Dismissal of Lawsuit Against Portal X Due to Hate Content Allegations - Criticism Levied Towards Portal X Over Alleged Hate Speech Incident
In a recent development, the Berlin Court of Appeals has dismissed a complaint against internet portal X for the second time, citing limitations in prosecuting antisemitic postings due to jurisdictional principles in international law.
The complaint, which sought to prohibit X from further distributing six antisemitic hate postings, was initiated by Felix Klein, the Federal Government's Commissioner for Combating Antisemitism. Klein has been vocal about the presence of antisemitic postings on the platform, stating that such content is poison for the liberal democratic order.
However, the operators of portal X argued that the Berlin courts were not internationally competent because X is based in Ireland. According to international law, jurisdiction over criminal offenses such as hate speech or antisemitic content generally requires either that the crime took place within German territory, the offenders are German nationals, or the victims are German citizens.
If the offending posts are hosted by a company registered and physically located in Ireland, responsibility for content moderation and legal compliance largely falls under Irish law and jurisdiction, unless there is an applicable global or European legal framework that mandates cross-border enforcement.
German courts typically lack jurisdiction over foreign companies unless there is a direct and substantial connection to Germany or international treaties or EU law provide for extraterritorial enforcement. Enforcement against non-compliant companies based abroad can remain challenging.
Klein criticized X for not contributing satisfactorily to alleviating the intolerable situation of antisemitic postings on their platform. He expects the company to take responsibility and actively combat hate and incitement.
It's worth noting that the complaint of one of the plaintiffs was inadmissible because they did not provide a residential address. Another plaintiff, the organization HateAid, initially a plaintiff in the proceedings against internet portal X, did not appeal the decision of the Regional Court.
A non-appeal complaint can be filed with the Federal Court of Justice against the decision, and the judgment in the case against X is not yet final. This situation is not unique to Germany or to antisemitic content but reflects broader challenges in regulating online speech across borders.
[1] This jurisdictional gap is a common issue in internet law, where companies based outside a country's borders are often beyond the direct reach of that country's courts unless specific international cooperation or treaty arrangements are in place.
- In light of the Berlin Court's decision and the jurisdictional principles in international law, it may be challenging for community policy to regulate antisemitic content on the internet, particularly when the offending posts are hosted by foreign companies like X, based in Ireland.
- The ongoing debate about combating antisemitic postings online, such as those on portal X, highlights the intersection of technology, general-news, and crime-and-justice, as efforts to enforce employment policy (content moderation) across borders face legal complexities and jurisdictional gaps.
