Abstract

The article explores the ECHR case law on hate speech and genoicide denial. The ECHR follows a two tiers approach, adjudicating holocaust denials, anti-semitic and hislamophobic propaganda under the abuse clause provided for by art. 17 ECHR, assessing, on the contrary, other forms of hate speech through an ad hoc balancing in the light of art. 10 ECHR. The outcomes of the ECHR decisions exhibit a sort of «militant pluralism», which, on one hand, perfectly fits the ECHR telos, while, on the other, collide with the democratic process fostered by freedom of speech and public discourse at a national level.