Facebook polices hate speech while law enforcement hesitates

Wednesday, 24 June 2020

One of the organisers of Wellington's Black Lives Matter protest says he's disappointed Facebook has done more to address online threats than the authorities.

Guled Mire, a community advocate, received threatening Facebook messages following the march to Parliament on June 14.

Across the country, thousands of New Zealanders gathered to show solidarity with the movement, which has come to life again in the United States following the death of George Floyd, an unarmed black man in police custody.

Online hate is nothing new to Mire, who's spoken out about racism in New Zealand following last year's massacre at two Christchurch mosques, and campaigned for the Government to scrap a 'family link' refugee policy dubbed discriminatory.

**READ MORE:

* Where is the Government’s promised national action plan on racism?

* Jacinda Ardern says George Floyd situation in US 'horrifying'

* Hate speech up since Christchurch terror attack; Government considers law changes

**

'I've noticed a real increase in hate and abuse online since I've put myself in the public arena, since March 15, [2019],' Mire says. 'Some of it's just trolling but there are messages that are really threatening in nature. That's where my concern lies. There's not enough being done to keep us safe.'

Some messages, sent from an account based in Auckland, with a profile photo of a young, tattooed man, told Mire to expect 'trouble' if further protests went ahead.

He suggested Mire 'lay low, or else'.

'We're watching you very close.'

Mire reported the messages to police, who told him the comments were 'distasteful and would cause alarm' but didn't meet the threshold to be a criminal offence.

Mire says when he insisted he felt unsafe, an officer told him the messages appeared to be someone expressing their opinion.

There was no identifiable risk to Mire's safety, the officer said.

Police were unable to cross-reference the Facebook identity with a particular person, so couldn't take further action.

Mire also went to Netsafe, who flagged the messages with Facebook, who subsequently removed the account for violating the site's community standards.

Mire said he was surprised Facebook agreed the messages were harmful while the police considered them 'an opinion'.

He was disappointed police didn't attempt to at least identify the sender.

'For me, the thing that's more hurtful is not so much the messages of hate, but the dismissive response from authorities. And they wonder why we're protesting, why we're on the streets calling for change.'

It's as though someone has to get hurt before being taken seriously, he says.

'When you have people telling you to watch your back, I'm worried about not just my safety but also others involved in anti-racism kaupapa. It's sad to think post-Christchurch, this is the world we live in.'

If anything, Mire says, despite a recent focus on online hate, 'things have got worse'.

'It's heartbreaking, especially after seeing 51 members of my community slaughtered.'

In a statement, Wellington Police area commander inspector Dion Bennett said: 'Police review all matters based on the facts presented. On this occasion police have determined that no offence has been committed, therefore the grounds to seek personal details about the user from the social media site is not justified.'

Mire is one of a growing number of Kiwis who have experienced hate speech online and reported it to Netsafe. The online safety organisation has seen a 238 per cent increase in reports this year, compared to the last six months of 2019.

Chief executive Martin Cocker says there has been 'a lot of race-based abuse' directed towards Chinese people and, more recently, those involved in the Black Lives Matter movement.

People who feel threatened as a result of online abuse should go to the police, he says. However, if content didn't meet the threshold to be considered an offence, 'unfortunately there's not a lot below that level'.

'It's a pretty high threshold if you want to take legal action. To get support from Netsafe, it's much lower. Our doors are open to everyone.'

In most cases, they relied on big platforms enforcing their terms and conditions, Cocker says, which, in recent years, have been strengthened.

In the aftermath of the March 15, 2019 attack, which was broadcast live on Facebook by a white supremacist gunman, Justice Minister Andrew Little announced he would fast-track a review of hate speech laws and consider whether a separate hate crime offence should be created.

The racial disharmony provisions in the Human Rights Act 1993 are generally referred to as the country's hate speech laws. The act provides both civil and criminal remedies for hate speech, but only in relation to it being directed at race, colour, ethnic or national origins.

However, online hate speech directed at individuals is mainly regulated through the Harmful Digital Communications Act, which has a broader scope.

For years, academics, human rights and minority groups have been saying the country's hate speech laws should be broadened to cover communities currently unprotected by the legislation. But aside from Netsafe reports, there's little data on hate speech.

And unlike other countries, such as the United Kingdom and the United States, New Zealand doesn't keep a comprehensive record of hate crimes, largely because hate crime isn't a standalone offence.

Since October 2018, police have had the ability to add a 'flag' in their computer databases where they believe an offence has the added aggravating features of being a 'hate/prejudice crime'. Earlier this year a spokesperson said police are 'working actively' to better track crimes motivated by hatred, but details about how or when changes will take place remain unclear.

When Police Minister Stuart Nash was asked for reports and advice he'd received on the subject since December, his office said he hadn't received any.

In a statement, Race Relations Commissioner Meng Foon said: “Police and all government departments need to improve responsiveness to the needs of our many diverse communities.”

He was “disappointed” by the messages to Mire.

“These comments reflect sentiment by some quarters of the public and that there is a deep misunderstanding about the Black Lives Matter movement and the reasons it exists in the first place.

“These issues resonate with communities in Aotearoa as we also grapple with inequality.”

He applauded the leadership and courage shown by the young organisers of the events and would continue lobbying for updates to hate speech legislation.

“The Human Rights Commission has heard similar feedback from various communities for many years about the hateful comments and abuse they receive and whether the overall legal framework is adequate for addressing these.”

Victoria University's Professor Petra Butler, a lawyer who specialises in domestic and international human rights, has seen the messages sent to Mire, and says she considers them threatening.

However, they aren't 'explicit enough' that it's fair to say police have interpreted them incorrectly, she says.

'It's a grey area. There's discretion to look at particular circumstances.'

The University of Canterbury's dean of law, Professor Ursula Cheer, says interpretation of the current laws requires freedom of expression under the Bill of Rights to be given weight.

'The police seem to be doing that when they are deciding whether to prosecute criminal offences.'

In January, Little was presented with a preliminary report and recommendations. Those recommendations haven't been made public.

On Tuesday, his office said the review's process was 'subject to ongoing discussions' and would likely be an issue for after the election. Proposals had been circulated but there was no draft or amending legislation.

Governing partner NZ First indicated it had not seen any proposals.