Saying ‘No’ To All Hate Speech

HATE speech should be avoided at all costs, and there should be legal repercussions for those who indulge in it.

We have seen some attention given to this phenomenon in recent weeks. And even though democracy remains a learning process, there is no excuse for unfettered attacks, whoever is making them.It has not been the first time since Independence that this has happened.There have been many instances in the past.What is noteworthy, however, is the hypocrisy on the part of people who condemn hate speech only if it emanates from a position other than their own.This is unacceptable.Hate speech is just that.And it cannot be condoned, even if it is a former head of state who is reported to be responsible.Information and Broadcasting Minister Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, as Government’s official spokesperson, for example, has taken issue with various sections of the print media in the past for this kind of offence.Only this week again, she condemned the Namibian Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) for failure to adhere to its mission statement, and allowing callers to go on air with what she termed “uncensored opinions” which had “the potential to shatter the country’s existing peace, stability and unity” and in particular, to allow insults against the former head of state.This is all well and good.Her statement, in any case, followed after that of the NBC’s Director General, Vezera Kandetu, who himself responded quickly by appealing for restraint.But as far as we know, the same Information Minister has not spoken out in condemnation of inciteful and inflammatory statements attributed to former President Sam Nujoma himself in the past week [which his office has not denied]; and neither has she spoken out in the past when other political office bearers, such as the former Secretary General of the Swapo Youth League, Paulus Kapia, committed similar ‘crimes’.Nor did Government take public issue with the publication, in the Government mouthpiece, of an anti-Kwanyama letter which appeared recently, and for which the newspaper in question ‘apologised unreservedly’.Political and other leadership in Namibia have to set the example.If they break the rules, others will follow suit, seeing it as open season on all opponents and/or perceived enemies.This does not constitute limitations on free speech.Free speech is globally understood to mean the freedom to air one’s opinions and views, but to do so without infringing on the rights of others.It is possible to disagree with or even condemn a contrary viewpoint or an individual, for that matter, without resorting to hate speech, which includes that which is threatening and inciteful.If the leadership shows the way, the people will follow and so the political elite of the country, including the Minister of Information, must assist in guiding people to exercise their rights without eroding those of others.Perhaps it would be helpful if the Minister could be interviewed by the NBC on just this, and they could air such an interview prior to the call shows.But she too must be consistent, or she will not be believed or seen as credible.Perhaps the NBC could also organise a ‘Talk of the Nation’ on what constitutes ‘hate speech’, so that people know there are limitations to the way in which one expresses oneself.It is not ‘censorship’ that is the answer; it is the internalisation of what constitutes human rights, and why, in the first place, we have something like an inalienable Bill of Rights in our Constitution.Those who infringe these rights, and make themselves guilty of hate speech, should be taken to task, across the board and whoever they are.Everyone should make an effort to restrain themselves, no matter how heated a debate it may be.And even though democracy remains a learning process, there is no excuse for unfettered attacks, whoever is making them.It has not been the first time since Independence that this has happened.There have been many instances in the past.What is noteworthy, however, is the hypocrisy on the part of people who condemn hate speech only if it emanates from a position other than their own.This is unacceptable.Hate speech is just that.And it cannot be condoned, even if it is a former head of state who is reported to be responsible.Information and Broadcasting Minister Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, as Government’s official spokesperson, for example, has taken issue with various sections of the print media in the past for this kind of offence.Only this week again, she condemned the Namibian Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) for failure to adhere to its mission statement, and allowing callers to go on air with what she termed “uncensored opinions” which had “the potential to shatter the country’s existing peace, stability and unity” and in particular, to allow insults against the former head of state.This is all well and good.Her statement, in any case, followed after that of the NBC’s Director General, Vezera Kandetu, who himself responded quickly by appealing for restraint.But as far as we know, the same Information Minister has not spoken out in condemnation of inciteful and inflammatory statements attributed to former President Sam Nujoma himself in the past week [which his office has not denied]; and neither has she spoken out in the past when other political office bearers, such as the former Secretary General of the Swapo Youth League, Paulus Kapia, committed similar ‘crimes’.Nor did Government take public issue with the publication, in the Government mouthpiece, of an anti-Kwanyama letter which appeared recently, and for which the newspaper in question ‘apologised unreservedly’.Political and other leadership in Namibia have to set the example.If they break the rules, others will follow suit, seeing it as open season on all opponents and/or perceived enemies.This does not constitute limitations on free speech.Free speech is globally understood to mean the freedom to air one’s opinions and views, but to do so without infringing on the rights of others.It is possible to disagree with or even condemn a contrary viewpoint or an individual, for that matter, without resorting to hate speech, which includes that which is threatening and inciteful.If the leadership shows the way, the people will follow and so the political elite of the country, including the Minister of Information, must assist in guiding people to exercise their rights without eroding those of others.Perhaps it would be helpful if the Minister could be interviewed by the NBC on just this, and they could air such an interview prior to the call shows.But she too must be consistent, or she will not be believed or seen as credible.Perhaps the NBC could also organise a ‘Talk of the Nation’ on what constitutes ‘hate speech’, so that people know there are limitations to the way in which one expresses oneself.It is not ‘censorship’ that is the answer; it is the internalisation of what constitutes human rights, and why, in the first place, we have something like an inalienable Bill of Rights in our Constitution.Those who infringe these rights, and make themselves guilty of hate speech, should be taken to task, across the board and whoever they are.Everyone should make an effort to restrain themselves, no matter how heated a debate it may be.