Combating hate speech and what journalists should do in the media was the topic we discussed at the Tuesday Salon which was held yesterday. Invited to discuss and share recommendations from their experience were: Flutura Kusari, Media Law lawyer, Fitore Rexhepi, journalist and presenter at RTK, Labinot Leposhtica, BIRN legal officer and Valon Kerolli, manager of social networks. Until the moderation of this salon was done by Teuta Arifaj, the editor at ATV.
It is very difficult to define what hate speech is because if it is defined, the freedom of expression can be limited. In Kosovo, unfortunately, there have been cases of violence that have come as a result of online developments. Flutura Kusari stated that freedom of expression is a right guaranteed by the constitution, it is guaranteed by the European Convention, but freedom of expression does not mean that it is unlimited, we cannot say everything we want, and we cannot express ourselves as we think. However, there are two aspects that should be emphasized regarding hate speech. First is the definition, which is one of the challenges for all those who deal with freedom of expression, be it institutional persons, prosecutors, police, judges, or lawyers, who should know more or less how hate speech should be defined, but on all responsibility lies with the media, the responsibility applies because they are responsible for spreading hate speech and if the media contributes and unfortunately, like in us and in many other countries, the media contributes to the spread of hate speech.
Also, the standards of the Council of Europe which they apply must also be put into practice by us. Kusari stated that in 2022 the Council of Europe presented a recommendation that includes elements of the definition of hate speech that must be taken into account when assessing whether an expression contains hate speech. According to the Council of Europe, hate speech means all forms of expression that promote, distribute, or justify violence, hatred, or discrimination against a person or group of persons because of their personal characteristics or because of their status, race, color, language, faith, nationality, age, sex, gender identity or sexual identity, these are some of the elements that help us identify hate speech.
Until, Fitore Rexhepi stated that hate speech as a global challenge does not only happen in Kosovo, but it is dangerous here. The most important thing is that the role of journalists should be key in preventing hate speech because they have an important role in orienting the audience, and this is done by forgetting visibility, clickability, sensation, and returning to traditional journalism. Today in Kosovo there are more than 21 televisions where there are many political debates, a terrible competition in which there is not much care for the prevention of hate speech. Today, journalism is faster, and it is pushed with more elbows, but one should never leave the role of a journalist, but since this is a little individual, it also does not depend on individuals, but very often on the owner of the media.
Meanwhile, Valon Kerolli, manager of social networks, has shown that visibility on social networks is different than visibility at home, and the best solution to prevent hate speech is to create a database of the words that are used most often and that create the most mostly hate, but it should be noted that today there are many tools that are used to identify posts in which the media is using more hate speech. The most important thing is media education so that more broadcasts and information campaigns are carried out to show people how it is possible to activate the filters of social networks to stop hate speech.
In the following question, how is the situation in Kosovo’s courts and how many cases of hate speech are reported or punished, Labinot Leposhtica, as a legal officer, stated that solving the problem or minimizing the consequences requires a comprehensive approach, and this approach is preceded by the System of Justice, regardless of what happens to the professionalism of journalists or the editorial staff of the media. In this case, the justice system should address where quality justice is offered to the person who is the source of the hate speech and to those affected by the language used. In this regard, the Justice system in Kosovo is based on the basic recognition of definitions, so we have a justice system that has completely stagnated in the organization of developments and therefore we are unable to identify the language of hate. We only identify a segment that is the direct manifestation of the action, but never the source.
Hate speech precedes early forms of extremism and the starting points of these forms are TV debates, portals, and electronic media. This issue is never addressed and when we try to answer it through the mechanisms of the justice system, we are convinced that our justice system is not capable of providing answers to these cases of the use of hate speech.
If we stop and make a difference with European countries in the prevention of hate speech, Kusari said that even at the level of the Council of Europe it is very difficult to create a standard that applies to all countries, for this reason, the recommendation to fight hate speech was the recommendation with the most difficulties for drafting and approval. Therefore, these recommendations should be taken as a basis and used in Kosovo. A good example is Germany, which applies forms of punishment up to 50 million euros based on legislation. So, the rule of law is very relevant, so I think that in Kosovo, the best form that could work are awareness campaigns of the justice system for the punishment of persons who use hate speech and their publication in the media is the most efficient method for the prevention of hate speech. So, if it starts with the punishment of some people, of course, others will become aware.
This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union, within the project “Combating Discrimination, Hate Speech and Gender-Based Violence”. The content of this publication is the responsibility of ATRC, IKS and D4D and in no way, it cannot be considered as the position of the European Union.