Prosecutors again call for anti-Islam lawmaker's acquittal

25th May 2011, Comments 1 comment

Dutch prosecutors Wednesday again argued for anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders's acquittal on hate speech charges, saying that while his comments may have caused anxiety and insult, they were not criminal.

"In regards to this case, the public ministry has not changed its mind. We recommend an acquittal," prosecutor Paul Velleman told the Amsterdam district court.

Wilders, 47, the leader of the right-wing Party for Freedom (PVV) went on trial on October last year for criticising Islam and notably likening the Koran to Hitler's "Mein Kampf".

Prosecutors previously called for the politician's acquittal on charges of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims and people of non-Western immigrant origin, particularly Moroccans.

The Dutch MP originally went on trial October 4 but it ended abruptly after three weeks when the judges trying him were ordered to step down by a panel of their peers who upheld claims of bias by the politician.

The trial resumed in March, with prosecutors again stating their position on Wednesday.

Velleman told the court the prosecution believed Wilders had no case to answer as he was criticising Islam as a religion and not Muslims as a people and therefore committed no criminal offence.

"Dutch legislation sets high requirements for hate speech," Velleman said.

"Although (Wilders') comments may cause anxiety and aversion, it would not be punishable by law," he said.

Wilders became notorious in 2008 by making a short film, "Fitna", mixing Koranic verses with footage of extremist attacks.

Wilders, whose PVV party gives parliamentary support to a right-leaning coalition, risks up to a year in jail or a 7,600 euro (10,300 dollar) fine for comments made in his campaign to "stop the Islamisation of The Netherlands".

Prosecutors initially dismissed dozens of complaints against him in June 2008 but appeals judges in January 2009 ordered that Wilders be put on trial as his utterances amounted to "sowing hatred" -- compelling an unwilling prosecution to mount a case against him.

© 2011 AFP

1 Comment To This Article

  • Tim Bus posted:

    on 26th May 2011, 04:10:10 - Reply

    In the US, after useless squabbling, they say: "It's the economy, stupid."
    About the Geert Wilders 'trial' they say: "It's the judiciary, stupid."
    Your system is soooo different.
    1/. To have judges ORDER prosecution, when the latter knows it's a bust just boggles the mind. It's totally alien.
    2/. To have the senior judge even talk to a witness would probably have the case thrown out. To have the kind of gross interference which occurred in this couldn't happen. But IF it did, the 'judge' would rightfully be thrown out on his ear, and probably disbarred for life.
    3/. To have the case restarted under new judges smacks of double jeopardy. Obviously "Dutch" justice is different, very different.
    Is it Napoleonic?

    I obviously have no legal background. I just know the norms which I grew up with, on radio, TV and films, featuring British, American and Canadian courts.

    PS. I wondered what damage those extreme left wing idealogues* were doing to the Dutch name, so I googled 'Dutch Justice'. Et voila!: Justice

    *Anyone who calls GW extreme right wing, just because he loves his country, its history, culture, mores and its lifestyles, is obviously 'projecting' an extreme sinister point of view. The FACTS that his life is endangered, and that there exist 'no go' areas in what used to be a free and open society says it all.