The perpetrator is liable for the dissemination of the hate speech. Different forms of liability could be applied depending on where and how the hate speech was expressed.
Hate speech promotes hatred, discrimination or violence against individuals or groups based on certain attributes. It is not protected by freedom of expression and can be lawfully prevented and punished.
About this section
This section of the Guide will explain the different forms of liability for hate speech.
Who is liable for the dissemination of hate speech?
According to French law, the general principle is that the person liable for hate speech or any other offence is primarily the director of the publication. This rule applies to paper supports (books, newspapers etc.) and other types of support: television, radio, online and electronic communication. If the director is unknown, the next person liable is the author of the hate speech. If the director is known and held liable, the author of the hate speech can still be held liable as an accomplice to the director.
In France, only physical persons can be held liable in criminal proceedings. Legal entities such as publishing companies are excluded from criminal liability. This means that only the director or legal representative of the entity can be sued. However, legal entities can be held liable in civil proceedings to compensate the victim.
Also, if the media support or service concerned is not provided from France but from another country, the rules mentioned previously on liability do not apply. This does not mean that the media will remain unpunished but simply that its liability will be determined according to common law rules instead of the specific liability rules mentioned above. Therefore, in this case, it will be necessary to prove that the accused person personally participated in the distribution in France of the website/support edited abroad.
If the hate speech was pronounced on TV or on the radio on live broadcasting, only the author of the hate speech will be held liable in civil and criminal proceedings. The director of the radio or TV will usually not be liable as he/she had no control over what was said during live broadcasting.
There are also special rules regarding hate speech disseminated on the internet. If the director of the website had control over the part of the website/online service where the hate speech was located, he/she will be held liable. However, if the hate speech was made in a part of the website that is not under control of the director, his liability will be reduced. This is the case of hate speech contained in messages made by individual users on the personal contribution spaces made available by the online communication service. This could be, for example, blogs, forums, tweets, comments under published articles etc. In this scenario, the director will be liable only in two situations:
Also, if the media support or service concerned is not provided from France but from another country, the rules mentioned previously on liability do not apply. This does not mean that the media will remain unpunished but simply that its liability will be determined according to common law rules instead of the specific liability rules mentioned above. Therefore, in this case, it will be necessary to prove that the accused person personally participated in the distribution in France of the website/support edited abroad.
If the hate speech was pronounced on TV or on the radio on live broadcasting, only the author of the hate speech will be held liable in civil and criminal proceedings. The director of the radio or TV will usually not be liable as he/she had no control over what was said during live broadcasting.
There are also special rules regarding hate speech disseminated on the internet. If the director of the website had control over the part of the website/online service where the hate speech was located, he/she will be held liable. However, if the hate speech was made in a part of the website that is not under control of the director, his liability will be reduced. This is the case of hate speech contained in messages made by individual users on the personal contribution spaces made available by the online communication service. This could be, for example, blogs, forums, tweets, comments under published articles etc. In this scenario, the director will be liable only in two situations:
- The director knew about the illegal message before it was put online and did not act to prevent its publication
- The director did not act promptly
Read more about liability: