Tweet
EU AGREES IT SHOULD BE A CRIME TO DENY THE HOLOCAUST
By Dan Bilefsky, International Herald Tribune
Boston Globe, MA
April 20 2007
But draft rapped as watered down
BRUSSELS -- The European Union approved legislation yesterday that
would make denying the Holocaust punishable by jail sentences, but
would give countries across the 27-member bloc the option of not
enforcing the law if such a prohibition did not exist in their own laws
The draft law, which EU diplomats called a minimalist compromise,
gained approval after six years of emotional negotiations, during
which countries with vastly different legal cultures struggled to
reconcile the protection of freedom of speech with protection of
their citizens from racism and hate crimes.
The legislation calls for jail terms of as much as three years for
"intentional conduct" that incites violence or hatred against a
person's "race, color, religion, descent, or national or ethnic
origin." The same punishment would apply to those who incite violence
by "denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes."
EU officials said that the law was notable for what it omitted.
Fearing that the legislation could be hijacked by groups trying to
right historical wrongs, a majority of EU countries rejected a demand
by the formerly communist Baltic countries that the law criminalize
the denial of atrocities committed by Stalin during Soviet times. As
a political gesture, however, Franco Frattini, the EU's justice
commissioner, said the EU would organize public hearings on the
"horrible crimes" of the Stalin era in the coming months.
The scope of the law also does not cover other historical events,
like the massacre of Armenians during World War I by Ottoman Turks,
which Armenians call a genocide. Instead, the legislation recognized
only genocides that fall under the statutes of the International
Criminal Court in The Hague, like the mass killing of Jews during
World War II and the massacre in Rwanda in 1994.
There will be no Europe-wide ban on the use of Nazi symbols, one of
the original intentions of the law's drafters, which gained force
two years ago after the release of photographs of Prince Harry of
Britain wearing a swastika armband at a costume party.
EU officials involved in the drafting of the law, which needed
unanimous approval, said consensus had been achieved by allowing
national laws to take precedence. Britain, Sweden, and Denmark,
which have particularly libertarian traditions, pressed for wording
that would avoid criminalizing debates about the Holocaust and
would ensure that films and plays about the Holocaust, like Roberto
Benigni's award-winning "Life is Beautiful" and Mel Brooks's musical
"The Producers," were not censored.
The legislation also states that individual countries' constitutional
protections of freedom of speech would be upheld. The provision would,
for example, allow publishing caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed in
Denmark, where freedom of speech is enshrined in the constitution.
Denmark and Britain also pressed successfully for a provision to
ensure that attacks on religions are covered only when they are of
a xenophobic or racist nature.
Anti racism groups said the law had been watered down to the point of
rendering it unenforceable . Michael Privot, spokesman for the European
Network Against Racism, said, for example, that a person publishing a
pamphlet denying the Holocaust could do so with impunity in Britain,
while still facing prosecution in France. "We have ended up with a
lowest common denominator law," he said.
Laws against denying the Holocaust exist in Austria, Belgium, France,
Germany, and Spain, and in many cases the national legislation goes
much further than the new EU rules. In a recent high-profile case,
the British historian David Irving spent 13 months in jail in Austria
for challenging the Holocaust before being released in December.
Two years ago, Luxembourg tried to use its EU presidency to push
through Europe-wide antiracism legislation, but it was blocked by
the center-right government then in power in Italy on the grounds
that it threatened freedom of speech. The proposed law was considered
too politically difficult to pass until it was taken up by Germany,
current holder of the EU's rotating presidency, which has called it
a historical obligation and a moral imperative.
Friso Roscam Abbing, spokesman for Frattini, the EU's justice
commissioner, said it was inevitable that the bill was diluted, given
the need to reconcile so many different political and legal cultures.
But he added: "We still think it is useful and sends a strong political
signal that there is no safe haven in Europe for racism, anti-Semitism,
or Islam-phobia."
But Muslim leaders accused the EU of having double standards,
arguing that it protects established Christian religions and outlaws
anti-Semitism while doing nothing to defend Muslims against defamation.
By Dan Bilefsky, International Herald Tribune
Boston Globe, MA
April 20 2007
But draft rapped as watered down
BRUSSELS -- The European Union approved legislation yesterday that
would make denying the Holocaust punishable by jail sentences, but
would give countries across the 27-member bloc the option of not
enforcing the law if such a prohibition did not exist in their own laws
The draft law, which EU diplomats called a minimalist compromise,
gained approval after six years of emotional negotiations, during
which countries with vastly different legal cultures struggled to
reconcile the protection of freedom of speech with protection of
their citizens from racism and hate crimes.
The legislation calls for jail terms of as much as three years for
"intentional conduct" that incites violence or hatred against a
person's "race, color, religion, descent, or national or ethnic
origin." The same punishment would apply to those who incite violence
by "denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes."
EU officials said that the law was notable for what it omitted.
Fearing that the legislation could be hijacked by groups trying to
right historical wrongs, a majority of EU countries rejected a demand
by the formerly communist Baltic countries that the law criminalize
the denial of atrocities committed by Stalin during Soviet times. As
a political gesture, however, Franco Frattini, the EU's justice
commissioner, said the EU would organize public hearings on the
"horrible crimes" of the Stalin era in the coming months.
The scope of the law also does not cover other historical events,
like the massacre of Armenians during World War I by Ottoman Turks,
which Armenians call a genocide. Instead, the legislation recognized
only genocides that fall under the statutes of the International
Criminal Court in The Hague, like the mass killing of Jews during
World War II and the massacre in Rwanda in 1994.
There will be no Europe-wide ban on the use of Nazi symbols, one of
the original intentions of the law's drafters, which gained force
two years ago after the release of photographs of Prince Harry of
Britain wearing a swastika armband at a costume party.
EU officials involved in the drafting of the law, which needed
unanimous approval, said consensus had been achieved by allowing
national laws to take precedence. Britain, Sweden, and Denmark,
which have particularly libertarian traditions, pressed for wording
that would avoid criminalizing debates about the Holocaust and
would ensure that films and plays about the Holocaust, like Roberto
Benigni's award-winning "Life is Beautiful" and Mel Brooks's musical
"The Producers," were not censored.
The legislation also states that individual countries' constitutional
protections of freedom of speech would be upheld. The provision would,
for example, allow publishing caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed in
Denmark, where freedom of speech is enshrined in the constitution.
Denmark and Britain also pressed successfully for a provision to
ensure that attacks on religions are covered only when they are of
a xenophobic or racist nature.
Anti racism groups said the law had been watered down to the point of
rendering it unenforceable . Michael Privot, spokesman for the European
Network Against Racism, said, for example, that a person publishing a
pamphlet denying the Holocaust could do so with impunity in Britain,
while still facing prosecution in France. "We have ended up with a
lowest common denominator law," he said.
Laws against denying the Holocaust exist in Austria, Belgium, France,
Germany, and Spain, and in many cases the national legislation goes
much further than the new EU rules. In a recent high-profile case,
the British historian David Irving spent 13 months in jail in Austria
for challenging the Holocaust before being released in December.
Two years ago, Luxembourg tried to use its EU presidency to push
through Europe-wide antiracism legislation, but it was blocked by
the center-right government then in power in Italy on the grounds
that it threatened freedom of speech. The proposed law was considered
too politically difficult to pass until it was taken up by Germany,
current holder of the EU's rotating presidency, which has called it
a historical obligation and a moral imperative.
Friso Roscam Abbing, spokesman for Frattini, the EU's justice
commissioner, said it was inevitable that the bill was diluted, given
the need to reconcile so many different political and legal cultures.
But he added: "We still think it is useful and sends a strong political
signal that there is no safe haven in Europe for racism, anti-Semitism,
or Islam-phobia."
But Muslim leaders accused the EU of having double standards,
arguing that it protects established Christian religions and outlaws
anti-Semitism while doing nothing to defend Muslims against defamation.