That kind of fallacy is called Argumentum ad Hominem. It means the argument is addressed to the person; attacking that person instead the issue. There is an irrelevance because the argument is against to the person making a claim, rather against to the claim itself. An example is judging a person's social status or attitude, like calling his strategies aren't effective to finish a certain task because of his untidiness and laziness.
I think E ww1 but correct me if I’m wrong :)
Answer:
Limitations on speech that might be relevant in the context of interruption of public speech such as heckling include prohibitions on disturbance of public order or safety, defamation, hate speech, insult and violation of human dignity in a number of the countries surveyed.
