A. MacKinnon, "Toward A Feminist Theory of The State" Harvard U.P 206-, 1989

7 Catriona McKinnon, "Toleration" New York: Routledge 156-, 2006

8 Gerald Uelmen, "The Price of Free Speech: Campus Hate Speech Codes"

9 Gordon Allport, "The Nature of Prejudice" Addison-Wesley 14-, 1954

10 Norman G. Finkelstein, "The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering" Verso 2000

11 Klaus Günther, "The Denial of Holocaust: Employing Criminal Law to Combat Anti-Semitism in Germany" 15 : 51-, 2000

12 Emanuela Fronza, "THE PUNISHMENT OF NEGATIONISM ; THE DIFFICULT DIALOGUE BETWEEN LAW AND MEMORY" 30 : 621-, 2006

13 Noam Chomsky, "Some Elementary Comments on the Rights of Freedom of Expression"

14 "Resolution 1577(2007) Towards Decriminalization of Defamation"

15 "Report of the Secretary-General on the rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies" the Security Council 616-, 2004

16 Claudia E. Haupt, "Regulating Hate Speech" 23 : 314-, 2006

17 Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, "Rechtsextremistischer Revisionismus"

18 Mari J. Matsuda, "Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim’s Story" 87 : 2320-2381, 1989

19 Alexsander Tsesis, "Prohibiting Incitment on the Internet" 7 : 5-, 2002

20 Peter R. Teachout, "Making Holocaust Denial A Crime: Reflection on European Anti-negationist Laws From The Perspective of U.S. Constitutional Experience" 30 : 669-, 2006

21 The Prosecutor v. Ferdinand Nahimana, "Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza & Hassan Ngeze, INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA TRIAL CHAMBER I CASE NO. ICTR-99-52-T"

22 Henry J. Steiner, "International Human Rights In Context, 3.ed" Oxford U.P 639-, 2008

23 Danny Ben-Mosche, "Holocaust Denial in Australia"

24 Kenneth Lasson, "Holocaust Denial and The First Amendment: The Quest For Truth In a Free Society" 6 : 70-, 1997

25 Daniel Goldhagen, "Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust" New York: Alfred A. Knopf 1996

26 Kathleen E. Mahoney, "Hate Speech: Affirmation or Contradiction of Freedom of Expression" 789-808, 1996

27 Kevin Boyle, "Hate Speech-The United States Versus the Rest of the World?”" 53 : 487-502, 2001

28 William A. Schabas, "Hate Speech in Rwanda: The Road to Genocide" 46 : 141-171, 2000

29 William A. Schabas, "Hate Speech in Rwanda: The Road to Genocide" 46 : 141-171, 2000

30 Michel Rosenfeld, "Hate Speech In Constitutional Jurisprudence: A Comparative Analysis" 24 : 1524-, 2003

31 Mariano Mello, "HAGEN V. AUSTRALIA; A SIGN OF THE EMERGING NOTION OF HATE SPEECH IN CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW" 28 : 365-, 2006

32 Ronald Dworkin, "Freedom’s Law" Harvard U. P. 219-, 1996

33 Catharine MacKinnon, "Feminism Unmodified" Harvard U.P. -206, 1987

34 Richard J, "Evans, Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial" Basic Books 2002

35 "EuGRZ"

36 Alexander Bickel, "Domesticated Civil Disobedience: The First Amendment, from Sullivan to the Pentagon Papers" 55 : 72-73,

37 Günter Bertram, "Der Rechtsstaat und seine Volksverhetzungs-Novelle"

38 Peter Singer, "David Irving has a right to free speech, too" Jerusalem Post 2006

39 Stefan Huster, "Das Verbot der Auschwitzlüge, die Meinungsfreiheit und das Bundesverfassungsgericht" NJW 488-, 1996

40 Robert Kahn, "Cross-burning, Holocaust Denial, and The Development of Hate Speech Law in the United States and Germany" 83 : 189-, 2006

41 Tarlach McGonagle, "Combating racially motivated crime and hate crimes through legislation, Roundtable Discussion, organised by Irish Human Rights Commission & Amnesty Internation" Dublin Castle 2005

42 Winfried Brugger, "Ban on or Protection of the Hate Speech? Some Observation Based on German and American Law" 17 : 17-, 2002

43 "BVerfGE"

44 Richard Delgado, "Are Hate-Speech Rules constitutional Heresy? A Reply to Steven G" 146 : 865-878, 1998

45 Gregory S. Copoper, "A Tangled Web We Weave: Enforcing International Speech Restrictions In Online World" 8 : 2-, 2007

46 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" 78 : 1549-, 2004

47 "."

48 "."

49 "."