Hate speech poses a threat to democratic values, social stability, and peace. As part of a concerning global phenomenon, hate speech and racism against ethnic minorities have experienced a significant increase in Japan, attracting domestic and international criticism. In response to recommendations from the UN human rights treaty bodies, Japan enacted its first anti-hate speech law in 2016. Despite criticisms regarding the law's narrow definition of hate speech and lack of penalties, it has impacted the judiciary, police, and administrative bodies to some extent. Notably, by delegating responsibility to local governments to develop their own strategies for addressing hate speech, the law stimulated local anti-hate movements, resulting in stricter regulations in municipalities. Some municipalities have implemented anti-hate speech ordinances with broader protection and more robust enforcement mechanisms, including penalties, surpassing the national level. This case demonstrates how non-binding and cooperative soft law at the international and national levels can have a ripple effect, encouraging legalistic modes of governance at the municipal level and leading to a pluralistic legal regulation of hate speech. To analyse this ripple effect of soft law, this study examines how international human rights law and norms are internalised in the development and implementation process of anti-hate legislation, involving the interaction of multiple stakeholders in both domestic and international forums. Through theoretical and empirical analysis, including interviews with legal experts and anti-hate activists, this study describes the dynamic process of internalising international law and the involvement of multiple stakeholders. This case study will provide insights into the transformative impact of global human rights on local actors and the feedback mechanisms through which local movements influence global human rights institutions.
