The Hate Speech Bill: another instalment in the march towards tyranny
The Hate Speech Bill is fundamentally flawed and manifests either an act of bad faith or of gross incompetence by its creators
A curious right that has emerged from the rights culture of the past 70 years is the right to be not offended. This right is qualitatively different from the right not to be offended, which is a rule of ordinary civility, normally expressed as: "Please do not offend me". The other is an assertive right: "If you dare offend me, there will be consequences and if I do not initiate those consequences then the normally inert National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) will do so on my behalf". The NPA demonstrated its enthusiasm to act in a case of this kind in the Penny Sparrow matter, where the prosecution was swift and efficient, although cases of far greater national importance had languished for years. The Sparrow frenzy was caused by a foolish comment, made by a foolish woman on a foolish occasion. Far more serious was the scandalous command-in-suspension of Julius Malema, when he invoked his own authority to call upon his devotees not to slaughter the whites … yet. The unspoken menace la...
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.