Open-Ended Issue

YES: Geert Wilders should stand trial for his harsh criticism of Islam
. >>

According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam
"The Amsterdam appeals court has ordered the prosecution of member of parliament Geert Wilders for inciting hatred and discrimination, based on comments by him in various media on Muslims and their beliefs. The court also considers appropriate criminal prosecution for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism made by Wilders. In a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in the general interest to... draw a clear line." -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

Geert Wilders should be [will be] prosecuted for the incitement to hatred and discrimination based on his statements in various media about moslims and their belief. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

The contents of Geert Wilders’ views adds to making it a criminal offence. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

The method of presentation of Geert Wilders’ views adds to making it a criminal offence. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

The method of presentation is characterized by biased, strongly generalizing phrasings with a radical meaning, ongoing reiteration and an increasing intensity. >>

Geert Wilders should be [because it is obvious] criminal prosecuted for the insult of Islamic worshippers. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

Geert Wilders has insulted the Islamic worshippers themselves. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

The statements of Geert Wilders substantially harm the religious esteem of the Islamic worshippers. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

Geert Wilders has affected the symbols of the Islamic belief. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

The initiation of a criminal prosecution and a possible conviction later on as well does not necessarily conflict with the freedom of expression of Geert Wilders. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

Freedom of expression is of paramount importance. -- According to the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the European Court based thereon >>

Statements which create hate and grief made by politicians, taken their special responsibility into consideration, are not permitted -- According to the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the European Court based thereon >>

The conviction (punishment) has to be proportionate. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

Criminal prosecution of Wilders because of his statements is opportune in the Dutch situation (the question of opportunity). -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

Instigation of hatred in a democratic society constitutes such a serious matter that a general interest is at stake in order to draw a clear boundary in the public debate. -- According to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam >>

The way in which the public debate about controversial issues is held, such as the immigration and integration debate, does not fall within the ambit of the law in principle indeed. >>

Regarding insulting statements, political, public and other legal counter forces rather than the criminal law is preferred. >>

The traditional Dutch culture of debating is based on tolerance of each other views to a large extent. >>

Islamic immigrants may be expected to have consideration for the existing sentiments in the Netherlands as regards their belief, which is partly at odds with Dutch and European values and norms. >>

It promotes an active participation to the public debate, by muslims. >>

The Court of Appeal makes an exception as regards insulting statements in which a connection with Nazism is made (for instance by comparing the Koran with “Mein Kampf”). >>

The Court of Appeal considers this insulting to such a degree for a community of Islamic worshippers that a general interest is deemed to be present in order to prosecute Wilders because of this. >>

When fundamental boundaries are exceeded, then criminal law does appear as well. >>

Mr. Wilders also claims that Muslims can't take part in Western society as long as they adhere to the Qu'ran and have to tear out at least half of its pages for it to be acceptable in Western society. The court now indicated that even a politician can't exclude groups of people from society based solely on their religious beliefs. -- One of the court points according to Herman van Voorn in WSJ Forum >>

Mr. Wilders claims to criticize Islam and especially the violent verses of the Qu'ran, but he also wants to close the borders to Muslim immigrants. The court now indicated that one doesn't close the borders to books or faiths but to people. -- One of the court points according to Herman van Voorn in WSJ Forum >>

Mr. Wilders claims that all of Islam is radical and that every Muslim is a potential terrorist. The court indicates that by deliberately and constantly blurring the line between extremists and moderates, mr. Wilders entices hate against all Muslims in the Netherlands. -- One of the court points according to Herman van Voorn in WSJ Forum >>

The Amsterdam appeals court objects strongly to mr. Wilders' unfounded comparison of Islam to Nazism and of his equation of the Qu'ran to Hitlers 'Mein Kampf'. -- -- One of the court points according to Herman van Voorn in WSJ Forum >>

Geert Wilders has uttered harsh criticism of Islam. >>

Geert Wilders has used direct quotations and video clips of what others have done in the name of Islam to support his opinions. -- According to Sam Hayes in NRC Handelsblad Discussion >>

Geert Wilders has urged Muslims to tear out "hate-filled" verses from their scripture [Koran, etc.]. >>

Geert Wilders published Fitna
In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders published on the Internet his highly charged and much-anticipated anti-Koran 17-minute film titled “Fitna”, Arabic for civil strife. The first 10 minutes of the film consist of a compilation of video fragments showing the victims of terrorist attacks in New York, Madrid and London. This is interspersed with translations of verses from the Koran and recordings of Islamic leaders calling for violence against non-believers. In the last five minutes, Wilders focuses on Islam in the Netherlands. There are images of blocks of flats dotted with satellite dishes, policemen removing their shoes before entering a mosque, recordings of preaching and a selection of newspaper headlines. >>

Geert Wilders has compared the Koran to Hitler's "Mein Kampf". For instance, in his movie Fitna. >>

Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties -- According to Geert Wilders >>

The Koran calls for violence against Jews and other non-Muslims. -- According to Geert Wilders in his movie Fitna >>

Court ruling may address the feeling of many Muslims that the Netherlands operates double standards
"Muslim youngsters who make anti-semitic remarks are prosecuted but Wilders' anti-Islamic remarks go unpunished." -- Abdelmajid Khairoun, chairman of the Dutch Muslim Council (NMO) told Dutch newspaper the Telegraaf >>

NO: Geert Wilders should NOT stand trial for his harsh criticism of Islam
- >>

Geert Wilders will not be prosecuted on charges of inciting hatred of Muslims
Mr. Wilders’s film, “Fitna,” or “Ordeal” in Arabic, and his published remarks, in which he called the Koran fascist, were hurtful and insulting, but not criminal -- According to Dutch prosecutors >>

Part of the statements of Wilders do not relate to a group of worshippers, but consists of criticism as regards the Islamic belief, as a result of which neither the self-esteem of this group of worshippers is affected nor is this group brought into discredit. -- According to Dutch public prosecutors, in a statement when they rejected the complaints against Geert Wilders >>

Some statements of Geert Wilders can be regarded as offending, but these were made (outside the Dutch Second Chamber) as a contribution to a social debate. -- According to Dutch public prosecutors, in a statement when they rejected the complaints against Geert Wilders >>

"That comments are hurtful and offensive for a large number of Muslims does not mean that they are punishable. Freedom of expression fulfills an essential role in public debate in a democratic society. That means that offensive comments can be made in a political debate." -- Dutch prosecutors, in a statement when they rejected the complaints against Geert Wilders >>

The Dutch prosecutors decision (in june 2008) not to prosecute Geert Wilders was a political one. >>

The judgement of Amsterdam appeal court is an attack on the freedom of expression: Geert Wilders
"Participation in the public debate has become a dangerous activity. If you give your opinion, you risk being prosecuted," -- Geert Wilders, MP Netherlands >>

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression." -- United Nations, Universal Declaration on Human Rights >>

Freedom of speech means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection. >>

There are limits to free speech. >>

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights -- article 10(2)
"This paragraph gives us a range of reasons for which the right to freedom of speech can and should be restrained. The right to express oneself freely comes with certain special duties and responsibilities...If speech is used recklessly or with malicious intent it will threaten the security of society in various ways, it will threaten the constitutional state and it will harm the individual." -- Jieskje Hollander, in her book, Hate Speech, a Historical Inquiry into its Legal Status, p. 31 >>

Free speech does not allow calls for violence. >>

Geert Wilders has not called for violence. >>

Geert Wilders targets Islam the religion, not its followers. >>

Some Muslims say they are outraged by the statements of Geert Wilders. >>

"The position of Muslims in the Netherlands is not so weak that the criminal justice system needs to protect them against [Geert] Wilders." -- NRC Handelsblad, newspaper in the Netherlands >>

Geert Wilders has tried to stop others their free speech
Geert Wilders has, in the recent past, called for the Koran to be outlawed. In other words, Wilders wants to ban books with which he doesn’t agree. It is anathema to the ideals of free speech and free choice of religion when one explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others. >>

The prosecution against Mr. Wilders is a political attempt to kill a politician and a party which threaten the ruling establishment. -- According to Paul Belien, in his article, Bad News from Europe: Nazi Methods in Court >>

[Only] Nine people filed complaints against Geert Wilders with the Court of Appeal -- According to Otto Van Der Bijl, Amsterdam district prosecutor, talking with CNN >>

One of the people that complained about Gert Wilders is Mrs. Els Lucas of the governing Labour party, a political opponent of Mr. Wilders’ PVV party, and a party which is rapidly losing its blue-collar voting base to the PVV. -- According to Paul Belien, in his article, Bad News from Europe: Nazi Methods in Court >>

The ruling of the Amsterdam appeals court to prosecute Geert Wilders fits into a trend
The big-mouthed politician Pim Fortuyn was assassinated in 2002. The boisterous film maker Theo van Gogh was slaughtered by a Dutch-born Islamist on an Amsterdam street in 2004. The soft-spoken but clear-eyed member of Parliament Ayaan Hirsi Ali was endlessly threatened, lived behind bulletproof glass and was essentially driven out of the country in 2006; she ended up in the United States. Now Wilders will be prosecuted for speaking his mind. -- According to Diederik van Hoogstraten, correspondent for Elsevier magazine and the newspaper Volkskrant >>

The appeals court is introducing Saudi Arabian legal standards to the Netherlands -- According to Wall Street Journal >>