Weather
weather forecast Wednesday: Dry with sunny spells and rain towards evening. Max 8-10º. Similar Thursday
    
Home| Opinion| Features| International| In Dutch| Dictionary| What's On| Jobs| Housing| Expats| Blogs| Books
 
 
««« previousnext »»»

Wilders trial ‘a bit of a farce’, say plaintiffs’ lawyer

Tuesday 09 November 2010

The trial of MP Geert Wilders on charges of inciting hatred and discrimination took a new twist on Monday when a senior court official wrote a weblog entry saying the legal proceedings should not have been suspended.

A special panel at Amsterdam district court halted the trial last month and ordered it start again with new judges because the chief judge had acted in a way which could be prejudicial.

But writing in his own name on the legal blog njblog.nl, high court advocate general Diederik Aben said the case against Wilders should not have been suspended pending the appointment of new judges.

Judge's request

According to the Telegraaf, he wrote the item at the request of Amsterdam judge Jan Moors, who was at the centre of the controversy.

Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moszkovicz said it was ‘incomprehensible’ that a high court advocate general had made such a statement and said the trial had become a ‘farce’

Gerard Spong, a lawyer representing some of the people taking legal action against Wilders, said Aben was exercising his right to freedom of speech.

Nevertheless, the trial had become ‘a bit of a farce’, Spong said.

Re-start

The trial should be removed from the Amsterdam court and continued elsewhere with new officials, he said.

The public prosecution department, which itself had been forced to take the case by the appeal court, asked for all charges against Wilders to be dismissed.

It is not clear when the trial will now take place.

© DutchNews.nl


Subscribe Newsletter
Print-version
News archives

Readers' comments

well I'm glad we all agree at least!

By Bill | November 9, 2010 11:19 AM


'Gerard Spong, a lawyer representing some of the people taking legal action against Wilders, said Aben was exercising his right to freedom of speech.'

And obviously he is right. Nobody can be demanding their right to freedom of expression and at the same time, trying to gag to another.

But there is nothing new with this. All these kind of 'movements', always try to use the rights and warranties that provides a democratic system to, firstly, take control and after that, to disassemble it.

By zenplus | November 9, 2010 1:34 PM


"Gerard Spong, a lawyer representing some of the people taking legal action against Wilders, said Aben was exercising his right to freedom of speech."
Something Wilders is apparently denied.

By tjeerd | November 9, 2010 6:43 PM


So, let me get this straight, the lawyer representing the "offended" defends the controversial statement as an exercise of "freedom of speech"??? . . . if he really believes in free speech, how can he advocate on behalf of those trying to silence it?

By Alan Herbold | November 9, 2010 9:12 PM


"Aben was exercising his right to freedom of speech" but Wilders does not have freedom of speech, that's why the trial is being held. As long as you have hate speech laws there will be no freedom of speech in Europe.

By Anon | November 10, 2010 12:15 AM


It is amazing to me why MP Wilders was placed on trial in the first place. The "Truth will set you free" is not true in the Netherlands. Truth is now hate speech yet Muslims are encouraged by this trial to impose sharia while the Dutch legal system acts as an enabler.

By Catmann | November 10, 2010 1:15 AM


@Catmann.
"Muslims are encouraged by this trial to impose sharia".

With same legitimacy, others think Wilders tries to bring us a neo-Nazi regime.
Only difference is you only supply your own criteria, and the word from 'the new Galileo', of course. While we have a lot of prima facie evidence. As Wilders is trying to undermine our constitution, the role of our Queen, our role into EU, our international prestige and Dutch legal system. At the same time he tries to close our borders, and reduce plurality at Parliament by reducing number of MPs by 33%, All that in order to increase our isolation, to drop any protective law for our democracy, rights and liberties. Pure fascist tactic from 1930s.

By zenplus | November 10, 2010 1:21 PM


Comments have been closed for this article.


 
 
 
Comments
 
Click here
 
 
 
Newsletter| RSS| Advertising| Business services| Mobile| Friends| Contact| About us| Tell a Friend
Website by
Stammeshaus.com
Stammeshaus.com
 
EasyToBook.com Apartments for rent Gardener in Amsterdam, maintenance and design
 
Hosted by Qweb.nl
Qweb.nl