By Joan Barata
[Editor’s note: this is a review of Dr. Natalie Alkiviadou’s new book, Hate Speech and the European Court of Human Rights (Routledge 2025)].
The notion of hate speech has always been a problematic legal artifact in international human rights law. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides a balanced approach by framing the scope and main pillars of the right to freedom of expression while at the same time establishing clear criteria regarding the possibilities for States to introduce limitations or restrictions. Article 20 addresses the issue of limits with a different tone and technique. It basically introduces straightforward prohibitions in relation to two big categories: propaganda for war and advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (usually known as illegal hate speech).
[. . .]In sum, Natalie Alkiviadou has produced a unique and solid scrutiny of the case law of the ECtHR in cases of hate speech. The book does not only show the analytical shortcomings and inconsistencies of judgements in this area, but it also invites to adopt a more stringent approach based on a resolute defense of the right to express shocking, disturbing and offensive ideas, and where possible restrictions (either based on article 10 or article 17 of the Convention) are subject to a strict scrutiny for harm following clear scientific evidence or sociological data. All these principles will not only provide proper protection to freedom of expression in the continent in times of serious demise but will also preserve the obvious legitimacy of the Court as a human rights arbiter in the international arena.
Read More
Natalie Alkiviadou is a Senior Research Fellow at The Future of Free Speech. Her research interests lie in the freedom of expression, the far-right, hate speech, hate crime, and non-discrimination.