Dutch court hands anti-Islam populist Wilders conviction, but no punishment

A panel of judges found Dutch far-right populist leader Geert Wilders guilty of inciting discrimination in a speech he made against Moroccans in the Netherlands.

Peter Dejong/AP
Populist anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders prepares to address judges at the high-security court near Schiphol Airport, Amsterdam, on Nov. 23, 2016. Judges convicted Mr. Wilders on Friday of discrimination for insulting Moroccans during a public speech in 2009.

Dutch populist leader Geert Wilders was convicted Friday of inciting discrimination and insulting a group during a speech in 2009, when he said that the Netherlands would be safer with fewer Moroccans.

Mr. Wilders, the controversial leader of the far-right Party for Freedom, has been known for his anti-Islam stance and incendiary remarks against Muslims, minority groups, and immigrants in the Netherlands. In 2011, he was acquitted of a similar charge over anti-Islamic statements.

But Wilders’ party has been gaining in the polls in recent years, emboldened by the rise of anti-establishment, far-right parties in Europe that campaign on similar messages. Donald Trump’s presidential victory in the United States also added a boost to the movements. While Europe has stricter laws regulating hate speech and discrimination, some question whether it is enough to curb the influence of politicians who deliver inflammatory statements that target specific groups of people.

The judges emphasized during the trial that charging Wilders is not an affront to freedom of speech.

"Freedom of speech is one of the foundations of our democratic society," a ruling judge said on Friday, according to the Associated Press. "Freedom of speech can be limited, for example to protect the rights and freedoms of others, and that is what this case is about."

Gilders was found not guilty of a separate hate speech charge regarding comments he made about Moroccans in a TV program. He was convicted, however, for a speech he made in a political rally when he asked a crowd "Do you want more or fewer Moroccans in your city and in the Netherlands," as reported by BBC, to which the crowd chanted "Fewer! Fewer!"

Wilders replied: "We're going to take care of that."

It’s not the first trial he has had regarding similar charges, which have gained Wilders considerable media attention. In the meantime, his party has been rising in the polls as the country prepares to head for an election in three months.

Wilders refused to attend an October hearing, claiming that the proceedings were a "political trial" that sought to undermine his freedom of speech. In 2010, he was also on trial for comparing Islam's holy book, the Quran, to Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf."

"He is trying to turn the court into a podium for his political activities," Rudy Andeweg, a professor of Dutch politics at Leiden University, told The Christian Science Monitor in 2010. "He enjoys the attention. He wants a political trial but judges won't have that."

"Three PVV [Party for Freedom] hating judges declare that Moroccans are a race and convict me and half of the Netherlands," Wilders Tweeted after Friday’s verdict. "Madness."

There will be no penalties or fines to go with the conviction. The presiding judges said that the conviction is enough, and that Wilders, as the leader of a political party, "had a duty not to polarize society," the BBC wrote.

Yet his incendiary message against Muslims and immigrants, the target of blame for some politicians as Europe tries to deal with an influx of refugees, scattered terrorist attacks, and economic troubles, might have struck a chord with disillusioned voters.

"Muslims have a completely different view on society, gender, sexuality, different values. In some cities whites are a minority now. People don't feel at home. They feel unsafe," a Wilders supporter told the BBC, although he also admits he doesn't know any Muslims and mostly gets what he knows from opinion pieces published on the internet.

Wilders' trial, some observers say, is stoking support among those who applaud his courage for speaking out when others don’t.

"A lot of people mentioned that they’re really getting angry that he is being accused and judged only for what he said," Peter Kanne, a Dutch pollster with I&O Research, told The New York Times. "They think that he said something that is true, and they're very angry that a politician cannot say that in a society where there is freedom of speech."

Europe's strict laws regulating hate speech and discrimination stems from its history during World War II, when racial and religious hatred fanned deadly atrocities in the region.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Dutch court hands anti-Islam populist Wilders conviction, but no punishment
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today