Not a hater, say the judges

 

THE last time he took the stand in court, Geert Wilders, the enfant terrible of Dutch politics, promised to continue speaking publicly, even if it cost him his freedom. He was visibly relieved to discover today that no such sacrifice would be demanded of him. This morning an Amsterdam court acquitted him of five counts of hate speech and discrimination.

The charges were based on a number of comments he made in the early days of his political career, including his comparison of the Koran to Mein Kampf, his warning of a “tsunami of Islamisation” and his description of Islam as a “violent religion”. The trial was initiated by a group of citizens who petitioned the justice ministry to prosecute him.

The judges found Mr Wilders's language to be “rude and denigrating” and warned him that he walked “on the edge of what is allowed.” But, they said, his public comments still fell within the limitations set by the law.

The legal distinction between Mr Wilders's words and “hate speech” was clarified in previous hearings by the prosecutors (who even suggested dropping the case; they were not allowed to do so by the Court of Appeal). According to them, Mr Wilders’s comments were addressed to a religion (Islam) rather than to the people that practice it (Muslims), and could not therefore be seen as hate-mongering against a group.

Mr Wilders called the verdict "a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands," and said he looked forward to continuing to discuss Islam freely. His relief was shared across the political spectrum—though for different reasons. The prime minister, Mark Rutte, said he was "personally glad to see Wilders freed" because of "what the process did to him." Other parties noted that they were happy to see the court strengthening the principle of free, if not decent, speech. In polls, 60% of people said they wanted to see Mr Wilders acquitted.

His views may not have moderated much over the years. But far from the provocative joker of previous years, Mr Wilders has become an important force in Dutch politics. Since last year his Freedom Party has provided backbench support for Mr Rutte's minority centre-right government and its ambitious austerity programme. 

Expect a newly emboldened Mr Wilders to start expanding his range of concerns. In recent provincial elections, his party turned on the Netherlands's biggish Polish community, accusing them of crime, drunkenness and taking Dutch jobs. Similar sentiments were soon heard from both the ruling liberal VVD party and the opposition Labour Party. More recently Mr Wilders has joined the euro debate, calling for the Dutch government to reject another bail-out for the Greeks.

But Mr Wilders's ambitions go beyond offending minority groups and political opponents. His party’s agenda is broad, if eclectic, and while it comes wrapped in liberal pieties it also includes elements of social conservatism and foreign-policy isolationism. This appears to have earned it wide popular support—in polls the party remains second only to Mr Rutte's VVD.

A lot of Mr Wilders's populist ideas have found their way into the political mainstream. The Dutch now have strict immigration rules, a renewed focus on law and order (hence a move to restrict the infamous "coffee shops" to Dutch nationals only), and are turning away from what some dismiss as “leftist hobbies”—everything from social-security provisions through foreign-aid spending to culture. Ignore Mr Wilders's fiery rhetoric; it’s the quiet shifting of the tectonic plates of Dutch politics that are worth listening to.
writen by : http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2011/06/wilders-trial