Kyle Matthews Free Speech, Hate Speech, and the Free Speech Union
Recommendation 40 of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch Shooting called for the repeal of New Zealand’s ineffective hate speech laws and the creation of a new Crimes Act offence of inciting racial or religious disharmony. After a public backlash the Labour-led government delegated this work to the Law Commission in 2022. In March 2024 the new Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith halted this work, ending hopes for effective hate speech laws in Aotearoa.
In this paper I analyse the media statements, letters, and twitter feed of the Free Speech Union (FSU), which advocates for absolutist free speech rights, to interrogate their arguments and influence in these debates. I argue that the FSU understands free speech in a simplistic way, prioritises free speech rights over rights to be free from harm, emphasises global symbolism rather than evidence grounded in Aotearoa, is only absolutist when it serves them, and privileges already dominant voices while ignoring the racialised communities that hate speech targets. I suggest instead that tikanga Māori could guide us through the challenges of balancing free speech rights with rights to be free from harmful speech.
Fairleigh Evelyn Gilmour Violence against women and the Dangerous Speech Framework: Exploring the tensions
In this presentation, I explore the tensions between feminist articulations of allegations of violence against women – in particular the calls to believe victims and to punish perpetrators – and the historical use of the threat of violence against women and girls as a justification for and precursor to genocide as documented in the Dangerous Speech framework. I explore the use of hashtags in the aftermath of October 7th, in particular the reworkings of the #believewomen and #metoo hashtags. The purpose of this presentation is to examine the foundations of feminist arguments in relation to the concept of belief and to challenge the ways in which these ideas have been re-appropriated in the context of violent conflict between militarized groups.
Kyle Matthews & Kayli Taylor Rethinking Security & Radicalisation: A principled response to insecurity and violent extremism
We argue that the search for security in an insecure world drives approaches to radicalisation and violent extremism. These approaches target ‘radicals’ and securitise ‘at risk’ communities and are entangled with race, colonisation, xenophobia, and white supremacy.
We propose that the state should turn from targeted practices focused on radicalisation and securitisation towards principled responses which address the structural drivers of insecurity. We argue for ten principles to guide that work including enacting te Tiriti o Waitangi, human rights and global justice, non-violence, transparency and democratic accountability, and structural responses to the marginalisation and othering of communities. We use these principles to interrogate ‘Know the Signs’, a guide produced by the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service which encourages the public to recognise and report individuals at risk of engaging in violent extremism. While this guide upholds some human rights and uses evidence on violent extremism, it misuses that evidence, neglects te Tiriti and global justice issues, overlooks structural drivers of violent extremism, and is not accountable to affected communities or the wider population. We conclude that a principled approach to violent extremism offers a critical utopian way of thinking about the challenges of security in an insecure world.
