Why doesn’t the law school advertise what Turudic doesn’t know what hate speech is?

Attack, at a conference for a newspaper conference last Friday, the Attorney General Ivan Turudic spoke about the work of the State Attorney’s Office in 2024, he said this: “As a mayor who spread hate speech (Tomislav Tomasevic, Mayor of Zagreb, op. Aut.) He uses hate speech like anyone who goes with personal disqualification. On the side of the fact that Turudic also participates in the campaign of the party from which he originated and which he was posting him, aside the mayor threatens to the mayor (« if he is a defendant and not the defendant »: so he could become), what is really new and that we are scared that Ivan Turudic does not know what the term « hate speech » means.

Namely, Tomasevic resented Turudic that he aligns Timing investigations and investigative procedures with the elections and pre-election activities of the HDZ and the Prime Minister. And « hate speech » defines: « Hate speech is any form of encouraging, spreading or justification of hatred and violence against an individual or group of people on the basis of certain characteristics such as gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, nationality, language, social status, religion or other beliefs. » In addition to being the term or syntagm in Croatian, « hate speech » is a legal term and crime in us, described in Article 325 of the Criminal Code, whose first one reads: “Who through printing, radio, television, computer system or network, in a public gathering or otherwise, publicly encourages or make available leaflets or other materials or other materials A group of people or a member of the group for their racial, religious, national or ethnicity, origin, skin, sex, sexual commitment, gender identity, disability or any other qualities, will be punished by imprisonment for up to three years.  » And the second is: “The penalty referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by who publicly approves, denies or significantly reduces the crime of genocide, the crime of aggression, crime against humanity or war crimes, aimed at a group of people or a group of groups for their racial, religious, national or ethnicity, origin or color, in a manner that those groups. ”

It is not easy to believe that someone has really graduated from the Faculty of Law without knowing what « hate speech » is, or that there are no such cognitive abilities to conclude from what he writes in the Criminal Code that he is not a victim of hate speech if he is told to participate in the HDZ election campaign, to abuse the institution of the Attorney General said Turudic belongs to the speech of ignorant right -wing extremists, when they respond to the public attempts to challenge them the right to racism and discriminate against others and different. He, like them, nor does he know what the term « hate speech » means, nor is it interested in it, and in general, they are not interested in what the individual words of the Croatian language mean, since they use mostly only threats, curse, insults and intimidation.

The way in which Ivan Turudic breaks, as a child rattle, one syntagm of the Croatian language and one legal term unprecedented is, probably, in legal practices in us, regardless of time and political systems. The Attorney General, with the term « hate speech », used about as if he had accused the cyclist who was accusing the pedestrian zone of genocide, and a pedestrian crossing the street beyond the pedestrian crossing of religious, racial and national hatred.

But Ivan Turudic is not a problem in this case. The problem is, it seems to me, professors from that beautifully renovated building at the Croatian National Theater, in which Turudic allegedly studied. With the exception of the criminal law professor, Maja Munivrana, they are silent as if someone had their ears and mouth poured into their lead. Shut up, grave silence, and otherwise very eloquent, to any discussion, from poetry to infrastructure and legal issues, always ready dean Ivan Koprić. And he should not remain silent, because Turudic issued his college a diploma, so there is something we would dare to call himself a lasting and undeniable obligation to the school towards her student. If they have not taught him the meaning of something as simple and unambiguously defined, such as « hate speech », or if they have failed to notice that the student has no cognitive abilities to learn such a thing, they are responsible for the evil that is not obsolete, though, is probably not legally punishable, but is moral and civilizational suspension. If, however, the dean and his professors think that their former student knows what « hate speech » is, but he prefers that this term is served through his meanings in the Argo of street beating and right abusers, their offense is even more difficult because they do not say it publicly.

When a lady here comes out with an epochal discovery that autism is treated by drinking lingerie bleach, or when the community parts take a campaign against vaccination of children against infectious diseases, numerous doctors and professors of medical faculties in Croatia publicly rebel and alarm people that their health and health of their children are in danger. In this way, they will show that they are responsible people, they will show that they are really doctors and that the meaning of medical studies is not just that you get a job in the office, give patients injections and persuade them to say: aaaaaa! In order for the health system to function, people need to believe it. In fact, they need to believe that doctors have a secret of healing, not a lady with a bleach.

He is the same, but indeed exactly the same thing with law, legal, legal state, judiciary … If the Attorney General at the press conference of the General State Attorney’s Office appears with the Laundry Breakdown, the dean of the Zagreb Law in Zagreb is obliged to respond without calling him journalists. Because journalists, Professor Koprić are not responsible for ignorance, terminological manipulation or conceptual hooliganism of one of the most positioned lawyers in the country, and you are responsible! And you had to respond immediately.

No one, except Professor Munivrana, reacted from this fine plastered building, which is a bit like the externally resembles a sanatorium from Mann’s classic novel, in addition to being an expression of irresponsibility and a certain Korebolje, it concerns the following: that from the Faculty of Law in Zagreb officially and institutionally reacted, not by free will, and then, and then, and then, the foreigners of HDZ HDZ, it would be rebelled that the Faculty of Law became involved in the election campaign. And worse than that: Part of the scientific staff would raise the noise for such a response, because, no matter what, they are still in favor of the ruling party, and have an understanding of her Attorney General. So then it is better not to say anything, but to remain silent and let the lingerie bleach do its thing.

Article 325 is one of those legal provisions that we know exist, but in practice they are generally not applied or applied in a slightly cynical way. Namely, what is described in this article and includes linguistic, cultural, and then the legal concept of « hate speech » is concerned solely, or mostly, the other and the other. What does that mean? Well, for example, it means that it is cynically, perverted and unprotected, and contrary to the meaning of the term and sense of legal provision, in Croatia of hate speech accusing blacks who mock whites, fagots who make fun of those who are not, women who underestimate men, Buddhists who discriminate against Catholics, one -legged ones who have two legs, and in the end, Croats.

Article 325 should protect those who are small and powerless than those who are more powerful and more numerous from discrimination. Hate from the term « hate speech » always stems from the feeling of superiority, and is cynical and miserable to accuse the feeling of superiority.