This is a guest blog by Anna Mouhot, Advocacy Volunteer with the World Evangelical Alliance Geneva Office this summer.
Today marks the United Nations’ International Day for Countering Hate Speech—a timely reminder of one of the most pressing challenges facing our global society.
Many speak of an “epidemic” of hate speech, breaking out through social media and online platforms, as groups on all sides retreat further into their ideological bubbles, sidelining and dehumanizing the “others”. This is a peril not only for democracies, but also for stability and peace more broadly. And, as Christians, we are called to speak up for the inherent dignity of each human being, no matter his origin or background. We are to be peacemakers, beacons of tolerance and love in a world of hate.
So, what can we do? At the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA), we engage with the United Nations to represent Evangelical Christians before international bodies and seek to change policies to protect fundamental freedoms for all. The regulation of hate speech is a tricky subject because, as much as we are convinced of the necessity to prevent the spread of hate and intolerance – which directly affects many Christians – it can also lead to a denial of these same Christians’ right to freely and openly express their views, even when these views aren’t popular. Regulating hate speech is all about striking a fine line between protecting individuals and groups from harm arising directly from such speech and protecting each individual’s freedom of opinion and expression, especially the right to express certain religious views.
As always, defining terms always helps with the problem. This isn’t easy, given that there is no official definition for hate speech, and UN guidelines are very broad: according to the UN Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech, hate speech is defined as “any kind of communication (…) that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group based on (…) any identity factor”. While all forms of hate, especially inflammatory overgeneralisations concerning particular groups, vilification, discrimination and calls to violence are unacceptable and must be prosecuted, such a definition can be problematic in the way it leaves many aspects to interpretation.
Hate speech regulations can be misapplied in ways which violate the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Overly broad interpretations of what constitutes hate speech can thus also lead to discrimination and undermine the initial goal of promoting tolerance and peaceful cohabitation between people with different views and beliefs. Vague legal definitions can lead to arbitrary decisions or at least generate an atmosphere of fear and silence for those who hold views which are not mainstream. We need clear and well-defined standards to differentiate between hate and honest belief. This is why the WEA advocates for strict and precise standards for regulating hate speech. International law helps us here, as it takes a narrower stance, prohibiting direct “incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence” (see the 2012 Rabat Plan of Action). Following the criteria of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’ Article 20, hate speech must be prosecuted when there are risks of actual harm to certain individuals or groups. In other words, hate speech does not necessarily occur when comments are made which critique or ridicule other groups. Restricting comments which make certain audiences feel uncomfortable isn’t always regulating hate speech; it can be violating fundamental rights.
However, hate speech also generates high risks for minority groups in many countries. Patterns of online disinformation, facilitated by social media, fuel hatred and enable discrimination on the ground, sometimes leading to outward persecution. In India, hate speech against religious minorities rose by 13% in 2025 – with disinformation and calls to violence spreading through channels like WhatsApp. As a direct consequence, mobs were formed, attacking Christians during funerals for instance, claiming they did not have the right to bury their dead on Hindu ground and pressuring for their (re)conversion back to Hinduism.
In this context, the WEA has been advocating for states to fully implement international regulations against incitement to violence and prosecute offenders. We have also been fighting for the repeal of blasphemy laws which are often used to stir up hatred against religious minorities. Importantly, we also encourage interreligious and intercultural dialogue, bridge-building and education on this issue.
Hate speech is a complex – and sometimes paradoxical – topic. International law and organisations must acknowledge this and work towards a balanced approach to hate speech, ensuring that religious minorities are protected and religious views are tolerated.
Copied from: https://janeteppbuckingham1.substack.com/p/countering-hate-speech-a-call-for
Stay Connected