GEERT WILDERS, one of Europe’s most high-profile right-wing political leaders, was acquitted by a Dutch court yesterday on charges of inciting hatred of Muslims – in a ruling which is likely to exacerbate tensions over immigration policy in the Netherlands.
As he emerged from court in Amsterdam at the end of a trial which began last October, Mr Wilders (47) said he was “incredibly happy”, and described the outcome as “not just an acquittal for me, but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands”.
He added: “The good news is that, as a result of this ruling, it is legal to speak in a critical way about Islam. The Islamicisation of our societies is a major problem and a threat to our freedom – and I’m allowed to say so. I have not been muzzled.”
Mr Wilders was charged in January 2009 with inciting hatred and discrimination based on anti-Islamic statements he made in speeches, in articles, on the internet, and in his controversial 2008 film, Fitna – Arabic for Dissention – which mixes Koranic verses with video footage of extremist attacks.
The 17-minute film caused outrage among minority groups by comparing the Koran to Adolf Hitler's apologia, Mein Kampf.
Anti-racism campaigners and leaders of the ethnic community who initiated the case against the Freedom Party (PVV) leader told the trial that Mr Wilders’s comments had led to a rise in discrimination and violence against Muslims – and they sought a symbolic penalty in the form of a one euro fine.
However, Judge Marcel van Oosten found in Mr Wilders’s favour yesterday, finding him not guilty on all the charges and ruling that his comments had been directed at Islam as a religion and not at Muslim believers.
He said that while some of the statements were “insulting, shocking and on the edge of legal acceptability”, they were made in the broad context of a vigorous political and social debate in a multicultural society.
At the end of the 20-minute ruling, Judge van Oosten said that while the bench found many of the comments – especially those about “a tsunami of immigrants” – both “gross and denigrating”, they had not given rise to hatred.
The verdict was greeted with applause from PVV supporters packed into the public gallery.
However, Ties Prakken, lawyer for the plaintiff immigrant groups, said they were “deeply disappointed” by the decision, and believed the right of minorities to be protected against hate speech had been violated.
While the ruling will not be appealed in the Netherlands by the prosecuting authorities, who accepted during the trial that Mr Wilders’s comments were offensive but not illegal, it is possible that the plaintiffs will continue their campaign to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
Boosted by its anti-immigrant stance, the PVV is now the third-largest political party in the Dutch parliament and an essential supporter of the minority Liberal-Christian Democrat coalition led by prime minister Mark Rutte.
That leverage has already won Mr Wilders major concessions, which have been added to the programme for government, including an agreement to halve immigration from non-western countries, a ban on the burqa, and the rejection of a higher proportion of asylum applications.
Some observers believe that yesterday’s judicial victory will embolden Mr Wilders even further. “This means that his political views are condoned by law and his political rhetoric has been legalised,” said Dr Andre Krouwel, a political scientist at Amsterdam’s Free University.