In a historic 3-2 ruling the First Chamber of the Mexican Supreme Court of Justice has determined that homophobic expressions such as “maricones” or “puñal” are not only offensive and discriminatory but are also not protected under the freedom of expression laws.
A statement released by the Court (translation) read:
In session on March 6 this year, the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, on the proposal of the Minister Arturo Zaldivar Lelo de Larrea, resolved an issue which was discussed for the first time in Mexican jurisprudence, the complex problem between freedom of speech and discriminatory statements, specifically homophobic expressions.
Solving the direct protection in Review 2806/2012, the Board was based on the strong influence of language on the perception that people have of reality, may cause rooted prejudices in society by predisposing expressions marginalization of certain individuals or groups. In this introductory part the Board also considered the role of dominant discourses and stereotypes. Thus, in the opinion of the Court, the language used to offend or disqualify certain groups of discriminatory acquires qualifying.
In that sense, the First Chamber found that homophobic expressions, that is, the discourse consisting infer that homosexuality not a valid sexual option, but a condition of inferiority, constitute discriminatory statements, although it issued a burlesque sense, because through them is encouraged, promoted and justified intolerance towards homosexuality.
Based on the foregoing, homophobic demonstrations are a category of hate speech, which are identified by cause or encourage the rejection of a social group. The social problems of such speeches is that, by expressions of contempt and insult that contain, they generate social feelings of hostility against persons or groups.
Due to this, the First Board determined that the terms used in the specific case, consisting of the words “fag” and “dagger” were offensive, because although it is deeply rooted expressions in the language of Mexican society, the fact is that practices that do most of the members of society can not validate violations of fundamental rights.
Additionally, the First Chamber ruled that these statements were irrelevant, because his job was not necessary for the purpose of the dispute that was being carried out on mutual criticism between two journalists from the city of Puebla . Therefore, it was determined that the terms “queer” and “dagger” as were used in this case were not protected by the Constitution.
should be noted, that the First Chamber does not overlook certain expressions, in the abstract, could form a homophobic discourse, can validly be used in studies in scientific or artistic works of nature, without for that reason updating involving hate speech.
Finally, it should be noted that this resolution is consistent with the various rulings on freedom of expression and right to honor the First Chamber has issued, for in the same set a parameter analysis of such rights, which is that offensive and impertinent expressions are not protected by the Constitution, yes situation updated in this case.
The vote in this case was as follows: 3 votes in favor of the Ministers Pardo Rebolledo, Sanchez Garcia Villegas Cordero and Zaldivar Lelo de Larrea in favor and two votes against the Ministers Cossio Diaz Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena.
