Toothless Rhetoric or Strategic Polemic? A Textual and Contextual Analysis of Japan’s Hate Speech Law

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 35 (6):2303-2322 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In May, 2016 the Diet passed a law on the “Promotion of efforts to eliminate unfair discriminatory speech and behaviour against people originating from outside Japan”, widely referred to as ヘイトスピーチ法 (_Heito Supiichi Hō_ /Hate Speech Law). For some residents of Japan it had been a long time coming. Without any laws specifically prohibiting racially discriminatory speech or writing, aggrieved parties had hitherto been forced to resort to indirect lines of protection. In 1999, for example, a Brazilian national ejected from a jewelry shop displaying a poster saying “No foreigners allowed” obtained a favourable ruling citing Japan’s ratification of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and in 2013 an injunction for defamation and obstruction of business was granted on behalf of a school for children of North Korean descent repeatedly subjected to provocative demonstrations. But others questioned the need to reinforce limits on freedom of expression even in the face of aggressive taunts, with some claiming that incidents of racial discrimination in Japan lacked the historical, entrenched and violent dimensions that had prompted hate speech laws in Europe and elsewhere. When the text of the proposed law became public there was also debate about its utility as such an abstract measure seemed inapplicable to many potential victims and lacked punitive sanctions. Against this criticism it could be argued that the law went about as far as the government could expect to go if it were to get it passed; that it appears to be curtailing a particularly aggressive form of hate speech; and that it has ushered in a number of more specific initiatives, especially at local level. This study will begin with the 2016 text itself, drawing on the semiotic framework of Systemic Functional Grammar to explore how it prioritises general principles over specific regulations. This textual analysis will be followed by a contextual account of why the Law was constructed as it was, how it has influenced awareness of hate speech, and where it fits in with an existing genre of non-coercive legislation in Japan.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,990

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Hate Speech in Political Discourse.Ghaleb Rabab’ah, Asmaa Hussein & Samer Jarbou - forthcoming - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique:1-20.
Covert Hate Speech, Conspiracy Theory and Anti-semitism: Linguistic Analysis Versus Legal Judgement.Fabienne Baider - 2022 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 35 (6):2347-2371.
Hate Crimes, Literature, and Speech.L. W. Sumner - 2003 - In R. G. Frey & Christopher Heath Wellman (eds.), A Companion to Applied Ethics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 142–153.
What is Hate Speech? Part 2: Family Resemblances.Alexander Brown - 2017 - Law and Philosophy 36 (5):561-613.
What is hate speech? Part 1: The Myth of Hate.Alexander Brown - 2017 - Law and Philosophy 36 (4):419-468.
Speech that Isn’t Mine: Obligations Under the European Court of Human Rights.Natalie Alkiviadou - 2023 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 37 (1):77-90.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-02-15

Downloads
7 (#1,407,052)

6 months
4 (#1,006,062)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations