The purpose of this thesis is to clarify the criminalization of criminal law provisions 267. This will be done through analysing the basis of the development from the analogue to the digital world. This is done partly by reviewing the historical design and application of the provision from the 1930s (analogue) to 2000 and so forth (digital), and partly by comparing it with the Criminal Law Council's considerations on decriminalizing the provision.

It can be concluded the courts found the protection of the honour to be significantly worthy of protection. This became clear as the courts found statements such as »citation cheaters«, »spiritual jokers« for being defamatory.

A myriad of opportunities have arisen in the digital age, which was previously not possible to the same extent. It is now possible, through the Internet, to spread through Emails, Facebook - in particular groups as well as sharing files with defamatory content. However, it can be deduced from case law that not all forms of dissemination on the Internet constitute an aggravating element. The prevalence must be assessed based on general case law in the light of the potential harmful effect of the dissemination for the violated party.

The digital age period has undoubtedly, in line with the spread of the Internet, focused on ensuring free exchange of opinions in the form of participation in public debates on social media, etc. However, over time, this has proven to be detrimental to the protection of the individual's honour against defamation.

The conclusion of the above must therefore be that it cannot be caused to maintain § 267, as it will be too burdensome for the individual to raise a case of defamation. The financial and temporal perspective will never be comparable to direct contact with the moderators or Facebook itself. § 267 must therefore be considered to be of little importance to society in the digital age period, as value judgments and expressions of contempt in their entirety, almost never occur alone; and contemptuous expressions probably will not occur at all in recent times. Only charges remain for this, but by reviewing section 268 of the Criminal Code on defamation, this will be able to handle the most serious defamation that is made or remedied against better knowledge.