南非杜省中华公会仇恨言论案件

1. We refer to our last press release issued on 8 December 2020 in terms of which we indicated that our Hate Speech case would be pended while we await the outcome of the Constitutional Court Judgment in the Qwelane matter(the" Constitutional Court Judgment). 我们提起于2020年12月8日最后发布的新闻稿，在此发布中我们表示过在等宪法法院对 Qwelane案件(“宪法法院判决”)判决结果的期间，我们的仇恨言论案须处于待审状态的。

2. The Constitutional Court Judgment (over 80 pages) was finally delivered on 30 July 2021. Upon receipt of request from any members of the Community TCA's attorneys Nam-Ford joyce anam-ford co Za )will make a copy of this Judgment available. 宪法法院的判决(80多页)终于在2021年7月30曰作出了判决.在收到来自社团任何成员的要求,南非杜省中华公会(TCA)的律师，胡丽珍律师事务所( loyce(@nam- ford. co, za)将会提供判决副本给请求者。

3. For the convenience of our Community, Nam-Ford have obtained a summary which is attached of the salient aspects of the Constitutional Court's Judgment from Advocate Ben Winks (Winks), who acted for the Nelson Mandela Foundation in the Qwelane case. Winks is also part of the team of advocates that Nam-Ford appointed in the TCA's Hate Speech case. The summary deals with the impact of the Constitutional Court Judgment on the Hate Speech action instituted by tca against the12 Respondents. 为了方便，胡丽珍律师事务所也从辩护大律师,代表纳尔逊曼德拉基金会对α welane一案的 Ben winks(“wnks"),获得了宪法法院判决中突出方面之摘要，Winks也是胡丽珍律师事务所在南非杜省中华公会(TCA)仇恨言论案件中所任命的倡导团队成员之一。该摘要涉及宪法法院的判决对南非杜省中华公会(TCA)针对12名被告所提起的仇恨言论诉讼之影响。

4. It is clear from the summary that the constitutional Court Judgment has a significant and positive impact on TCA's case and although there was a delay in the delivering of the Constitutional Court Judgment, which in turn delayed our matter, it was imperative and worthwhile waiting. 从总结中可清楚看到的是宪法法庭判决对南非杜省中华公会(TCA)仇恨言论案有着重要积极的影响，尽管宪法法院判决有所延误,关连也延误我方一案但这是个必要又值得的等待。

5.In the light of the Constitutional Court Judgment, all twelve of the statements complained of in the TCA’s case would satisfy the amended Section 10(1) of the Equality Act being “no person may publish, propagate, advocate or communicate words that are based on one or more of the prohibited grounds, against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to be harmful or to incite harm and to promote or propagate hatred”. 根据宪法法院的判决，在南非杜省中华公会(TCA)案件中被投诉的所有12个被告之陈述均符合修订后的《平等法》第10(1)条也就是“没有人可以基于一个或多个被禁止的理由提倡或对任何人传达发布，传播，倡导或传达可以合理解释为暗示打击或煽动危害和促进或传播仇恨。”

6. TCA must convince the Equality Court that the words used, in context, would be understood by the reasonable observer to have been intended (a) to impair Chinese people's dignity or emotional or psychological wellbeing, or (b) to incite discrimination, hostility or violence against them; and (c) to promote detestation and vilification of Chinese people, or despising, scorning, disrespecting, or ill-treating them. The evidence led by TCA during the trial against the 12 Respondents clearly supports this. 南非杜省中华公会（TCA）须说服平等法院,在上下文中所使用的词语可被合理的观察者理解为以下意图;

(a)损害华人的尊严和情绪或心理健康，或

(b)煽动对华人的歧视、敌意或暴力；和

(C)宣扬对华人的憎恶和诽谤、蔑视、不尊重及虐待。

南非杜省中华公会（TCA）在针对12名被告的审判期间所提供的证据清楚地反映支持了以上这一点。

7. We stated in the last press release that once the Constitutional Court Judgment has been delivered the dates for the furnishing of the heads of Argument ( the "heads") in respect of our matter would be established and same are:-

7.1. TCA as the complainant to deliver their heads on 27 August 2021.

7.2. Thereafter the respondents to reply with their heads by 24 September 2021.

7.3. TCA will have an opportunity to do a reply thereto by 8 October 2021.

我们在上次新闻稿中提到一旦宪法法院作岀Qwelane一案判决后将确定地提供与我方案件的相关书面的法律论点之提交日期，同样是:

7.1. 南非杜省中华公会（TCA）作为申诉方在2021年8月27日交付书面的法律论点。

7.2. 此后，被告方须在2021年9月24日回复他们书面的法律论点。

7.3. 南非杜省中华公会(TCA)将有机会在2021年10月8日做出答复。

8. In the interim pending the delivery of the heads on the due date/s and to save time Nam -Ford who emphasised to the Equality Court the importance of the case to our Community and that it must be finalised have requested that the Equality Court allocate a date/s for the final hearing of oral argument. 在等待交付书面的法律论点期间，为了节省时间，胡丽珍律师事务所向平等法院强调了必须完成此案对我方社团的重要性并要求平等法院为最终口头辩论的听证会分配日期。

9. On Friday, 13 August 2021 the equality Court reverted and indicated that dates for the hearing will be during the last term (4 October to 5 December 2021). Although Judge Makume has stated that he could be on special leave during the last term, the judge has undertaken to make himself available, on the date/s agreed to between the complainant (TCA) and the Respondents' legal representatives. 2021年8月13日,平等法院已回复表示听审将会在最后一期（2021年10月4日至12月5日中）。虽然 Makume法官提及他可能在最后一期有个特别假,但法官也承诺在申诉人南非杜省中华公会（TCA）和被告方的法律代表所商定的日期出庭。

10. Nam-Ford will be liaising with all the legal teams to agree to a date/s and will thereafter advise TCA and the Community. 胡丽珍律师事务所将与双方律师团队联合商定日期并通知南非杜省中华公会（TCA）和社团。

SUMMARY: IMPACT of the consTitUtIONAL COURT jUdgment

总结：宪法法院的判决之影响

1. This Summary serves to update the TCA and wider Chinese South African community on the implications, for our pending hate speech case, of the Constitutional Court s judgment delivered on Friday, 30 July 2021, in Qwelane v South African Human Rights Commission and Another(with the Nelson Mandela Foundation and others as amici curiae(friends of the court)).

宪法法院于2021年7月30日,星期五,就 Qwelane诉南非人权委员会和其他人(与纳尔逊曼德拉基金会和其他人(法庭之友)）一案中作出的判决摘要用于南非杜省中华公会（TCA）和更广泛的南非华人社团在悬而未决的仇恨言论案件上做更新。

2. The Community will recall that, in the final days of our trial in late 2019, the Supreme Court of Appeal ("SCa")in the Qwelane case declared section 10(1) (the hate speech provision) of the Promotion of Equality and prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act ( "Equality Act)unconstitutional. That section originally read as follows(in the relevant part) no person may publish, propagate, advocate or communicate words based on one or more of the prohibited grounds, against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to

(a) be hurtful

(b)be harmful or to incite harm

(c)promote or propagate hatred

社团可想起最高上诉法院（“SCA”）在2019年年底的最后几天的审判，就 Qwelane一案，宣布《促进平等和防止不公平歧视法》(“平等法”）第10(1)条(仇恨言论条款)违宪。当时该部分原文如下(相关部分):

”任何人不得发表、传播、基于一个或多个被禁止的理由提倡或传达词语,针对任何人,可以合理

地解释为表明有明确的意图-

(a)是有害的;

(b)有害或煽动伤害

(C)宣扬或传播仇恨。”

3. The SCA replaced this with: "No person may advocate hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion sexual orientation and that constitutes incitement to cause harm."

最高上诉法院SCA其替换为:“任何人不得宣扬基于种族、民族、性别、宗教或性取向的仇恨并更加构成煽动造成伤害之行为。”

4. This was a considerably narrower definition of hate speech than the original, and the sca also made a number of pronouncements that would make it harder to succeed with hate speech complaints(for example, suggesting that the subjective intention to commit hate speech was required). Also, the SCA order implied that any hate speech complaints instituted before its judgment would not be allowed to succeed (as section 10 was being declared unconstitutional retrospectively)

此仇恨言论的定义比原文的定义要窄得多，最高上诉法院(SCA)更加了一些令人难以以仇恨言论投诉之声明(例如，暗示发表仇恨言论的主观意图是有必需的)。此外，SCA的法令更暗示，在其案判决前任何所提岀的仇恨言论之投诉都不许取得成功的判决(因第10条法令被追溯性地宣布为违宪之原因)。

5. The SCA's judgment meant that strategically the TCA's case had to be put on hold. Although the TCA's complaint is not confined to hate speech(section 10), as it also concerns unfair racial discrimination(section 7)and harassment (section 11)-hate speech(section 10)is an important part of our case, and thus the matter could not be argued until the Constitutional Court had pronounced on the constitutionality of section 10.

最高上诉法院(SCA的判决意味着南非杜省中华公会(TCA)的案件必须战略性地搁置。虽然南非杜省中华公会(TCA)的投诉不限于仇恨言论的(第10条)，它还涉及不公平的种族歧视(第7条)和骚扰(第11条)-但仇恨言论(第10条)是我们案件中重要的组成部分，因此，在宪法法院对第10条的宪法发言前我方是无法继续争辩的。

6. After frustrating and unexplained delays, the Constitutional Court finally, on Friday, 30 July 2021, handed down judgment in which it largely overturned the SCA's judgment. The Constitutional Court has preserved the original section 10(1)of the Equality Act, except that it has taken out paragraph(a)(believing it to be redundant) and making paragraphs(b)and(c)"conjunctive" or cumulative requirements. The section now reads as follows:

"no person may publish, propagate, advocate or communicate words that are based on one or more of the prohibited grounds, against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to be harmful or to incite harm and to promote or propagate hatred."

在令人沮丧和无法解释的延误之后，宪法法院终于在2021年7月30日,上周五,作出了判决，并大程度的推翻了最高上诉法院（SCA）的判决。宪法法院保留了平等法的第10(1)段，除了取出(a)(因认为它是多余的)并制定(B)和(C)段落为“联合”或累积要求的。此部分阅读如下：

“没有人可以基于一个或多个被禁止的理由提倡或对任何人传达发布，传播，倡导或传达可以合理解释为暗示打击或煽动危害和促进或传播仇恨。”

7. Importantly, the Constitutional Court confirmed that the test for hate speech is objective, meaning that the actual subjective intention of the speaker is irrelevant. Hate speech will be found if the reasonable observer would understand the speech as demonstrating a clear intention to be harmful or incite harm, and to promote or propagate hatred. This means, for example, in Mr Horne's case(the 4th Respondent that appeared in Court), that his testimony about his subjective intention is unhelpful to him -all that matters is what the reasonable observer would have understood as being intended by the words "wipe them out"(i.e that "them" meant the Chinese")

重要的是，宪法法院确认仇恨言论的测试是为客观的，意思是，评论者的实际主流意图是无关紧要的。如果理性的观察者将言论理解为明确的有害或煽动伤害意图，则将被认定为仇恨言论及宣扬或传播仇恨。这意味着，例如 Horne先生在案件中(出庭的第四名被告)，他个人主观意图的证词对他是没有帮助的-重要的是理性的观察者会理解“消灭他们”(即“他们”的意思是“华人”）。

8. The Court crucially also confirmed that there is no requirement to show that anybody acted on the hate speech to commit violent acts against the targeted group(as counsel for the 4th and 8th Respondents seemed to suggest during cross-examination of our witnesses). The speech is judged on its own contents and context. It does not matter what happened or did not happen afterwards. Even"incitement"to commit violence or other hateful acts is not required.

法院还关键地确认不需证明任何人根据仇恨言论针对目标群体实施暴力行为（正如第4和第8被告的律师对我方的证人进行盘问时似乎所建议的说法）。言论是根据自身的内容和上下文来做判断的发生或未发生都为无关紧要的，甚至也不需要“煽动”实施暴力或其他仇恨行为。

9. The Court defined "harmful"as causing deep emotional or psychological pain, or seriously impairing dignity, and to ncite harm"as to incite discrimination hostility or violence. the Court then defined hatred as detestation and vilification"or regarding a group as to be despised, scorned, denied respect and made subject to treatment. Elsewhere, the Court found that speech will constitute hate speech if it"undermines the target group's dignity, social standing and assurance against exclusion, hostility discrimination and violence.

法院定义“有害”为造成深刻的情绪或心理痛苦，或严重损害尊严，“煽动危害”，煽动“歧视，敌意或暴力”。法院然后又将”仇恨“定义为”憎恨和诽谤“或”鄙视、蔑视、拒绝尊重和虐待群体。在其它方面，法院认定，如果岀现以下，“损害目标群体的尊严，社会地位和不被排除的保证，有敌意，歧视和暴力”那么言论将构成仇恨言论。

10. Accordingly, the constitutional Courts judgment favours TCA's case, and has finally allowed the case to proceed to finality.

因此，宪法法院的判决对南非杜省中华公会（TCA）的案例终于允许我方的案件进行至结案。