Inciting ethnic hatred

In the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, punishment for such acts is contained in the chapter on crimes against the foundations of the political system and state security.

Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation ^[1] provides that

Propaganda or agitation inciting social, racial, national or religious hatred or enmity is not allowed. Propaganda of social, racial, national, religious or linguistic superiority is prohibited.

According to part 1 of article 282 "The incitement of hatred or enmity, as well as the humiliation of human dignity" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as amended by Federal Law of 08.12.2003 N 162-ФЗ ^[2] ,

Actions aimed at inciting hatred or enmity, as well as humiliating the dignity of a person or a group of people on the grounds of sex, race, nationality, language, origin, religion, as well as belonging to any social group, committed publicly or with the use of the media shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles, or in the amount of the wage or other income of the convicted person for a period of one year to two years, or by deprivation of the right to hold certain bit or engage in certain activities for up to three years, or by compulsory works for a term of up to one hundred eighty hours, or correctional labor for up to one year, or imprisonment for up to two years.

Thus, one way of committing this crime is to disseminate information in the media , which increases the likelihood of familiarization with the statements that incite ethnic hatred, a large audience.

A crime is recognized to be completed from the moment of making public statements or appearing in the media regardless of whether or not someone has developed a sense of hostility towards a particular nationality. The subject of a crime can be any person who has reached the age of 16.

The motives for criminal actions can be political, nationalistic, personal.

There are known cases of criminal proceedings under Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for statements on the Internet ^{[3] [4]} .

Article 161 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - “Violation of the equal rights of citizens depending on their race, nationality or attitude to religion”

1. Deliberate actions aimed at inciting national, racial or religious hatred and hatred, humiliating national honor and dignity or insulting the feelings of people in connection with their religious beliefs, racial, ethnicity, color, language, as well as direct or indirect restriction rights or the establishment of direct or indirect privileges on the grounds of race, color, political, religious and other beliefs, gender, ethnic and social origin, property status, place of residence , Linguistic or other grounds - are punishable by a fine of two hundred to five hundred untaxed minimum incomes, or restraint of liberty for up to five years, with disqualification to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years or without it.

2. The same actions, combined with violence, deceit or threats, as well as committed by an official, shall be punishable by a fine of five hundred to one thousand tax-free minimum incomes of citizens or restriction of liberty for a period of two to five years.

3. The actions provided for by parts one or two of this article, committed by an organized group of persons or resulting in loss of life or other serious consequences, shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for a term of three to ten years.

Article 174 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "The excitement of social, national, tribal, racial, class or religious hatred"

1. Deliberate actions aimed at inciting social, national, tribal, racial, estate or religious hatred, insulting the national honor and dignity or religious feelings of citizens, as well as propaganda of the exclusivity, superiority or inferiority of citizens on the basis of their attitude to religion, class, national, tribal or racial affiliation, if these acts were committed publicly or using the media or telecommunication networks, as well as by manufacture or distribution Anenia of literature or other information carriers promoting social, national, tribal, racial, estate or religious discord -

Shall be punishable by restraint of liberty for a term of two to seven years or by imprisonment for the same term.

Section 130 of the German Penal Code provides that anyone who incites hatred against a “certain part of the population” or viciously ridicules one may be punished with up to 5 years in prison if his actions could lead to a violation of the world. Moreover, it is enough that the sense of security of the group that has become the object of insult is threatened, or that the predisposition of others to commit attacks against this group is strengthened.

In Germany, France , Denmark and the Netherlands, there is legislation that allows for conviction for statements that incite hatred, regardless of intent or possible consequences. Thus, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands ruled: “Whether a statement addressed to them regarding their race and (or) religion is offensive to a group of persons is determined by the nature of the statement itself, and not by the intention of the person who publishes it.” In France, under the law on incitement of hatred and defamation of a group of individuals, the newspaper editor was convicted of publishing a vicious anti-Semitic article, which he allegedly published without reading, indicating that there was no requirement for intent. In 1990, the French Penal Code was supplemented with the fact that denying or even questioning the genocide of Jews by the Nazis is a crime, regardless of the intent of the perpetrator.

However, it should be pointed out that the Danish legislation, which also does not require intent as a prerequisite for the onset of responsibility, has been amended to establish that journalists are not responsible for the publication of statements by others unless it is proven that the journalists have intent to inflict insults.

Articles 18 and 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 of England criminalize threatening, offensive or abusive statements or acts that are either deliberately aimed at inciting racial hatred or that could actually lead to inciting such hatred. Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 prohibits the use of threatening, insulting, or abusive words within the audibility or visibility of a person to whom they may cause “disturbance, anxiety or suffering”. There is also a law prohibiting the sending of a letter or the publication of an article containing threatening or highly offensive and aimed at causing anxiety or fear.

In Northern Ireland, the offense is the use of threatening, offensive and offensive in form or meaning expressions that may incite hatred against part of the population or cause fear in part of the population.

Section 144B of the Israeli Penal Code provides for up to five years of imprisonment for any publication intended to incite racism , regardless of whether it is true and actually leads to racism, and imprisonment of up to one year for storage and the distribution of prohibited publications aimed at inciting racism.

India punishes up to 5 years in prison for intentionally inciting intercommunal hatred. It is also recognized as a crime if a candidate or party representative performs “systematic actions calling for a vote or abstention from voting on the grounds of caste , race, community or religion”.

Canadian criminal law provides for liability if there is either intent to incite hatred, or the likelihood of peace breaking as a result of criminal acts.

In the United States, a broad interpretation by courts of the First Amendment to the US Constitution (on freedom of speech) prevents criminal liability for inciting ethnic hatred. The courts acknowledge that freedom of speech can only be limited in cases where expressions can directly lead to unlawful actions and when no other accessible and less stringent measures can be effective. Some believe that the decision of the US Supreme Court in the National Socialist Party of America v. Skoki case , which allowed neo-Nazis dressed in swastikas in 1977 to march along the streets of the Chicago suburb of the Holocaust survivors , is an excess of application First Amendment ^[5] .

• Hate speech
• Ethnopolism
• Xenophobia
• Russophobia

• Borzenkov G.N., Komissarov V.S. Crimes encroaching on the principle of equality of citizens, proclaimed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, regardless of race, nationality or religion (unavailable link from 05/26/2013 [2299 days] - history , copy )
• The problem of responsibility for inciting ethnic hatred // Brochure of the Memorial Society
• Round table transcript “Article 282: cannot be canceled. Where to put a comma? " 2012
• Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 28, 2011 No. 11 “On judicial practice in criminal cases of extremist crimes” (Russian) (PDF) (June 28, 2011). Date of treatment June 26, 2011. Archived on February 5, 2012.