Legal Beagle by Graeme Edgeler

Read Post

Legal Beagle: The Government's Proposed Decriminalisation of Racist Hate Speech

3 Responses

  • Nick Russell,

    It seems a bit of a stretch to argue that the proposed reform will somehow narrow the scope of prohibited speech. If you can draw a distinction between speech which is offensive enough to "excite hostility" but is not offensive enough to "stir up hatred", then hats off to you. But I can't really see any distinction at all.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2008 • 129 posts Report Reply

  • EE,

    Thanks for outlining this issue with such clarity.

    The modifications proposed are in response to the Mosque shootings, but, ironically, wouldn't there be a case to prosecute anyone who published some Islamic religious texts, I'm thinking specifically of what they say about homosexuals.

    They would seem to contravene Section 131 of the Human Rights Act you outlined above, if those rights were extended to gay communities.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2014 • 21 posts Report Reply

  • Tim McKenzie,

    If someone publicly said that a particular New Zealander of Ruritanian descent should "go back to Ruritania", in a context where the plain meaning was that the Ruritanian–New Zealander was unwelcome here, could that be an offence, either under the current law, or the proposed changes?

    Lower Hutt • Since Apr 2007 • 126 posts Report Reply

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…


You may also create an account or retrieve your password.