About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

6 Canberra L. Rev. 257 (1999)
Race Vilification Laws: A Comparative Perspective

handle is hein.journals/canbera6 and id is 263 raw text is: The Canberra Law Review Vol 6 Nos 1&2 1999 RACE VILIFICATION LAWS: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE BEDE HARRISt I. INTRODUCTION The enactment of South Africa's final Constitution in 19961 marked the culmination of a process of constitutional change which commenced in 1990 with the white minority government's release of Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners, and the unbanning of political organisations which had been engaged in the struggle against apartheid. An interim Constitution,2 drafted at a negotiating forum at which all political parties were represented, paved the way for the country's first universal suffrage elections, held in 1994. The resultant Parliament acted in two capacities - as the nation's legislature and as a Constitutional Convention, charged with the task of drafting a final Constitution. Given that during the apartheid era governments had been both undemocratic and racially discriminatory, all parties accepted that both the interim and final Constitutions would be founded on the values of freedom and equality, and that these would be given effect to in an entrenched Bill of Rights. However it was also recognised that freedom and equality might well conflict. An instance of potential conflict related to freedom of expression, where a commitment to open political discussion indicated that the widest possible scope be given to the freedom, while a commitment to the eradication of racial discrimination indicated that restrictions be placed on hate speech. This article examines how the South African legal system balances these competing interests and whether any lessons may be drawn for Australia. Part 2 of the article contains a critical analysis of the two major schools of thought on the issue of hate speech, represented by the opposing approaches adopted in the BA(Mod) Dublin, LLB Rhodes, DPhil Waikato, Lecturer, School of Law, University of Canberra. This research is the product of a visit to the University of Natal, Durban, South Africa, funded by an Australian Research Council grant. I would like to express my appreciation to the Law School at the University of Natal for its hospitality, and to the ARC, DEETYA and the Research Office of James Cook University for the financial support provided for the project. This article is dedicated to the late Professor Anthony S Mathews, James Scott Wylie Professor of Law at the University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, whose unwavering commitment to human rights remains an inspiration to me. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. 2 Republic of South Africa Constitution Act 200 of 1993.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most