The Frankfurt am Main regional court has decided: The operator of the social network Facebook can block an account for 30 days if the user writes a so-called hate comment.
This can also apply in individual cases if the hate comment is still covered by the right to expression.
The regional court's decision was based on the following case: A Facebook user had made the following comment in response to an online article in the newspaper "Welt" entitled "Escalation in Dresden - 50 asylum seekers attack police officers - officers are kicked and beaten":
“Water march, baton released and then a unit of military police! Then there will be peace and quiet quickly! And send every identified guest of Merkel home.”
Facebook then blocked the account for 30 days because, according to its terms of use, the comment constituted “hate speech.” Before the regional court in Frankfurt am Main, the user demanded in an expedited procedure that Facebook be prohibited from blocking his account because of this literal or analogous statement or deleting the comment.
The Frankfurt am Main regional court rejected the user's urgent application.
The comment meets the characteristics of hate speech within the meaning of Facebook's terms of use. “The statement falls under the respondent’s hate speech conditions (note: Facebook) because it calls for violence against the refugees affected here.
The average recipient can only understand the statement to mean that water cannons, clubs and, if necessary, other measures should be used against refugees,” the regional court chamber found.
However, the statement is also a permissible expression of opinion within the meaning of Article 5 of the Basic Law. It does not represent insulting criticism, because it does not aim beyond polemical and exaggerated criticism to purely defame those affected. The user made his comment on the occasion of press reporting, so it was not made outside of any factual context.
A statement that, as in the present case, is subject to the constitutional protection of freedom of expression cannot easily be blocked or prohibited state However, this does not apply to the operator of a social network to the same extent. Facebook, for its part, can rely on the protection of professional freedom under Article 12 of the Basic Law, which protects its interest in operating the platform. The court said that the rights of the user and the interests of Facebook must therefore be weighed against each other.
On the one hand, the district court chamber took into account that the user would no longer be able to express himself on this important social network for the duration of the blocking. The court explained that Facebook “represents an essential marketplace for information and there is a great interest for the applicant (note: the user) in being able to express his opinion on this specific platform.”
On the other hand, Facebook has an interest in operating its platform. The Chamber is aware that individual users only took part in discussions to a limited extent due to the (hate) comments made by other participants and refrained from expressing their opinions. A legal portal recently even completely deactivated the comment function because the forum was increasingly being abused to spread hate under the guise of freedom of expression. In making its decision, the chamber also took into account that the European Court of Human Rights allows restrictions on freedom of expression in individual cases if the fundamental rights of third parties are seriously impaired.
The regional court's decision is not yet legally binding. The resolution of September 10, 2018, file number: 2-03 O 310/18, is available at www.lareda.hessenrecht.hessen.de .
Notes:
1) This content reflects the current state of affairs at the time of publication. The reproduction of individual images, screenshots, embeds or video sequences serves to discuss the topic. 2) Individual contributions were created through the use of machine assistance and were carefully checked by the Mimikama editorial team before publication. ( Reason )