Any regulation affecting the free flow of information is unnecessary for a democratic society, Ara Ghazaryan

In Armenia, there have been trends to regulate hate speech, but it seems that there has gradually been a shift to the field of defamation regulation, which was unnecessary. This was reported by Factinfo. International law does not distinguish between slander and insult; any speech that tarnishes a person's dignity is considered defamation, but not hate speech. Hate speech is a very narrowly defined concept, generally conditioned by 10 categories.

This was stated by international law expert Ara Ghazaryan during a discussion titled 'Against Restrictions on the Press, In Favor of the Right to Freedom of Speech'. He emphasized that defamation should not have been regulated and should have remained in the civil legal sphere rather than being transferred to the criminal law field. 'Unfortunately, gradually, what should not have been done was done: defamation was criminalized. Apart from the regulation of hate speech, defamation started to be regulated even more strictly,' said Ara Ghazaryan.

Responding to the project adopted in the previous parliament that criminalizes insults, the expert noted that its primary goal was to prevent actions. 'Even before the article is written, a journalist thinks they might become a criminal, and thus they do not write the article. In other words, the first negative consequence of establishing such norms is the preemption of actions,' said the speaker. Ara Ghazaryan also emphasized that international law clearly stipulates that any regulation or reform affecting the free flow of information is unnecessary in a democratic society. 'We should accept this as a European norm; thus, we are moving against the European standard,' he said.