无用的修辞还是策略性的论战?日本仇恨言论法的文本与语境分析。

IF 0.9 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE SEMIOTICS OF LAW-REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE SEMIOTIQUE JURIDIQUE Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-02-14 DOI:10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9
Richard Powell
{"title":"无用的修辞还是策略性的论战?日本仇恨言论法的文本与语境分析。","authors":"Richard Powell","doi":"10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In May, 2016 the Diet passed a law on the \"Promotion of efforts to eliminate unfair discriminatory speech and behaviour against people originating from outside Japan\", widely referred to as ヘイトスピーチ (<i>Heito Supiichi Hō</i> /Hate Speech Law). For some residents of Japan it had been a long time coming. Without any laws specifically prohibiting racially discriminatory speech or writing, aggrieved parties had hitherto been forced to resort to indirect lines of protection. In 1999, for example, a Brazilian national ejected from a jewelry shop displaying a poster saying \"No foreigners allowed\" obtained a favourable ruling citing Japan's ratification of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and in 2013 an injunction for defamation and obstruction of business was granted on behalf of a school for children of North Korean descent repeatedly subjected to provocative demonstrations. But others questioned the need to reinforce limits on freedom of expression even in the face of aggressive taunts, with some claiming that incidents of racial discrimination in Japan lacked the historical, entrenched and violent dimensions that had prompted hate speech laws in Europe and elsewhere. When the text of the proposed law became public there was also debate about its utility as such an abstract measure seemed inapplicable to many potential victims and lacked punitive sanctions. Against this criticism it could be argued that the law went about as far as the government could expect to go if it were to get it passed; that it appears to be curtailing a particularly aggressive form of hate speech; and that it has ushered in a number of more specific initiatives, especially at local level. This study will begin with the 2016 text itself, drawing on the semiotic framework of Systemic Functional Grammar to explore how it prioritises general principles over specific regulations. This textual analysis will be followed by a contextual account of why the Law was constructed as it was, how it has influenced awareness of hate speech, and where it fits in with an existing genre of non-coercive legislation in Japan.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9.</p>","PeriodicalId":44376,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE SEMIOTICS OF LAW-REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE SEMIOTIQUE JURIDIQUE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8853277/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toothless Rhetoric or Strategic Polemic? A Textual and Contextual Analysis of Japan's Hate Speech Law.\",\"authors\":\"Richard Powell\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In May, 2016 the Diet passed a law on the \\\"Promotion of efforts to eliminate unfair discriminatory speech and behaviour against people originating from outside Japan\\\", widely referred to as ヘイトスピーチ (<i>Heito Supiichi Hō</i> /Hate Speech Law). For some residents of Japan it had been a long time coming. Without any laws specifically prohibiting racially discriminatory speech or writing, aggrieved parties had hitherto been forced to resort to indirect lines of protection. In 1999, for example, a Brazilian national ejected from a jewelry shop displaying a poster saying \\\"No foreigners allowed\\\" obtained a favourable ruling citing Japan's ratification of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and in 2013 an injunction for defamation and obstruction of business was granted on behalf of a school for children of North Korean descent repeatedly subjected to provocative demonstrations. But others questioned the need to reinforce limits on freedom of expression even in the face of aggressive taunts, with some claiming that incidents of racial discrimination in Japan lacked the historical, entrenched and violent dimensions that had prompted hate speech laws in Europe and elsewhere. When the text of the proposed law became public there was also debate about its utility as such an abstract measure seemed inapplicable to many potential victims and lacked punitive sanctions. Against this criticism it could be argued that the law went about as far as the government could expect to go if it were to get it passed; that it appears to be curtailing a particularly aggressive form of hate speech; and that it has ushered in a number of more specific initiatives, especially at local level. This study will begin with the 2016 text itself, drawing on the semiotic framework of Systemic Functional Grammar to explore how it prioritises general principles over specific regulations. This textual analysis will be followed by a contextual account of why the Law was constructed as it was, how it has influenced awareness of hate speech, and where it fits in with an existing genre of non-coercive legislation in Japan.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE SEMIOTICS OF LAW-REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE SEMIOTIQUE JURIDIQUE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8853277/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE SEMIOTICS OF LAW-REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE SEMIOTIQUE JURIDIQUE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/2/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE SEMIOTICS OF LAW-REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE SEMIOTIQUE JURIDIQUE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2016年5月,日本国会通过了一项关于“促进消除针对日本境外人士的不公平歧视性言论和行为”的法律,俗称“仇恨言论法”(Heito Supiichi hhi /Hate speech law)。对于日本的一些居民来说,这是一个漫长的等待。由于没有任何法律明确禁止种族歧视言论或文字,受害各方迄今为止被迫诉诸间接的保护手段。例如,1999年,一名巴西人从一家挂着“外国人不得入内”海报的珠宝店被驱逐,并获得了一项有利的裁决,理由是日本批准了《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》;2013年,一所朝鲜后裔学校因多次遭受挑衅性示威而获得诽谤和妨碍商业的禁令。但也有人质疑,即使面对咄咄逼人的嘲讽,也有必要加强对言论自由的限制。一些人声称,日本的种族歧视事件缺乏欧洲和其他地方出台仇恨言论法律的历史、根深蒂固和暴力层面。当拟议法律的案文公开时,也有关于其效用的辩论,因为这种抽象措施似乎不适用于许多潜在的受害者,而且缺乏惩罚性制裁。针对这种批评,我们可以辩称,如果政府想要通过这项法律,它已经达到了政府所能达到的程度;它似乎正在遏制一种特别具有攻击性的仇恨言论;它还带来了一些更具体的倡议,特别是在地方一级。本研究将从2016年的文本本身开始,利用系统功能语法的符号学框架来探索它如何优先考虑一般原则而不是具体规定。在进行文本分析之后,将对该法律的制定原因、它如何影响对仇恨言论的认识,以及它与日本现有的非强制性立法类型的契合程度进行背景说明。补充资料:在线版本包含补充资料,下载地址:10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Toothless Rhetoric or Strategic Polemic? A Textual and Contextual Analysis of Japan's Hate Speech Law.

In May, 2016 the Diet passed a law on the "Promotion of efforts to eliminate unfair discriminatory speech and behaviour against people originating from outside Japan", widely referred to as ヘイトスピーチ (Heito Supiichi Hō /Hate Speech Law). For some residents of Japan it had been a long time coming. Without any laws specifically prohibiting racially discriminatory speech or writing, aggrieved parties had hitherto been forced to resort to indirect lines of protection. In 1999, for example, a Brazilian national ejected from a jewelry shop displaying a poster saying "No foreigners allowed" obtained a favourable ruling citing Japan's ratification of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and in 2013 an injunction for defamation and obstruction of business was granted on behalf of a school for children of North Korean descent repeatedly subjected to provocative demonstrations. But others questioned the need to reinforce limits on freedom of expression even in the face of aggressive taunts, with some claiming that incidents of racial discrimination in Japan lacked the historical, entrenched and violent dimensions that had prompted hate speech laws in Europe and elsewhere. When the text of the proposed law became public there was also debate about its utility as such an abstract measure seemed inapplicable to many potential victims and lacked punitive sanctions. Against this criticism it could be argued that the law went about as far as the government could expect to go if it were to get it passed; that it appears to be curtailing a particularly aggressive form of hate speech; and that it has ushered in a number of more specific initiatives, especially at local level. This study will begin with the 2016 text itself, drawing on the semiotic framework of Systemic Functional Grammar to explore how it prioritises general principles over specific regulations. This textual analysis will be followed by a contextual account of why the Law was constructed as it was, how it has influenced awareness of hate speech, and where it fits in with an existing genre of non-coercive legislation in Japan.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11196-022-09883-9.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The International Journal for the Semiotics of Law is the leading international journal in Legal Semiotics worldwide.   We are pathfinders in mapping the contours of Legal Semiotics.   We provide a high quality blind peer-reviewing process to all the papers via our online submission platform with well-established expert reviewers from all over the world. Our boards reflect this vision and mission.   We welcome submissions in English or in French.   We bridge different fields of expertise to allow a percolation of experience and a sharing of this advanced knowledge from individual, collective and/or institutional fields of competence.   We publish original and high quality papers that should ideally critique, apply or otherwise engage with semiotics or related theory and models of analyses, or with rhetoric, history of political and legal discourses, philosophy of language, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, deconstruction and all types of semiotics analyses including visual semiotics. We also welcome submissions, which reflect on legal philosophy or legal theory, hermeneutics, the relation between psychoanalysis and language, the intersection between law and literature, as well as the relation between law and aesthetics.   We encourage researchers to submit proposals for Special Issues so as to promote their research projects. Submissions should be sent to the EIC.   We aim at publishing Online First to decrease publication delays, and give the possibility to select Open Choice.   Our goal is to identify, promote and publish interdisciplinary and innovative research papers in legal semiotics.
期刊最新文献
International Law in The Era of Blockchain: Law Semiotics. Ecosystem Vulnerability. New Semantics for International Law. Vulnerability. From the Paradigmatic Subject to a New Paradigm of the Human Condition? An Introduction. Digitisation and Sharing of Collections: Museum Practices and Copyright During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Queer Privacy Protection: Challenges and the Fight within Libraries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1