Balancing Freedom of Expression and Hate Speech : A Comparative Case Law Analysis of Swedish and European Courts.

Sammanfattning

This study examines the legal and judicial balancing of freedom of expression and hate speech regulation in Sweden, focusing on Swedish judicial practice in comparison with European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings. By studying landmark judicial decisions from both Swedish and European courts through the lens of critical legal theory, the study tries to clarify judicial approaches to hate speech and the practical limitations imposed on freedom of expression. The lack of a universally accepted statutory definition of hate speech complicates legal interpretation, which makes judicial approaches contextual. With the comparative analysis of Swedish legal practice and landmark rulings by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), this study examines how Swedish courts interpret and apply hate speech laws while upholding freedom of expression. The study employs critical legal theory to explore how power and societal norms shape the boundaries between hate speech and freedom of expression in Sweden, and how this differs from the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) practice. The findings of this study reveal a tension between the right to freedom of expression and protecting vulnerable groups, the subjectivity in legal interpretation, and the societal context in which speech occurs. The study aims to underscore the necessity of dialogue and critical reflection on hate speech regulation for making it more comprehensive that balances fundamental rights and social harmony.