Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/125516
Type of publication: master thesis
Field of Science: Teisė / Law (S001)
Author(s): Chmieliauskytė, Agnė
Title: Ar Lietuvos teisiniame reguliavime įtvirtinti kriterijai įgalina atriboti saviraiškos laisvę nuo neapykantos kurstymo nusikaltimų?
Other Title: Do current Lithuanian legal framework criteria allow to distinguish between freedom of expression and incitement of hate crimes?
Extent: 40 p.
Date: 3-Jun-2016
Keywords: Neapykantos kurstymas;neapykantos kurstymo nusikaltimai;saviraiškos laisvė.;Incitement to hatred;hate crimes;freedom of expression.
Abstract: Teisė į saviraiškos laisvę įtvirtinta Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijoje bei Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucijoje užtikrina asmenims teisę skleisti ne tik pozityvias, bet ir šokiruojančias idėjas. Vienas iš šios teisės ribojimų yra įtvirtintas Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo kodekso 170 straipsnyje, kuriame numatyta atsakomybė už neapykantos kurstymo nusikaltimus. Įstatymuose nėra numatytų aiškių kriterijų, taigi kyla problema – ar įtvirtintas teisinis reguliavimas, įgalina atriboti neapykantos kurstymo veikas nuo teisės į saviraiškos laisvę, nepažeisdamas kitų teisių. Siekiant išspręsti šią problemą, darbe analizuojama, kaip yra apibrėžiamos saviraiškos ir neapykantos kurstymo sąvokos, nagrinėjama užsienio šalių taikoma teisė, Europos Žmogaus Teisių Teismo jurisprudencijos įtvirtinti kriterijai ir jų pritaikymas Lietuvoje priimant sprendimus saviraiškos laisvės atskyrimo nuo neapykantos kurstymo bylose. Šio tyrimo objektas yra LR BK 170 straipsnio reguliavimas saviraiškos laisvės kontekste. Tyrimo tikslas – nustatyti, ar Lietuvoje įtvirtinti kriterijai įgalina atriboti saviraiškos laisvę nuo neapykantos kurstymo nusikaltimų, o šiam tikslui pasiekti, tyrime naudojami mokslinės literatūros analizės, dokumentų analizės, lyginamasis, ir apibendrinimo metodai. Išanalizavus mokslinę literatūrą, užsienio bei Lietuvos teisės aktus, Lietuvos bei EŽTT teismų praktiką, prieinama išvados, kad teisė į saviraiškos laisvę nėra absoliuti ir proporcingas jos ribojimas būtinas kitų teisių užtikrinimui, o neapykantos kurstymo veikų kriminalizavimas yra vienas iš būdų to įgyvendinimui. Pastebėta, jog Jungtinėse Amerikos Valstijose, kur saviraiškos laisvė yra aukščiau kitų teisių, atsakomybės taikymas už neapykantos kurstymo nusikaltimus yra suvokiama ne kaip būtinybė, o kaip teisės pažeidimas. Lietuvoje neapyknatos nusikaltimų skaičius auga, tačiau tokio pobūdžio bylos teisminį nagrinėjimą pasiekia retai. Daugiausia veikų padaroma prieš homoseksualius asmenis, internetinėje erdvėje skelbiant komentarus. Teismų sprendimuose sutinkami EŽTT jurisprudencijos išskiriami atribojimo kriterijai, tačiau jie taikomi ne kaip kriterijų visuma, ką kaip sąlygą šių kriterijų taikymui išskiria EŽTT. Lietuvoje dažniausiai išskiriamas konteksto kriterijus, įvardijamas kaip neigiamas, konservatyvus visuomenės požiūris tam tikro reiškinio atžvilgiu, kas galimai tampa diskriminacijos pateisinimu. Tokiu būdu susidorojimą kurstantys komentarai priskiriami saviraiškos laisvei, kas leidžia teigti, jog kriterijai, naudojami Lietuvos teisiniame reguliavime, neįgalina atriboti neapykantos kurstymo nusikaltimų nuo teisės į saviraiškos laisvę.
Right to freedom of expression, which is established in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, allows people to disseminate not only positive, but also shocking ideas. One of the restrictions of this right is established in Article 170 of Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania, providing liability for hate crimes. As laws fail to specify clear criteria, the problem of whether the established legal regulation enables separation of hate crimes from the right to freedom of expression without violation of other rights emerges. Seeking to solve the aforementioned problem, the present paper analyses the definition of concepts of freedom of expression and hate speech. It also examines the applicable foreign law, the criteria, established by the European Court of Human Rights, and their application in Lithuania, while deciding the cases of separation of right to freedom of expression and hate speech. The object of this research is regulation of Article 170 of Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania in the context of right to freedom of expression. The aim of research is to find out whether the criteria, established in Lithuania, enable separation of right to freedom of expression from hate crimes. Goals of research are: to define a concept, a legal consolidation and limits of the right of freedom of expression on the basis of scientific sources, legislation, case law and other documents; define a concept of hate crimes by using scientific sources, legislation, case law and other documents; to compare Lithuanian and foreign legal frameworks of incitement of hate crimes; to identify the criteria which separates freedom of expression from hate crimes by examining the jurisprudence of the ECtHR; to analyse the Lithuanian jurisprudence on hate crimes; to find out whether the criteria, established in Lithuania, allow to distinguish between freedom of expression and hate crimes. In order to achieve these goals and aim, analysis of scientific literature, analysis of documents, comparative, and generalizing methods were used. Upon analysing the scientific literature, foreign and Lithuanian legislation, and ECtHR case law, it might be concluded that: The right to freedom of expression is one of the fundamental human rights and it can occur in various forms – shocking as example. This right is not an absolute, and its proportional restriction is necessary to ensure other rights, while criminalization of hate speech is one of the methods for implementation. Hate crimes are especially serious discriminatory offences, made with prejudices against certain groups of persons and the negative consequences are obvious. Those crimes form a negative approach to society and dishonour the values of certain groups. Nevertheless, it is necessary to avoid a disproportionate application of criminal law in this area in order to strike a balance between the rights and obligations of individuals. The creation and application of the law providing liability for offences of incitement to hatred and its constituent elements of criminal offences are independently decided by States. This demonstrates the different parties' approach to the dangerousness of the crime of incitement to hatred. In Europe, the law providing liability for inciting hatred, adoption and application is perceived as a necessity. On the other hand, it was noticed that in the United States of America, where the right to freedom of expression is superior to other rights, application of liability for hate crimes is considered as violation of the right rather than necessity. Purpose, content and context are criteria formed by ECtHR, which allows distinguishing freedom of expression and hate crimes. They must be seen and assessed as a whole, whereas one of the elements necessary for the existence of another and helps to prove existence of assessment criteria. By applying this interaction, the right solution may be founded. The numbers of hate crimes increases in Lithuania, however, these cases rarely reach the trial. Also, these crimes constitute a substantial public interest and debates. Most offences are committed against homosexuals, while making comments on the Internet. Although by Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania the consequences are not needed, sometimes Lithuanian courts asks to prove them. The court decisions include the separation criteria, specified in jurisprudence of ECtHR, however, they are not applied as the entirety of criteria, what is specified by ECtHR as the condition for their application. In Lithuania, the most common context criterion is named as negative, conservative public view towards certain phenomenon, which potentially becomes a justification of discrimination. Thus, hate comments are attributed to the freedom of expression, which suggests that the criteria, used in Lithuanian legal regulation, do not enable separation of hate crimes from the right to freedom of expression.
Internet: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/125516
Affiliation(s): Teisės fakultetas
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:VDU, ASU ir LEU iki / until 2018

Files in This Item:
agne_chmieliauskyte_md.pdf790.95 kBAdobe PDF   Until 2021-05-18View/Open
Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats


CORE Recommender

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.