혐오표현의 규제: 표현의 자유와 소수자 보호를 위한 규제대안의 모색

This article strongly agrees that a certain intervention should be essential to address the harm of hate speech. However, more importantly, a regulatory principle should focus on promotion of freedom of speech rather than prohibiting hate speech. In other words, regulating hate speech can be justified only when such regulations contribute to freedom of speech for minorities and all members of society. This also makes it possible to avoid the dilemma between regulating hate speech and freedom of speech; freedom vs. equality, freedom of speech vs. freedom from discrimination. At the same time, this makes us advocate the principle of ‘more speech’ in the idea of marketplace. In this regard, hate speech should be regarded as a kind of discrimination and regulatory strategies should mainly depend on various ways provided by an equality body (anti-discrimination institutions). It is also assumed that criminalizing hate speech has a limited role in addressing hate speech and tends to produce some side-effects. If the policy of criminalizing hate speech is adopted, the scope of its application should be minimized to prevent its abuse. In addition, it is not an overstatement to say that formative and non-legal measures are one of the best ways to tackle hate speech. An equality body also plays an important role in these formative and non-legal measures in cooperation with other national bodies, educational institutions and NGOs. This is why this article call the proposed strategy, ‘an equality-body-led and holistic strategy for hate speech.’