• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Dutch right-wing populist Wilders convicted of discrimination against Moroccans

Status
Not open for further replies.

Regginator

Member
I didn't see a thread about this, it happened yesterday and the Netherlands is pretty divided over this. He immediately said he'd repeal the sentence. I have to say, the idea of Wilders now having a criminal record is hilarious. On the other hand, this will definitely strengthen him in the upcoming election in March 2017.

Anyway, thought GAF might be interested.

Reuters
Judges on Friday convicted Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders of discrimination against Moroccans but levied no punishment in a ruling that could influence elections just three months away. It was the first time that Wilders, whose anti-Islam comments have forced him to live under 24-hour protection for a decade, has been convicted for his outspoken views. Wilders, who is leading in some polls before national parliamentary elections on March 15, said he would appeal the "totally insane" verdict and accused the court of bias.

The charges against Wilders stem from a 2014 campaign rally, when he led a group of supporters to chant they wanted "Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!" Moroccans in the Netherlands. A smiling Wilders concluded: "we're going to take care of that." Reading the decision of a three-judge panel, Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said "no one is above the law", including politicians. Wilder had planned the inflammatory remarks beforehand and insulted the entire group of people of Moroccan origin in the Netherlands, he said.

"If a politician crosses the line, that doesn't mean free speech is being restricted," he said. "A crime cannot be protected by the right to free speech." In a videotaped response to the verdict, which he did not attend in person, Wilders said: "I will never be silenced". He said the ruling was an attempt to "neutralize the leader of the largest and most popular opposition party in the Netherlands."

Moroccan-Dutch organizations welcomed the verdict for drawing a clear line about the limits of free speech. "This ruling protects minorities in our country from the racist poison that is seeping into our society," said anti-discriminatiin platform NBK, which previously filed a failed lawsuit against Wilder in 2007.

Prime Minister Mark Rutte declined to comment on the ruling because the case is under appeal. But he said his liberal VVD party, which is virtually tied with Wilders in opinion polls, ruled out sharing power with him unless he takes back the comments about Moroccans.

Steenhuis said Moroccans form a clearly defined population within the Netherlands that Wilders had singled out as having less rights to reside in the Netherlands. About 400,000 people of Moroccan origin live in the Netherlands. "This statement can be regarded as affecting the dignity of this group as a whole. It is insulting for the entire group," the ruling said.

In closing remarks on Nov. 23, Wilders told judges his remarks were obviously not intended as a call to genocide -- he has never advocated violence -- but rather a reference to his official party platform. Measures he endorses that could lead to fewer Moroccans include a ban on immigration, expelling Moroccans with dual nationality who commit crimes, and a "voluntary repatriation" policy.

Prosecutors, who rejected Wilders' assertions the trial was politically motivated and an unfair attempt to limit his right to free speech, had asked that a fine of 5,000 euros ($5,300), but no prison sentence, be imposed. Wilders appeal is likely to last throughout the parliamentary election campaign, which runs for six weeks before voting on March 15.

A previous attempt to prosecute Wilders for anti-Islam remarks, such as likening the religion to Nazism and calling for a ban on the Koran, ended in acquittal in 2011. That process was widely seen as strengthening his reputation as a defender of freedom of speech and increased his popularity.

(Additional reporting by Thomas Escritt, editing by Larry King)

Associated Press
AMSTERDAM (AP) — Populist anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders was found guilty Friday of insulting and inciting discrimination against Moroccans, a conviction he immediately slammed as a "shameful" attack on free speech and an attempt to "neutralize" him.

Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said the court would not impose a sentence because the conviction was punishment enough for a democratically elected lawmaker. Wilders was not in court for the verdict that came just over three months before national elections. His Party for Freedom is narrowly leading a nationwide poll of polls and has risen in popularity during the trial.

Wilders quickly released a video message, in English and Dutch, slamming the judgment and vowing to appeal. "Today, I was convicted in a political trial which, shortly before the elections, attempts to neutralize the leader of the largest and most popular opposition party," Wilders said. "They will not succeed."

The politically charged prosecution centered on comments Wilders made before and after the Dutch municipal elections in 2014. At one meeting in a Hague cafe, he asked supporters whether they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. That sparked a chant of "Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!" — to which he replied, "we'll take care of it." Prime Minister Mark Rutte, speaking after the verdict, underscored that he and his Liberal Party would not consider forming a coalition with the Party for Freedom unless Wilders retracts the comments. "That is our stance and it remains our stance," Rutte said at his weekly press conference.

Prosecutors say that Wilders, who in 2011 was acquitted at another hate speech trial for his outspoken criticism of Islam, overstepped the limits of free speech by specifically targeting Moroccans. He had insisted he was performing his duty as a political leader by pointing out a problem in society.

On Friday, he was convicted for the interaction with the crowd of supporters in the Hague cafe, which judges said was carefully orchestrated and broadcast on national television. He was acquitted for similar comments he made in a radio interview a week earlier, which the judges said did not amount to inciting hatred. Steenhuis stressed that freedom of expression was not on trial. "Freedom of speech is one of the foundations of our democratic society," the judge said. But he added: "Freedom of speech can be limited, for example to protect the rights and freedoms of others, and that is what this case is about."

Abdou Menebhi, president of the Euro-Mediterranean Center for Migration and Development, welcomed the judgment. "For us, it's a very important verdict," he told The Associated Press. "This gives the Moroccans who felt like victims a renewed belief in a democratic society." He said it also sent a message to Wilders' supporters. "This man is not looking for solutions for you," Menebhi said. "His is an ideology of smearing Europe, migrants, Muslims, without offering alternatives."
 

Boem

Member
Yup. The clown has been around for a while, and he has been troubling for a while, but it seems Trump's success has reinvigorated his supporters a lot. He's definitely modeling his behavior on Trump the last couple of weeks. It's baffling, troubling, and very depressing.

Fellow Dutchies, go vote. I know our elections aren't as sexy as US elections, but after Brexit and Trump, we can't assume that sort of idiocy can't happen here.
 

Jumeira

Banned
Good news, read this yesterday. This piece of shit reminds me of that cunt Anjem Choudry, dancing on the boundaries of speech knowing full well thier vile message is hateful but avoid crossing criminal threshold. Not anymore. This surely puts a dent in his political prospects.
 
You can't just call to have less of a group of people like that. "Do we want less Jews?" would be instantly condemned. If he meant he wants less immigration, he should have said that. Or even if the problem was criminal Moroccan youth - which is a problem that needs solved.

Let's see if this sets a precedent so people calling in public or on camera wanting to get rid of other groups also will get the same treatment.

This surely puts a dent in his political prospects.
Nope, support will go up. If little changes, say hello to Prime Minister Wilders next year. Then again, he will probably screw it up and new elections will be called within the year. And he can't do much, since he doesn't own both houses and will never get a total majority.
 

roytheone

Member
Good news, read this yesterday. This piece of shit reminds me of that cunt Anjem Choudry, dancing on the boundaries of speech knowing full well thier vile message is hateful but avoid crossing criminal threshold. Not anymore. This surely puts a dent in his political prospects.

Nope, I totally expect the opposite: this will only get him more votes, sadly. Luckily I doubt he will have an easy time to form a coalition even if he wins the election, but still.
 
Nope, I totally expect the opposite: this will only get him more votes, sadly. Luckily I doubt he will have an easy time to form a coalition even if he wins the election, but still.
There is literally no coalition that he can form. The only major two parties ever willing to work with him were CDA and VVD some time back. And then he blew that up for political gain.

VVD says they won't work with him again unless he goes back on the remarks he just got convicted from. While they can make a turn, that still wouldn't be enough for 75 seats.
 

SamVimes

Member
Nope, support will go up. If little changes, say hello to Prime Minister Wilders next year. Then again, he will probably screw it up and new elections will be called within the year. And he can't do much, since he doesn't own both houses and will never get a total majority.

?? A lot would have to change for him to win the elections.
 
?? A lot would have to change for him to win the elections.
He's on top of the polls. The left has collapsed and is divided. He has a very good chance to become the largest party I think. But considering we need a coalition then, that is where he might get stuck, since no way he can ever get 75+ seats out of the 150.
 

Amalthea

Banned
It will only help him. The perception for many is that it was politically motivated, a desperate attempt to get rid of him
So?

They are gonna be mad anyway, right wingers are always angry.

And famous and/or wealthy people already get away with enough stuff.
 

kami_sama

Member
lol, this will only help him. Hatred for Moroccans (and black people) is sky high at the moment, this'll only strengthen people's support of him. I don't think his party can get 50%, but you can't ignore a behemoth.

I understand where you are coming from, and I think it's a real possibility, but my thoughts are still those.
 

roytheone

Member
There is literally no coalition that he can form. The only major two parties ever willing to work with him were CDA and VVD some time back. And then he blew that up for political gain.

VVD says they won't work with him again unless he goes back on the remarks he just got convicted from. While they can make a turn, that still wouldn't be enough for 75 seats.

I already see this happening and him whining how a coalition without him "is ignoring the voters' even though, you know, a coalition without the biggest party STILL GOT A MAJORITY OF THE VOTES.
 

Paz

Member
Does it make anyone else sad that the article points out he rose in popularity during the trial?

The whole fucking world has gone mad.
 

RSP

Member
Does it make anyone else sad that the article points out he rose in popularity during the trial?

The whole fucking world has gone mad.

Why do you think he is dragging this out as long as possible?

I'm not that worried about Wilders gaining in popularity because:

- We've seen his votes out much lower during previous elections compared to polls.
- There are very few parties who would even consider forming a government with the PVV party, meaning that even if it becomes the largest party, he would likely fail in forming a government.
- People are starting to understand that his stance on many subjects other than Islam or immigration are completely out of touch with reality, and have no chance of succeeding.
- Members of his party do dumb shit like lie on application forms or have conflicts of interest. Over here that often means they need to step down. Being unable to replace these people with others is one of the largest problems PVV faces.

I'm also convinced Wilders wants to remain in the opposition. He wants to become as popular as possible without actually having to do the work.
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
Does it make anyone else sad that the article points out he rose in popularity during the trial?

The whole fucking world has gone mad.

The world hasn't gone mad, it's as mad as it's ever been.
The only difference is that they now feel emboldened after Brexit and Trump's gains.
These people were always there, but countries were embarrassed of them so they hid them, now they feel as though they have a presence.
 

Harmen

Member
Unfortunately, this will only rile up more support and possibly even sway voters to his direction because people don't like "censorship" and actions against "free-speech".

He is currently tracking to become the biggest party but I am still fairly optomistic because of our political system. He likely won't reach majority with only his own party and I think Dutch people will see a little bit more reason after he failed all of his promises with his party at the top. It is what usually happens with populist parties. I also deem it likely his hypothetical cabinet will fall, like many cabinets here have done in the past.

Progress usually takes place after a low point and I hope our low point won't be as severe as some of the shit 2016 has teased us.

I think it was the best outcome from all of the possible ones.
If they found hin non-guilty, it would have emboldened his supporters even more.

Good point, that is true. It is just that the timing of this whole thing is only a few months before the elections
 

Nokterian

Member
Geert Wilders is a fucking joke, his supporters are even more dumb since they and let me quote this because this is real i heard it many times.

"He is a nice guy"
"He thinks what i am thinking"
"He says the truth"

In other words people can't think for them self and make there own conclusions and this happens way to much here in the netherlands also his supporters are even more dumb because they want to be more racists and not thinking that there being racists. What geert did is not freedom of speech it is hate speech that doesn't fall in line for freedom of speech at all.

I just saw this in my timeline on twitter and it is dutch but it is damn hilarious what a dumb fuck of a man he is.

https://twitter.com/SietseBakker/status/807210757096095744

It says ". @ Geertwilderspvv in video: "Freedom of expression curtailed millions NLers". Bottom: "Comments disabled."
 

Darkwater

Member
Geert Wilders is a fucking joke, his supporters are even more dumb since they and let me quote this because this is real i heard it many times.

"He is a nice guy"
"He thinks what i am thinking"
"He says the truth"

In other words people can't think for them self and make there own conclusions and this happens way to much here in the netherlands also his supporters are even more dumb because they want to be more racists and not thinking that there being racists. What geert did is not freedom of speech it is hate speech that doesn't fall in line for freedom of speech at all.

I just saw this in my timeline on twitter and it is dutch but it is damn hilarious what a dumb fuck of a man he is.

https://twitter.com/SietseBakker/status/807210757096095744

It says ". @ Geertwilderspvv in video: "Freedom of expression curtailed millions NLers". Bottom: "Comments disabled."

If Wilders becomes Prime Minister, I'd say he's a pretty smart guy, not a dumb one. Not a good one either, of course.

Also, while calling his supporters dumb is, to me, completely understandable, it still achieves nothing. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if his supporters' resolves are only strengthened by the way other Dutch citizens look down on them.

Sanders doesn't try to dehumanize or degrade Trump voters (example Conan clip, skip to 2:00 for relevant bit) and I find there's wisdom in that.

Then again, I'm a layman when it comes to politics, so feel free to disregard anything I say. ;) Either way, I'll be voting against Wilders in march.
 

Nokterian

Member
If Wilders becomes Prime Minister, I'd say he's a pretty smart guy, not a dumb one. Not a good one either, of course.

Also, while calling his supporters dumb is, to me, completely understandable, it still achieves nothing. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if his supporters' resolves are only strengthened by the way other Dutch citizens look down on them.

Sanders doesn't try to dehumanize or degrade Trump voters (example Conan clip, skip to 2:00 for relevant bit) and I find there's wisdom in that.

Then again, I'm a layman when it comes to politics, so feel free to disregard anything I say. ;) Either way, I'll be voting against Wilders in march.

Dutch elections and the government work different..there needs be a coalition between party's to get to a mutual agreement to work together but this happend before in 2010 and after less than 2 years it fell apart since VVD and CDA can't work with him also Wilders doesn't have solutions to the problems we are facing in the netherlands, he just shouts and shouts, that's it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_Netherlands
 

GSG Flash

Nobody ruins my family vacation but me...and maybe the boy!
Is there any law in Dutch politics that prevents convicted criminals from becoming Prime Minister? Would be pretty awesome if that judge just nuked Wilders' aspirations :)
 
He's on top of the polls. The left has collapsed and is divided. He has a very good chance to become the largest party I think. But considering we need a coalition then, that is where he might get stuck, since no way he can ever get 75+ seats out of the 150.
This is the most depressing thing I've read since "Trump wins US elections". What the fuck is up with platinum blonde fascist fearmongers winning everywhere?
 

Darkwater

Member
Dutch elections and the government work different..there needs be a coalition between party's to get to a mutual agreement to work together but this happend before in 2010 and after less than 2 years it fell apart since VVD and CDA can't work with him also Wilders doesn't have solutions to the problems we are facing in the netherlands, he just shouts and shouts, that's it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_Netherlands

Different from what? I said hardly anything about how Dutch elections and the government work. I'm a little confused.
 

Linkyn

Member
Different from what? I said hardly anything about how Dutch elections and the government work. I'm a little confused.

In essence, even if his party gets the greatest share of the vote, situations in which a single party gets a parliamentary majority are quite rare, so he'd have to form a coalition government with one of the other major parties in order to be part of the cabinet. What this means is that the election is a bit more complicated than simply a matter of choosing between Wilders and Rutte. As a result, comparisons to binary choices like the Brexit referendum or the US presidential election are suboptimal. For the same reason, the parliamentary election in Germany is different, because the AfD can at best become a large opposition party without support from one of the other major parties.

Of course, this doesn't refute your point about his supporters, but rather calls into question the hypothetical situation in which he becomes the next PM

Edit: Another example would be our last parliamentary election. The christian-democrats came out completely dominating in terms of parliamentary mandates (23 out of 60) against the social democrats (13), liberals (13), and green party (6), but the other 3 ended up forming a coalition government because none of them wanted to work with the former after an scandal involving our former PM and intelligence service.
 
Is there any law in Dutch politics that prevents convicted criminals from becoming Prime Minister? Would be pretty awesome if that judge just nuked Wilders' aspirations :)
No. Once you've done your time, you're pretty much free to do anything again since you are deemed to have paid your dues.

This is the most depressing thing I've read since "Trump wins US elections". What the fuck is up with platinum blonde fascist fearmongers winning everywhere?
It's really not surprising here though. If the other parties would over the last 15 years or so did not ignore key issues, then it wouldn't have come this far. Instead we have a government bailing out banks while the price for healthcare goes up. We close prisons because there are not enough inmates, but there are thousands upon thousands of convicted people walking free while they still need to do time. We get reports about decreased crime, while the police itself says that is not true, because people are just less willing to report stuff anymore. We take in immigrants from safe countries, see them doing crime, and give them money to convince them to go away.

People have had enough, and Wilders simple messages are then gaining popularity if the other parties don't do anything to present their own solutions. You can ignore and talk down the population only for so long until you have to pay the price as a politician.
 

Nokterian

Member
Different from what? I said hardly anything about how Dutch elections and the government work. I'm a little confused.

Well for starters we don't have a two party's like america they choose between two people also we can vote when you are 18 doesn't matter who you are you can vote. Also when voting we still use pen and paper nothing with computers since it can be hacked and manipulated see the example what happend now with trump.

We have multiple party's you can be a part of or don't that is democracy in a nutshell in the netherlands. And you can vote on everyone who you do see fit that is the essence of voting here we are not bound between two people we have multiple party's to choose from.

Even if Wilders wins he doesn't have the power yet since it isn't the same as america we work in coalitions unlike america with 1 person wielding power.
 

YourMaster

Member
Is there any law in Dutch politics that prevents convicted criminals from becoming Prime Minister? Would be pretty awesome if that judge just nuked Wilders' aspirations :)

No, but I'm sure this will be overturned on appeal. In order to convict the judge grasped onto an article that says it's illegal to discriminate based on 'race', and being a Moroccan is a nationality of course, not a race.
 
Good news, read this yesterday. This piece of shit reminds me of that cunt Anjem Choudry, dancing on the boundaries of speech knowing full well thier vile message is hateful but avoid crossing criminal threshold. Not anymore. This surely puts a dent in his political prospects.

while i doubt this conviction will make him less popular in the netherlands, i do think it puts a dent on his political endeavours. after all, he has a criminal record now, and several countries can refuse him access now. including his sweetheart israel and the united states, right?

could mean some problems if he, god forbid, becomes prime minister in the future.
 

Regginator

Member
No, but I'm sure this will be overturned on appeal. In order to convict the judge grasped onto an article that says it's illegal to discriminate based on 'race', and being a Moroccan is a nationality of course, not a race.

So basically as long as it's used under another word, racism and other forms are discrimination are okay? After all, what is nationality if not an umbrella term with people of which the majority belongs to the same ethnic backgrounds? Especially in a country where 99%+ of Moroccans belong to the same ethnic race.

I don't expect this to be overturned, or this will have massive consequences for future verdicts. The judge already waived away claims that Moroccans aren't a race, because the "juridical/legal definition of race is much broader than usual".
 

YourMaster

Member
So basically as long as it's used under another word, racism and other forms are discrimination are okay? After all, what is nationality if not an umbrella term with people of which the majority belongs to the same ethnic backgrounds? Especially in a country where 99%+ of Moroccans belong to the same ethnic race.

I don't expect this to be overturned, or this will have massive consequences for future verdicts. The judge already waived away claims that Moroccans aren't a race, because the "juridical/legal definition of race is much broader than usual".

Right or Wrong have no place in a court, only legal and illegal. Whenever you are convicted for something in needs to be against the letter - or at the very least the intent - of said law. A judge when convicting you also mention exactly which law you broke.
And exactly like you said - this judge has ruled that Moroccans are in fact legally a race so the law that forbids discriminating against race is broken.

So in order for this conviction to stand as it is, the judge(s) who handle the appeal have to agree with this court that Moroccans are a race.
 

Easy_D

never left the stone age
Yup. The clown has been around for a while, and he has been troubling for a while, but it seems Trump's success has reinvigorated his supporters a lot. He's definitely modeling his behavior on Trump the last couple of weeks. It's baffling, troubling, and very depressing.

Fellow Dutchies, go vote. I know our elections aren't as sexy as US elections, but after Brexit and Trump, we can't assume that sort of idiocy can't happen here.
As a fellow European my disappointment would be tenfold that which I felt over the US if you guys fuck this up
 
No, but I'm sure this will be overturned on appeal. In order to convict the judge grasped onto an article that says it's illegal to discriminate based on 'race', and being a Moroccan is a nationality of course, not a race.

He got convicted for defamation and discrimination.

Your definition of racism and race doesn't matter.
 

YourMaster

Member
He got convicted for defamation and discrimination.

Your definition of racism and race doesn't matter.

That's my point. It's not my definition that matters, it's the courts. And how they did what they did was a first and it is a question whether this holds up on appeal. It might, nobody can tell, but you can be sure the defense lawyer will attack mostly THIS point during appeal.
 

Shiggy

Member
The politically charged prosecution centered on comments Wilders made before and after the Dutch municipal elections in 2014. At one meeting in a Hague cafe, he asked supporters whether they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. That sparked a chant of "Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!" — to which he replied, "we'll take care of it."

Do I miss something here? Isn't he just saying "my party will restrict immigration from Morocco"? The way he's saying it is obviously politically incorrect. Can somebody explain the context a bit? I have a hard time believing that simply asking for restricting immigration gets you convicted in the Netherlands, and knowing Wilders he probably did some more shit which the article didn't cover.
 

Joni

Member
Do I miss something here? Isn't he just saying "my party will restrict immigration from Morocco"? The way he's saying it is obviously politically incorrect. Can somebody explain the context a bit? I have a hard time believing that simply asking for restricting immigration gets you convicted in the Netherlands, and knowing Wilders he probably did some more shit which the article didn't cover.
It is part of a bigger picture where he isn't talking about migration but expelling Dutch born people of Muslim descent.
 

YourMaster

Member
Do I miss something here? Isn't he just saying "my party will restrict immigration from Morocco"? The way he's saying it is obviously politically incorrect. Can somebody explain the context a bit? I have a hard time believing that simply asking for restricting immigration gets you convicted in the Netherlands, and knowing Wilders he probably did some more shit which the article didn't cover.

Wilders defense was exactly this, that what he said should be viewed in context of the rest of his speech and his party program of restricting immigration and evicting convicted criminals with a Moroccan passport.

However, fact is at the end of his speech at that election-gathering he simply asked 'Do we want to have more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands' and said 'We're going to arrange that.' when his audience chanted 'fewer, fewer, fewer'. The prosecution have - successfully - argued that he did not include any quantifiers in this statement and that especially as somebody with an audience you need to nuance your statements and that what he said, how he said it could be considered as attacking all Moroccans indiscriminately and this is crossing the law against racial discrimination.
 

Regginator

Member
Right or Wrong have no place in a court, only legal and illegal. Whenever you are convicted for something in needs to be against the letter - or at the very least the intent - of said law. A judge when convicting you also mention exactly which law you broke.
And exactly like you said - this judge has ruled that Moroccans are in fact legally a race so the law that forbids discriminating against race is broken.

So in order for this conviction to stand as it is, the judge(s) who handle the appeal have to agree with this court that Moroccans are a race.

I also meant it in a strictly legal manner. It's why I also said the judge waived away the notion of "Moroccans aren't a race". Then how can another judge rule in Wilders' favour during the appeal? It's literally in Article 1 of the Dutch constitution:

Dutch: "Allen die zich in Nederland bevinden, worden in gelijke gevallen gelijk behandeld. Discriminatie wegens godsdienst, levensovertuiging, politieke gezindheid, ras, geslacht of op welke grond dan ook, is niet toegestaan."

English: Loosely translated it means, "Everyone in the Netherlands shall be treated equally. Discrimination based on religion, lifestyle, political preferences, race, sex (gender), or whatever the reason, is not permitted.

The bold part is my point. You could argue whether it's racism or not ("Moroccan isn't a race, hur hur hur") but it's definitely discrimination, the very same in the abovementioned article, and that's exactly what Wilders has been convicted of.

I really doubt he'll win the appeal, otherwise we might as well just get rid of Article 1, I mean what's the point of it then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom