Hate speech and LGBTI rights: perspectives from the Jon Qwelane case

COMMENT

On September 22 2020, the Constitutional Court will hear the case of Jonathan Dubula Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another dealing with the subject matter of hate speech against LGBTI persons. While some parts of society try to turn back the clock on the constitutional protection of vulnerable groups it is once again up to the apex court to provide clarity on the use of hate speech against LGBTI persons.

Twelve years ago, Jon Qwelane authored an article which aimed to offend and dehumanise the gay community. While the Equality Court ruled in 2017 that his article constituted hate speech under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (Pepuda), the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) set this judgment aside and concluded that the provision that regulates hate speech – section 10 of Pepuda – is unconstitutional. It is now up to the Constitutional Court to decide whether the SCA’s findings are correct and section 10 of Pepuda is indeed unconstitutional.

The Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) has been admitted as an amicus curiae in this matter and provides the Constitutional Court with a comprehensive analysis of international law looking specifically at the elements of hate speech and how it harms the rights and compromises the safety of members of the LGBTI community. While South African laws provide legal protection for the rights of the LGBTI community, anti-LGBTI sentiment exists in many parts of South African society.

Contextualising South Africa’s history: sexual orientation and gender identity, apartheid, torture and the post-apartheid Constitution

During the apartheid-era, same sex acts were criminalised in terms of the Immorality Act. Discrimination, imprisonment of up to seven years and a medical torture programme (the aversion project) were the outcome of a system which now   constitutes a crime against humanity.

On May 8 1996, the South African Constitution was adopted, and proceeded to outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation as the first of its kind. This hugely progressive step was followed by laws aimed to protect the LGBTI community. The jurisprudence developed by the Constitutional Court in post-apartheid South Africa further strengthened the rights of the LGBTI community, enabling previously unheard-of situations, such as the ability of same-sex couples to adopt children and access the same health and financial benefits as opposite-sex spouses.


International law as the specialised body of law

There are numerous submissions before the court focussing on domestic law and the constitutionality of section 10 of Pepuda. SALC’s submission raises issues of international law and their relevance and necessity in the interpretation of domestic laws.

Since the discussion of section 10 of Pepuda entails an interpretation of the right of freedom of expression, any court must consider international law under section 39 of the Constitution. In addition, the text of Pepuda itself emphasises that one of its objectives is to ‘facilitate (…) compliance with international law obligations’.

South Africa is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. All these international agreements pose obligations on the state,to protect freedom of expression, prohibit any form of hate speech and protect LGBTI persons from any kind of discrimination.

This means that any interpretation of a South African hate speech provision has to conform to those international agreements. While the SCA gave a brief overview of international law on the issue of hate speech against LGBTI persons, its analysis of international law is far from comprehensive.

By contrast, SALC demonstrates in its submission that there is a determinable threshold in international law when expression becomes hate speech. Based on the jurisprudence and general comments by international bodies, SALC argues that international law, as a specialised body of law, provides sufficient content to inform the language of section 10 of Pepuda. Therefore, it cannot be argued that section 10 of Pepuda is too vague and unconstitutional.

As much as this case is about the prohibition of hate speech, it is also about discrimination and the vulnerability of LGBTI persons. In this context, SALC’s submission further highlights that the term “gender” as it is used under section 16 of the South African Constitution is not binary. Through the lens of international law, SALC illustrates that the definition of gender moves towards a socially constructed concept, which exceeds a definition that includes only the biological sex. This follows that “gender” should and must include reference to sexual orientation and gender identity.

The decision by the Constitutional Court: where do we go as a society?

Gender produces vulnerabilities linked to the way societies organise, understand and accept male and female roles and how they exclude those who transgress the accepted and expected boundaries of such roles. The speech in the Qwelane case constitutes a gold standard of hate speech which dehumanises LGBTI persons, deprives them of their dignity, and aims to exclude them from society and constitutional protections. Based on South Africa’s international obligations and the universal character of the most fundamental human right, human dignity, this matter cannot be decided solely on the basis of domestic law, particularly if such law does not live up to international standards.

Sexual orientation should therefore be treated in the same way as race, ethnicity and religion, which are covered by hate speech and hate crime laws, because sexual orientation is a characteristic that is fundamental to a person’s sense of self.

In response to the cruel oppression of the apartheid system, South Africa in 1996 adopted a Constitution that was ahead of its time. It is the same progressive Constitution that allows us to turn to international law in order to meet international standards. The decision of the Constitutional Court will be crucial in guiding the direction South Africa should be moving towards as a tolerant, rights-abiding and diverse society.

Atilla Kisla is a legal consultant for the international criminal justice and civil and political rights programme at the Southern Africa Litigation Centre

Subscribe to the M&G

These are unprecedented times, and the role of media to tell and record the story of South Africa as it develops is more important than ever.

The Mail & Guardian is a proud news publisher with roots stretching back 35 years, and we’ve survived right from day one thanks to the support of readers who value fiercely independent journalism that is beholden to no-one. To help us continue for another 35 future years with the same proud values, please consider taking out a subscription.

Atilla Kisla
Atilla Kisla is a senior researcher for the Southern Africa Litigation Centre’s International Criminal Justice Programme

Related stories

Sticks and stones: Qwelane and the violence of words

Constitutional Court justice says homophobic article did not ignite fire of hate against the LGBTI community but added fuel to it

The Qwelane case: When human rights meet human rights

The Jon Qwelane case brings into focus the tension between hate speech and freedom of expression

Covid-19 deepens the educational divide

With the closure of schools, learning has moved to online platforms across the world, but a UNESCO report said only 12% of households in the least-developed countries have internet access at home

Every person’s silence against violence gives perpetrators licence to kill

Ongoing hate speech, whether in person, among people or on social media, that is directed at vulnerable groups can lead to violence and death

Even religious freedom has its limits

When a business decides who can or cannot buy their services or products, is this discrimination?

A mixed bag for human rights in Southern Africa in 2019

Abuses continued from Angola to Zimbabwe but there were also victories for people’s rights
Advertising

Subscribers only

SAA bailout raises more questions

As the government continues to grapple with the troubles facing the airline, it would do well to keep on eye on the impending Denel implosion

ANC’s rogue deployees revealed

Despite 6 300 ANC cadres working in government, the party’s integrity committee has done little to deal with its accused members

More top stories

Fake trafficking news targets migrants

Exaggerated reports on social media of human trafficking syndicates snatching people in broad daylight legitimate xenophobia while deflecting from the real problems in society

It’s not a ‘second wave’: Covid resurges because safety measures...

A simple model shows how complacency in South Africa will cause the number of infections to go on an upward trend again

Trouble brewing for Kenya’s coffee growers

Kenyan farmers say theft of their crop is endemic – and they suspect collusion

Unisa shortlists two candidates for the vice-chancellor job

The outgoing vice-chancellor’s term has been extended to April to allow for a smooth hand-over
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…

The best local and international journalism

handpicked and in your inbox every weekday