Beg to differ on SCA hate speech ruling

I BEG to disagree with the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) on what constitutes hate speech.

Hate speech by any legal definition is a blatant violation of our constitutional right to freedom of expression. Under the guise of freedom of expression, demagogues test the constraints of the Constitution by engaging and becoming cheerleaders for forces of hate, from xenophobics to political extremists.

Any attempt to legally de-sanitise hate speech will lead to fascism by stealth. Hate speech and its toxin twin are an affront to humanity. Any form of human degradation is an outrageous violation of our sacred Constitution.

Racism and its insidious hate speech are two of the most baneful and persistent evils; they are a major barrier to peace. It’s a too outrageous violation to the dignity of human beings to be countenanced under any pretext. Hate speech is a grave malady which, unless arrested, is capable of causing the destruction of our democratic order.

It is a corrosion that has bitten into the fibre, and attacked the whole social structure of our society. There is surely no nation in this world that holds hate speech in greater horror than us.

No one surveying the history of our nation can overlook the pathetic wreckage of commitment twisted and turned into a thousand shapes under the stress of prejudice and racism by stealth.

It takes courage to face this malicious enemy in the face. The present situation is a product of the past.

The nation’s past is a painful history of racism resulting in a sick and divided society. It was philosopher George Santayana who said: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” FAROUK ARAIE | Johannesburg