Avia Law (France)

Last updated

The Avia Law, a law of 24 June 2020 aimed at combating hateful content on the internet, was a law of France whose initial content was largely challenged by the Constitutional Council, but some provisions were retained, such as the creation of a specialized public prosecutor's office and an Observatory of Online Hate attached to the Arcom.

Contents

The bill was intended to remove terrorist and pedopornographic content from any site and hateful and pornographic content from major social networks, collaborative platforms, and search engines within 24 hours.

Political figures, numerous organizations, and legal scholars criticized the law, arguing that it posed a danger to freedom of expression, particularly because content removal decisions could be made by a private operator without the intervention of the judicial judge, who is constitutionally the guarantor of individual liberties (Article 66 of the Constitution).

The bill was adopted by the National Assembly on 13 May 2020. The Constitutional Council, seized by opposition senators, ruled that the text was largely unconstitutional, particularly because it disproportionately infringed upon freedom of expression. On 24 June, President Emmanuel Macron promulgated the law, stripped of its provisions deemed unconstitutional.

Drafting of the Law

A Text Inspired by a German Law

Deputy Laetitia Avia was inspired by the German law Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz , known as "NetzDG", adopted on 1 September 2017, as a starting point for her work and claimed to propose a different system. [1] The German law required social networks to remove manifestly hateful content within 24 hours of notification. [2] If the illegal nature was not clear, sites had one week to respond. [2] Failure to comply with these deadlines exposed violators to a fine of up to 50 million euros. [2]

Similar positions were defended abroad by France, notably at the G7 Summit in Biarritz, in the summer of 2019, with the proposal of a charter on online moderation. [3]

Mission Against Online Hate

In March 2018, during the dinner of the Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions (CRIF), President Emmanuel Macron announced that he would entrust a mission to combat hate, racism, and antisemitism more effectively on the internet [4] to Franco-Algerian writer Karim Amellal, Gil Taïeb, vice-president of the CRIF, and Laetitia Avia, deputy of Paris (LREM). They submitted their report [5] to Prime Minister Édouard Philippe on 20 September 2018, containing twenty operational proposals to curb online hate and further regulate platforms in this area. [6]

Among the main measures included in the report were the establishment of a 24-hour deadline to censor hateful content, the implementation of a uniform reporting method for hateful content on the largest platforms, enhanced transparency obligations, better support for victims, a mechanism for measuring hate speech, intensified prevention and awareness campaigns targeting young people, a procedure allowing the blocking of clearly hateful sites, and a dialogue body involving all stakeholders.

In February 2019, Emmanuel Macron announced that the report and proposals co-written by Karim Amellal, Laetitia Avia, and Gil Taïeb would lead to a law to combat online hate. [7]

Concept of Hate in Law

Hate itself does not constitute an offense: it has no definition or existence in French positive law, [8] except when it serves as a motive for committing crimes or offenses. Thus, legal scholars debate the necessity of a new criminal offense since case law already punishes hateful speech under Article 32 of the July 29, 1881 law on freedom of the press. [9] In an opinion dated 10 July 2015, the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights stated that the existing incriminations [...] are sufficient. [10]

However, hateful content targeted by the bill could be defined, and the Pleven Law (1972) provided for punishing not hate itself but incitement to racial hatred. It reiterated the terms of the decree-law of Justice Minister Paul Marchandeau of 21 April 1939, which stated that the Public Prosecutor's Office should prosecute, of its own accord (without a complaint), the defamation or insult directed at a group of people belonging, by their origin, to a specific race or religion, [when it] was intended to incite hatred between citizens or inhabitants. Therefore, the first condition required that the statements be defamatory or insulting towards a group of people.

Bill Proposal

The bill, supported by the LICRA [11] and other organizations like Respect Zone, [12] SOS Homophobie, [11] and SOS Racisme, [13] was submitted on 20 March 2019 to the National Assembly by Deputy Laetitia Avia. Several dozen people were heard by reporters Laetitia Avia and Fabienne Colboc, including twelve associations, [14] nine independent administrative authorities and public bodies, [15] and twenty-two digital players, [16] along with specialized lawyers and magistrates. [17] These hearings were supplemented by a public consultation organized from 18 April to 12 May, which received one thousand four hundred and sixteen responses. [18] [19]

The Council of State, consulted for an opinion, issued a series of recommendations and criticisms. It notably recommended extending the law to search engines and broadening the scope of targeted content. [20] The initial proposal was therefore heavily revised in the Laws Committee of the National Assembly to comply with the Council of State's opinion [21] and thus respect European law and the French Constitution.

In December 2019, senators removed the flagship measure of the text, which required platforms, under penalty of sanctions, to remove any content reported as "hateful" within twenty-four hours, in favor of a "simplification of the notification systems" for this type of content. [22]

The joint committee on 8 January 2020 failed to reach an agreement. The text was therefore returned to the Senate and the National Assembly, the latter having the final say. The text was adopted by the National Assembly on 13 May by 355 votes in favor, 150 against, and 47 abstentions. The majority (LREM and MoDem) and UDI-Agir deputies voted in favor despite some abstentions, while the communists and socialists mostly abstained, and The Republicans, Liberties and Territories, La France Insoumise, and the National Rally opposed it. [23] [24] During this final vote, the favorable vote of Jean-François Cesarini, an LREM deputy who had passed away on 29 March 2020, was counted; according to the Assembly, the presence of this deputy was a material error, and the name of his substitute should indeed have been recorded. [25] [26]

The law was to come into effect in two phases: on 1 July 2020, and 1 January 2021.

European Commission

The bill was notified on 21 August 2019 to the European Commission. Initially, the French request to trigger the emergency procedure was denied. Subsequently, the Commission even issued observations to France following the reasoned opinion of the Czech Republic. [27] The European institution expressed reservations about the compatibility of the French text with European law. Brussels requested that France not vote on this text. [28] [29] Despite these criticisms, the government announced that it intended to modify the bill only marginally. [30]

Appeals and Censorship by the Constitutional Council

On 18 May 2020, Republican senators announced that they had filed an appeal with the Constitutional Council against the bill, in defense of freedom of expression. [31]

In its decision rendered on 18 June 2020, [32] the Constitutional Council ruled that the text was largely unconstitutional, finding that it imposed restrictions on freedom of expression that were not appropriate, necessary, or proportionate to the intended purpose. [33] The first article and eighteen other articles of the bill were censored. [34] The jurisdiction declared certain provisions unconstitutional due to a disproportionate infringement on freedom of expression. [35] Other provisions were also censored because they were considered legislative riders by the constitutional judge. [36] [37] [38] [39]

Content of the Bill Before the Constitutional Council's Decision

This chapter relates to the content of the bill, but it is not part of the promulgated law due to the Constitutional Council's decision. Therefore, it is not applicable.

Content Covered

Several categories of manifestly illegal content that must be removed are targeted by the first article of the law. These are offenses already present in French law that websites must remove within 1 hour or 24 hours from the time they are reported: [40]

OffenseLegal TextTimeframeTargeted Sites
Incitement to voluntary attacks on life, attacks on the integrity of the person, and sexual assault.

Incitement to thefts, extortions, and voluntary destruction, damage, and deterioration dangerous to people.

Glorification of the above crimes, war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of enslavement or exploitation of a person reduced to slavery, or crimes and misdemeanors of collaboration with the enemy

 Law of July 29, 1881, Article 24, Paragraph 5 [41] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Incitement to discrimination, hate, or violence against a person or group of people based on their origin or their membership or non-membership in a specific ethnic group, nation, race, or religion. Law of July 29, 1881, Article 24, Paragraph 7 [41] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Incitement to hate or violence against a person or group of people based on their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Law of July 29, 1881, Article 24, Paragraph 8 [41] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Denial of the existence of crimes against humanity.

Negation, gross minimization, or banalization of the existence of a crime of genocide, against humanity, enslavement, or war crime.

 Law of July 29, 1881, Article 24 bis [42] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Insult towards a person or group of people based on their origin or their membership or non-membership in a specific ethnic group, nation, race, or religion. Law of July 29, 1881, Article 33, Paragraph 3 [43] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Insult committed under the same conditions towards a person or group of people based on their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Law of July 29, 1881, Article 33, Paragraph 4 [43] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Sexual harassment. Penal Code, Article 222-33 [44] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Distribution of an image or representation of a minor when this image or representation has a pornographic character. Penal Code, Article 227-23 [45] 1 hour or 24 hoursWeb or major platforms and search engines
Distribution of a pornographic message when this message is likely to be seen or perceived by a minor. Penal Code, Article 227-24 [46] 24 hoursMajor platforms, search engines
Direct incitement to acts of terrorism.

Public apology for acts of terrorism.

 Penal Code, Article 421-2-5 [47] 1 hour or 24 hoursWeb or major platforms and search engines

Once hidden, illegal content must be retained "for the purposes of research, establishing and prosecuting criminal offenses, and only to provide information to the judicial authority." This will allow the determination or refutation of their illegal nature.

Targeted Sites

The removal within an hour of terrorist and pedopornographic content concerns all websites. The 24-hour timeframe applies to the following websites and Internet services:

Notification Procedure

Site operators must implement, for users located on French territory, a directly accessible, uniform, and easy-to-use notification system allowing any person to report illegal content in the language used by the service.

Sites must acknowledge receipt of any notification by informing the notifier, and if possible the user targeted by the report, of the date and time of the notification, the outcome, the reason for the decision taken, and a reminder of the penalties incurred in the event of abusive notification.

Penalties

If the website refuses to delete manifestly illegal content or does so too late, its representative is subject to a fine of 250,000 euros. The Higher Audiovisual Council (CSA) can also impose an administrative penalty that can reach up to 4% of global turnover. [48]

Abusive notification is punishable by one year of imprisonment and a fine of 15,000 euros. This provision, provided for in Article 1, II of this bill, will introduce new provisions into the Law for Trust in the Digital Economy of 21 June 2004. Therefore, on the grounds of the future Article 6-2 that will then be inserted into this law, the applicant may rely on abusive notification [ citation needed ].

Higher Audiovisual Council

As with the law against the manipulation of information, Article 4 assigned the responsibility of monitoring the obligations imposed on websites to the Higher Audiovisual Council (CSA). It assessed whether the removal of content was insufficient or excessive. The CSA could issue a formal notice to a website and impose a financial penalty.

The CSA was entrusted, in place of the CNIL, with the oversight of requests from the OCLCTIC for blocking by Internet service providers of websites with pedopornographic or terrorist content. [49]

Educational Component

Article 3 required operators to inform minors under fifteen and their legal guardians, upon the first use of their services, about the civic and responsible use of the service and the legal risks involved in the dissemination of hateful content by the minor. [50] [51]

Specialized Prosecutor's Office

The authors of hateful messages were scarcely mentioned in the law. Article 6 bis A only provided for the establishment of a specialized digital prosecutor's office within a high court designated by decree to prosecute and judge, under a principle of "concurrent jurisdiction," the authors of illegal hateful content online. [48] This jurisdiction could be located in Nanterre, due to its geographical proximity to the premises of Pharos, the public platform for reporting illegal content. [52] The prosecutor's office would have jurisdiction over both public messages and private communications (WhatsApp, SMS, etc.). [53] [54]

"Online Hate Observatory"

Article 7 provided for the creation of an "Online Hate Observatory [55] tasked with "monitoring and analyzing the evolution of" hateful content targeted by the law. The observatory would be composed of representatives from websites, associations, researchers, and regulatory authorities. It would make proposals regarding awareness, prevention, repression, and victim support. The observatory would be linked to the CSA, which would provide its secretariat, define its missions, and determine its composition. [56]

Designated Contact Person

Paragraph 9 of Article 3 required website operators to designate a contact person, a natural person located on French territory. This contact person was responsible for receiving requests from the judicial authority and the CSA.

Content of the Law After the Constitutional Council's Decision

Following the Constitutional Council's decision, only minor provisions remained from the law: [57]

Dalloz detailed the provisions that were retained: [58]

Criticisms of the Bill

In addition to political figures, numerous organizations and individuals criticized the bill:

Role of the Judge and Disengagement of the State

Lawyer and press law specialist Christophe Bigot, [78] lawyer François Sureau, [79] and law professor Anne-Sophie Choné Grimaldi [80] criticized the possibility that content removal decisions could be made by a private operator without the intervention of a judicial judge, who is constitutionally the guarantor of fundamental freedoms. In an open letter to the Prime Minister and the presidents of parliamentary groups, Memory of Jewish Resistance Fighters of the MOI (MRJ-MOI) and the Union of Jews for Resistance and Mutual Aid (UJRE) lamented the delegation to websites of the removal of hateful content under the pretext of the slowness of the judicial system and were not convinced by the ex-post surveillance planned by the CSA. [69] The National Digital Council (CNNum) made the same observation: "the PPL implies a significant delegation of powers to platforms in the field of regulating hateful content, which could give the impression of a certain privatization of missions historically devolved to the State". [81]

Socialist deputy Hervé Saulignac reminded that "extremely important financial and human resources will be needed, for justice, for the police, for education". [82]

The National Consultative Commission on Human Rights indicated in July 2019 that it supported the objective of the bill against hateful content on the Internet but found the bill to be inadequate and disproportionate and called for a complete review. [83]

Related Research Articles

Hate speech is a term with varied meaning and has no single, consistent definition. It is defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as "public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation". The Encyclopedia of the American Constitution states that hate speech is "usually thought to include communications of animosity or disparagement of an individual or a group on account of a group characteristic such as race, color, national origin, sex, disability, religion, or sexual orientation". There is no single definition of what constitutes "hate" or "disparagement". Legal definitions of hate speech vary from country to country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of information</span> Freedom of a person or people to publish and consume information

Freedom of information is freedom of a person or people to publish and have access to information. Access to information is the ability for an individual to seek, receive and impart information effectively. As articulated by UNESCO, it encompasses

"scientific, indigenous, and traditional knowledge; freedom of information, building of open knowledge resources, including open Internet and open standards, and open access and availability of data; preservation of digital heritage; respect for cultural and linguistic diversity, such as fostering access to local content in accessible languages; quality education for all, including lifelong and e-learning; diffusion of new media and information literacy and skills, and social inclusion online, including addressing inequalities based on skills, education, gender, age, race, ethnicity, and accessibility by those with disabilities; and the development of connectivity and affordable ICTs, including mobile, the Internet, and broadband infrastructures".

In Canada, appeals by the judiciary to community standards and the public interest are the ultimate determinants of which forms of expression may legally be published, broadcast, or otherwise publicly disseminated. Other public organisations with the authority to censor include some tribunals and courts under provincial human rights laws, and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, along with self-policing associations of private corporations such as the Canadian Association of Broadcasters and the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council.

<span title="French-language text"><i lang="fr">Conseil supérieur de laudiovisuel</i></span> French media regulation authority

The Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel, abbreviated CSA, was a French institution created in 1989 whose role was to regulate the various electronic media in France, such as radio and television. The creation of the Haute Autorité de la Communication Audiovisuelle was a measure founded in the Socialist Party's electoral program of 1981, called 110 Propositions for France.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of speech by country</span>

Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression. The right is preserved in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is granted formal recognition by the laws of most nations. Nonetheless, the degree to which the right is upheld in practice varies greatly from one nation to another. In many nations, particularly those with authoritarian forms of government, overt government censorship is enforced. Censorship has also been claimed to occur in other forms and there are different approaches to issues such as hate speech, obscenity, and defamation laws.

The French HADOPI law or Creation and Internet law was introduced during 2009, providing what is known as a graduated response as a means to encourage compliance with copyright laws. HADOPI is the acronym of the government agency created to administer it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internet censorship in Germany</span>

Although Internet censorship in Germany is traditionally been rated as low, it is practised directly and indirectly through various laws and court decisions. German law provides for freedom of speech and press with several exceptions, including what The Guardian has called "some of the world's toughest laws around hate speech". An example of content censored by law is the removal of web sites from Google search results that deny the holocaust, which is a felony under German law. According to the Google Transparency Report, the German government is frequently one of the most active in requesting user data after the United States. However, in Freedom House's Freedom On the Net 2022 Report, Germany was rated the eighth most free of the 70 countries rated.

The hate speech laws in France are matters of both civil law and criminal law. Those laws protect individuals and groups from being defamed or insulted because they belong or do not belong, in fact or in fancy, to an ethnicity, a nation, a race, a religion, a sex, a sexual orientation, or a gender identity or because they have a handicap. The laws forbid any communication which is intended to incite discrimination against, hatred of, or harm to, anyone because of his belonging or not belonging, in fact or in fancy, to an ethnicity, a nation, a race, a religion, a sex, a sexual orientation, or a gender identity, or because he or she has a handicap.

Internet censorship in South Africa is a developing topic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internet censorship in South Korea</span>

Internet censorship in South Korea is prevalent, and contains some unique elements such as the blocking of pro-North Korea websites, and to a lesser extent, Japanese websites, which led to it being categorized as "pervasive" in the conflict/security area by OpenNet Initiative. South Korea is also one of the few developed countries where pornography is largely illegal, with the exception of social media websites which are a common source of legal pornography in the country. Any and all material deemed "harmful" or subversive by the state is censored. The country also has a "cyber defamation law", which allow the police to crack down on comments deemed "hateful" without any reports from victims, with citizens being sentenced for such offenses.

There is medium internet censorship in France, including limited filtering of child pornography, laws against websites that promote terrorism or racial hatred, and attempts to protect copyright. The "Freedom on the Net" report by Freedom House has consistently listed France as a country with Internet freedom. Its global ranking was 6 in 2013 and 12 in 2017. A sharp decline in its score, second only to Libya was noted in 2015 and attributed to "problematic policies adopted in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack, such as restrictions on content that could be seen as 'apology for terrorism,' prosecutions of users, and significantly increased surveillance."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conseil national du numérique</span> French independent advisory commission

The Conseil national du numérique is a French independent advisory commission created on 29 April 2011 by the French presidential decree n°2011-476. It was reorganized and expanded by another French presidential decree on 13 December 2012, to expand its spectrum of actions to all the questions set up by the development of the digital in society and economy. The council issues independent opinions and recommendations on any question relating to the impact of digital technologies on economy and society. The government can consult the council on new legislation or draft regulations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shutdown law</span> Former South Korean law forbidding online gaming for children from 12:00am to 6:00am

The Youth Protection Revision Act, commonly known as the Shutdown Law or Cinderella Law, was an act of the South Korean National Assembly which forbade children under the age of sixteen to play online video games between the hours of 00:00 and 06:00. The legislature passed the law on 19 May 2011 and it went into effect on 20 November 2011. The law was abolished in August 2021.

The Network Enforcement Act, also known colloquially as the Facebook Act, is a German law that was passed in the Bundestag in 2017 that officially aims to combat fake news, hate speech and misinformation online.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Laetitia Avia</span> French politician

Laetitia Avia is a French lawyer and politician of La République En Marche! (LREM) who served as the member of the National Assembly for the 8th constituency of Paris from 2017 to 2022, representing a constituency covering parts of the 12th and 20th arrondissements.

Online hate speech is a type of speech that takes place online with the purpose of attacking a person or a group based on their race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, and/or gender. Online hate speech is not easily defined, but can be recognized by the degrading or dehumanizing function it serves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deplatforming</span> Administrative or political action to deny access to a platform to express opinions

Deplatforming, also called no-platforming, is a form of Internet censorship of an individual or group by preventing them from posting on the platforms they use to share their information/ideas. This typically involves suspension, outright bans, or reducing spread.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism</span>

The Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism is an international gathering for assessing the state of antisemitism globally and formulating effective forms of societal and governmental response. The forum is a project of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Hate speech is public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. Hate speech is "usually thought to include communications of animosity or disparagement of an individual or a group on account of a group characteristic such as race, colour, national origin, sex, disability, religion, or sexual orientation".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Regulatory Authority for Audiovisual and Digital Communication</span> French media watchdog agency

The Regulatory Authority for Audiovisual and Digital Communication is the French independent administrative agency resulting from the merger on 1 January 2022 of the High Audiovisual Council (CSA) and the High Authority for the Distribution of Works and Protection of Rights on the Internet (Hadopi). ARCOM is responsible for both audiovisual and digital communications.

References

  1. ↑ Avia, Laetitia. Report on the bill, after fast-track procedure, by Mrs. Laetitia Avia and several of her colleagues aimed at combating hate on the internet (PDF). p. 120.
  2. 1 2 3 By Patrick Evans (September 18, 2018). "Will Germany's new law kill free speech online?". BBC News .
  3. ↑ At the G7, France has a charter on online content moderation signed, lefigaro.fr, August 26, 2019, by Elisa Braün and Lucie Ronfaut
  4. ↑ "CRIF Dinner: Macron wants to combat cyberhate". Le Monde.fr. 8 March 2018. Retrieved 2018-03-10.
  5. ↑ française, La Documentation. "Strengthening the fight against racism and antisemitism on the Internet: Report to the Prime Minister". www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr. Retrieved 2018-09-24.
  6. ↑ "Report aimed at strengthening the fight against racism and antisemitism on the internet". Gouvernement.fr (in French). Retrieved 2018-09-21.
  7. ↑ "Antisemitism and racism online: the report that inspired Macron". leparisien.fr (in French). 2019-02-20. Retrieved 2019-02-21.
  8. ↑ "Law and hate. Freedom of expression and "hate speech" in democracy - raison-publique.fr". www.raison-publique.fr. Retrieved 2020-06-23.
  9. ↑ "Hate and the law". Livres Hebdo (in French). Retrieved 2020-06-23.
  10. ↑ Opinion on combating hate speech on the internet . Retrieved 2020-06-23.
  11. 1 2 "Trench warfare in Parliament over the Avia law". Les Échos . 2020-01-09. Retrieved 2020-06-04.
  12. ↑ "Adoption of the bill aimed at combating hateful content on the Internet". Respectzone. Retrieved 13 June 2023.
  13. ↑ "Hate on the Internet: SOS Racisme asks parliamentarians to allow effective regulation of online content". sos-racisme.org. Retrieved 13 June 2023.
  14. ↑ e-Enfance, Coexister, Flag !, Women's Foundation, Génération Numérique, La Quadrature du Net, League of Human Rights, International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism, Respect Zone, SOS Racisme, STOP Homophobie, Union of French Jewish Students
  15. ↑ Defender of Rights, ARCEP, CNIL, CSA, National Consultative Commission on Human Rights, National Digital Council, High Council for Equality between Women and Men, DILCRAH, and the OCLCTIC
  16. ↑ Bing, Bodyguard, Cdiscount, Dailymotion, EBay, EDiMA, Facebook, Federation of E-commerce and Distance Selling, French Telecom Federation, Jeuxvideo.com, Google France, IAB France, Le Bon Coin, Netino By Webhelp, Pointdecontact.net, Qwant, Rakuten France, Snapchat, Tech In France, TripAdvisor, Twitter, Wikimedia France
  17. ↑ Avia, Laetitia. Report on the bill, after fast-track procedure, by Mrs. Laetitia Avia and several of her colleagues aimed at combating hate on the internet (PDF). pp. 217–222.
  18. ↑ "Hateful or injurious content on the Internet - Opendata - National Assembly". data.assemblee-nationale.fr. Retrieved 2019-07-07.
  19. ↑ Lausson, Julien (2019-04-19). "Have you experienced online hate? How to crack down? Parliament consults you - Politics". Numerama (in French). Retrieved 2019-07-07.
  20. ↑ Marc Rees (2019-05-21). "After the opinion of the Council of State, the bill against cyberhate will be corrected". www.nextinpact.com. Retrieved 2019-07-07.
  21. ↑ "Opinion on the bill aimed at combating hate on the Internet". Council of State. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  22. ↑ Géraldine Delacroix (December 13, 2019). "Hateful remarks: the Senate rewrites the Avia law". Mediapart . Retrieved December 13, 2019.
  23. ↑ http://www2.assemblee-nationale.fr/static/15/scrutins/scrutin_ppl_haine_internet_ld_130520.pdf
  24. ↑ "The law against hate on the Internet definitively adopted by the National Assembly". Le Monde . May 13, 2020.
  25. ↑ Manon Rescan (April 1, 2020). "Death of Vaucluse deputy Jean-François Cesarini, a dissident voice of LRM". Le Monde (in French). No. 23398. p. 28.
  26. ↑ "Avia Law: when the National Assembly counts the vote of a deceased deputy". LCI (in French). Retrieved 2020-05-29.
  27. 1 2 Czech Republic (August 21, 2019). "Details of the notification - Law aimed at combating hateful content on the Internet". ec.europa.eu. Retrieved 2020-05-17.
  28. ↑ "Combating hate on the Internet: the future French law criticized by Europe". TV5MONDE. November 28, 2019. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  29. 1 2 Marc Rees (November 25, 2019). "Avia Law against cyberhate: the criticisms of the European Commission". www.nextinpact.com. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  30. ↑ Marc Rees (November 28, 2019). "Cyberhate: the government only considers marginal modifications to the Avia bill". www.nextinpact.com. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  31. ↑ "Law against online hate: LR senators file an appeal with the Constitutional Council", ouest-france.fr, May 18, 2020
  32. ↑ "Décision n° 2020-801 DC du 18 juin 2020 | Conseil constitutionnel".
  33. ↑ "The flagship provision of the Avia law against online hate censored by the Constitutional Council". Lemonde.fr (in French). June 18, 2020. Retrieved 2020-06-18.
  34. ↑ "Law against online hate censored: "I do not give up," says Avia". RTL.fr. 18 June 2020. Retrieved 23 June 2020.
  35. ↑ Francis Donnat (June 22, 2020). "When encouraging platforms to "over-censor" infringes on freedom of expression". Le club des juristes (in French). Retrieved November 14, 2020.
  36. ↑ "Decision n° 2020-801 DC of June 18, 2020 | Constitutional Council". conseil-constitutionnel.fr (in French). Retrieved 2020-06-18.
  37. ↑ "Cyberhate: the Avia law largely censored by the Constitutional Council". Nextinpact (in French). June 18, 2020. Retrieved 2020-06-18.
  38. ↑ Lenoir, Luc (June 18, 2020). "The Constitutional Council censors the Avia law against online hate". lefigaro.fr (in French). Retrieved 2020-06-18.
  39. ↑ http://decouverte.challenges.fr/politique/le-conseil-constitutionnel-pulverise-la-loi-avia-camouflet-pour-la-majorite_715431#xtor=CS1-93-20200619&xts=562191 The Constitutional Council shatters the Avia law, a slap in the face for the majority
  40. ↑ Untersinger, Martin (2019-07-04). "The Assembly completes the examination of the bill against online hate". Le Monde. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  41. 1 2 3 Article 24 of the Law of July 29, 1881 on freedom of the press
  42. ↑ Article 24 bis of the Law of July 29, 1881 on freedom of the press
  43. 1 2 Article 33 of the Law of July 29, 1881 on freedom of the press
  44. ↑ Article 222-33 of the Penal Code
  45. ↑ Article 227-23 of the Penal Code
  46. ↑ Article 227-24 of the Penal Code
  47. ↑ Article 421-2-5 of the Penal Code
  48. 1 2 Martin Untersinger (July 5, 2019). "Online hate: what the bill examined by the Assembly contains". Le Monde. Retrieved 2019-07-05.
  49. ↑ La Quadrature du Net (July 4, 2019). "The "hate" law will turn the Internet into television". Acrimed. Retrieved 2019-07-07.
  50. ↑ "Hate on the Internet. The main measures of the bill". Le Telegramme (in French). July 3, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  51. ↑ Freedom of expression and the fight against online hate, a difficult balancing act, slate.fr, July 24, 2019, by Valentine Leroy
  52. ↑ "Online hate: towards the creation of a specialized digital prosecutor's office?". LExpress.fr. May 19, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  53. ↑ "Online hate: the Assembly votes for the obligation to remove content within 24 hours". Le Point. July 4, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  54. ↑ What will change with the law against online hate, voted today at the National Assembly, bfmtv.com/tech, May 13, 2020, by Elsa Trujillo
  55. ↑ "Tremble, haters: the Assembly creates an "Online Hate Observatory"". Stratégies. July 5, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-05.
  56. ↑ "The Assembly votes to create an "Online Hate Observatory"". Le Huffington Post. July 5, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  57. ↑ Le Monde, The Avia law against online hate largely struck down by the Constitutional Council , June 18, 2020
  58. ↑ Censorship of the "Avia Law" by the Constitutional Council: a red thread for French and European legislators? , June 29, 2020
  59. ↑ "PPL Cyberhate: Digital professional organizations warn of the risk of inefficiency of the new text – TECH IN France" (in French). Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  60. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "Prevention and harm reduction on the internet endangered by the Avia bill". www.aides.org (in French). Retrieved 2020-05-14.
  61. ↑ https://www.nextinpact.com/news/109033-cyberhaine-deux-nouvelles-contributions-adressees-au-conseil-constitutionnel.htm Next Inpact June 3, 2020
  62. 1 2 3 4 5 Noisette, Thierry (January 18, 2020). "Anti-hate law: CNNum, La Quadrature du Net, Wikimedia France and 9 other organizations oppose together". ZDNet France (in French). Retrieved 2020-05-14.
  63. ↑ "Combating hate on the Internet: a bill deemed inadequate and disproportionate". www.cncdh.fr. Retrieved 2019-07-09.
  64. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "Collective open letter calling for the guarantee of our public freedoms in the bill aimed at combating online hate". League of Human Rights (in French). July 3, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-09.
  65. ↑ "CNNum speaks out on the bill aimed at combating hate on the Internet | CNNum | Translator and enlightener of digital transformations". cnnumerique.fr. Retrieved 2019-07-09.
  66. 1 2 Marc Rees (November 19, 2019). "EDRi and European ISPs demolish the Avia bill against online hate". www.nextinpact.com. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  67. ↑ "No, The Fight Against Hate Cannot Justify Censorship! Press release of July 8, 2019" (in French). Retrieved 2019-07-09.
  68. 1 2 antiracistes, A collective of feminist, LGBTI, and (January 21, 2020). "Feminists, LGBTI, and anti-racists, we do not want the Cyberhate law". Libération.fr (in French). Retrieved 2020-02-07.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  69. 1 2 3 "Online hate: two associations dissatisfied with the Avia bill". Le Figaro. July 5, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  70. ↑ "Legal analysis of the law "against online hate"". La Quadrature du Net (in French). June 17, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-09.
  71. ↑ "Our observations on the bill aimed at combating hateful content online - Magistrates' Union". www.syndicat-magistrature.org. Retrieved 2019-12-20.
  72. ↑ "My Red Light - A new danger for escorts, camgirls, and porn actors - Libération.fr". ma.lumiere.rouge.blogs.liberation.fr. Retrieved 2019-10-16.
  73. ↑ STRASS (October 7, 2019). "A new danger for escorts, camgirls, and porn actors". @STRASS_Syndicat. Retrieved 2019-10-16.
  74. ↑ "Acting against the cyberbullying of diversity activists and anti-discrimination struggles" (PDF).
  75. ↑ @wikimediapolicy (May 12, 2020). "On May 13, France's @AssembleeNat will vote on a proposed hate speech law that could harm both people's right to freedom of expression and access to knowledge not just in France, but in diverse communities across Europe and the globe. #LoiAvia #CyberHaine" (Tweet). Retrieved September 24, 2024– via Twitter.
  76. ↑ "GenerationLibre campaigns against the Avia Law" (PDF).
  77. ↑ Marc Rees (November 27, 2019). "Law against cyberhate: the reasoned and critical opinion of the Czech Republic". www.nextinpact.com. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  78. ↑ ""Anti-hate" law on the Internet: laudable objective but danger for freedom of expression!". www.lefigaro.fr. June 18, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  79. ↑ "François Sureau: "Liberticidal laws thrive on our collective resignation"". Le Figaro. June 17, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  80. ↑ "Online hate: "Prosecuting only digital platforms does not bode well for us"". Le Monde. June 18, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  81. ↑ "CNNum expresses its concerns about the bill aimed at combating hate on the Internet" (PDF). cnnumerique.fr. March 21, 2019.
  82. ↑ "Combating hate on the Internet: five questions about the bill examined in the National Assembly". Franceinfo. July 3, 2019. Retrieved 2019-07-06.
  83. ↑ Amaelle Guiton (July 10, 2019). "Avia Law: a large majority but serious concerns". Libération. Retrieved 2019-07-10.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.