GENOCIDE DENIALS AND THE LAEPDF|Epub|txt|kindle电子书版本网盘下载

GENOCIDE DENIALS AND THE LAEPDF格式电子书版下载

注意：本站所有压缩包均有解压码： 点击下载压缩包解压工具

PART ONE From Genocide to Denial1

1. Law's Holocaust Denial:State,Memory,Legality&David Fraser3

1. Introduction:Law's Holocaust/Law's Amnesia3

2. Blind in the Left Eye:Weimar,Law's Republic and Denial11

3. Holocaust and Legal History19

4. Memory Laws and Law's Memory22

5. Memory/Law-Memory Laws27

5.1 The loi Gayssot29

5.2 Lois Memorielles30

5.3 The Armenian (Genocide) in French Law39

6. Conclusion47

2. From Trying the Perpetrator to Trying the Denier and Back Again:Some Reflections&Lawrence Douglas49

1. The Logic of the Law:Denier as Perpetrator49

2. The Risks of Trial:Perpetrator as Denier60

3. Trying the Perpetrator to Answer the Denier65

PART TWO Balancing Denial Prohibition75

3. Holocaust Denial and Hate Speech&Robert A.Kahn77

1. The Problem of "Bare" Denial77

2. A "Minor Province of Censorship?"79

3. Judging Hate by Its Content82

4. Is Bare Denial Hateful?84

5. The Limits of Traditional Hate Speech Laws86

6. The Perils of Blanket Denial Laws90

7. Bringing "Hate" Back In94

7.1 Past Hate as a Rationale for Genocide Denial Laws95

7.2 Past Hate as a Justification for anti-Denial Laws in European Jurisprudence96

7.3 Past Hate as a Yardstick for Future Genocide Denial Laws100

8. Holocaust Denial Laws and Blasphemy103

9. Conclusion106

4. Defending Truth:Holocaust Denial in the Twenty-First Century&Kenneth Lasson109

1. Holocaust Denial112

1.1 The Nature of Denial113

1.2 Denial in the Twenty-First Century113

1.3 Denial in the Middle East116

1.4 Confronting Denial122

1.5 The Academic Voice123

1.6 Books124

1.7 Holocaust Denial and Political Correctness125

2. Historical Aspects of Free Expression:Framers and Revisionists128

2.1 Principles of Liberty129

2.2 The Right of Access133

2.3 Arguments in Deference to Freedom of Expression136

2.4 Arguments in Favor of Regulating Hate Speech140

2.5 The Experience Elsewhere144

1. Canada144

2. England146

3. France146

4. Sweden147

5. United States147

3. The Quest for Truth in a Free Society148

3.1 Ignorance and Education148

3.2 Liberty and Responsibility151

3.3 Toward a More Responsible Press152

4. Summary and Conclusion153

5. The Criminal Protection of Memory:Some Observations About the Offence of Holocaust Denial&Emanuela Fronza155

1. Law as Protection Against Oblivion:Punishing Holocaust Denial as Part of a General Trend155

1.1 Les "Lois Memorielles" and the Crime of Denial156

2. Denial as an Offence160

3. Deniers on Trial167

3.1 History as Res Judicata:the Holocaust as a "Historically Established Fact" and Garaudy v.France168

3.2 History on Trial:"the Correct Method" and the Theil Case170

3.3 Claims About Facts and Claims About Values:the Spanish Tribunal Constitucional's Judgement of Partial Unconstitutionality172

4. The Judge as Historian?175

5. Denial as an Attack on the Founding Ethical Pact and the Need for a Long Road of Memory178

PART THREE Ruling Denial Prohibition183

6. The Law of Holocaust Denial in Europe:Toward a (qualified) EU-wide Criminal Prohibition&Laurent Pech185

1.The Situation Before 9/11:United in Diversity187

1.1 The Principle:The Lack of Criminal Provisions Prohibiting the Denial of the Holocaust188

1.2 The Exception:The Express Criminalization of Holocaust Denial in "Militant Democracies"190

1. Punishing the "Auschwitz Lie" in Countries Haunted by Their Dark Past:The Example of Germany190

2. Punishing Holocaust Denial in a Context of Extreme-Right Resurgence:The Example of France198

3. Decriminalizing the Denial of the Holocaust in a "Non-Militant" Democracy:The "Surprising" Judgment of the Spanish Constitutional Court206

2. Holocaust Denial Laws Before the European Court of Human Rights:From a Low Standard of Scrutiny to the Absence of any Scrutiny210

2.1 The Principle:The Freedom to Express Offensive,Shocking,or Disturbing Information or Ideas210

2.2 The Holocaust Denial Exception:No Freedom to Deny "Clearly Established Historical Facts"213

1. The Initial Approach:A Minimalist Degree of Scrutiny Under Article 10 ECHR Interpreted in Light of Article 17 ECHR213

2. A More Radical Approach:Holocaust Denial as an Abuse of Right217

3. The Triumph of the Militant Democracies' Camp:The 2008 EU Framework Decision on Combating Certain Forms and Expressions of Racism and Xenophobia by Means of Criminal Law223

3.1 The Lack of a Universal Consensus223

3.2 A Long Time in the Coming:The 2008 EU FD on racism226

7. Denial of the Holocaust,Genocide,and Crimes Against Humanity:A Comparative Overview of Ad Hoc Statutes&Martin Imbleau235

1. Introduction235

2. Deniers' Intent and Tactics237

3. Scope of Ad Hoc Statutes241

3.1 Historical Events Targeted241

3.2 From Complete Denial to Moral Equivalence--The Spectrum of Ad Hoc Statutes244

3.3 The Event and the Rules of Evidence246

3.4 Formal Legislative Establishment and References to International Tribunal Decision249

4. An Overview of Ad Hoc Statutes and Other Approaches255

4.1 Ad hoc Statutes in Europe255

1. Germany255

2. France257

3. United Kingdom259

4. Austria260

5. Switzerland261

6. Belgium261

7. Spain261

8. Other European Countries262

4.2 North America263

1. Canada264

2. United States265

4.3 Israel267

5. Standardization of Ad Hoc Approaches in Europe267

6. Requirements to Prosecute Denial as a Form of Hate Speech:Are Ad Hoc Statutes Justified Infringements of the Freedom of Speech?269

7. Future Developments:The Cases of Japan,Rwanda,and Former Yugoslavia273

8. Conclusion275

8. The Denier's Intent&Thomas Hochmann279

1. A few "psychological" considerations281

1.1 Bare Denial as a Hidden Racist Attack281

1.2 Denial as a Way to Fame282

1.3 "Bona fide" Denial as Fanaticism:The Wishful Thinking of a Racist283

1.4 The Repercussions of State Denial287

2. Psychology of Denial Without a Specific Statute289

2.1 Assessment of the Methodology289

2.2 Other Techniques:Inferring Bad Faith293

1. Common Knowledge293

2. The Denier's Racism294

3. Explicit Prohibition of Denial and the Denier's Intent298

3.1 Legislative Discretion303

3.2 Intent and Consequences305

1. Some Distinctions305

2. Looking for a Normative Support for the Dogma of Intent307

3. "Substantial" speech regulations308

4. "Consequential" speech regulations311

5. Result:Irrelevance of the speaker's intent312

6. The Possibility of Making an Extra Requirement313

4. Conclusion317

Index321