David Irving, the pseudo-historian, was sentenced to prison in an Austrian court yesterday for a public display of holocaust denial.
The BBC World Service held a ‘Have your say’ discussion on the sentence the same day.
So, is the sentence limiting free speech? Well, yes. In my personal opinion I do not think that making such offensive statements should be made illegal. That is not the point here though.
Predictably, there were statements voiced that this sentence shows a double standard attitude of Europe/EU/The West (a bit unclear actually…) considering the defence (here and there) of the publication of the satirical drawings of the prophet Mohammed.
These comments miss the point entirely.
No country I know of has entirely free speech. Many European countries have laws making holocaust denial illegal. Also inciting hatred against e.g. ethnic or religious groups, or sexual minorities will be prosecuted. The laws differ a bit between the countries, naturally.
The point is that the countries, where offensive statements may be legal, or may be illegal, are ruled by law. Instead of the mindless protest against the cartoon publications, there could have been a serious attempt - why not widely publicized? - to bring the publication to court. In Denmark, of course. I believe that Denmark even has a law against blasphemy? Respect of the verdict is of course pivotal! You could predict that the cartoons would be acquitted, and that mr. Irving would be sentenced. That does not preclude the trial.
That the publication is illegal in some countries is a question to be considered, and debated, in these countries. It would be interesting to see how free this discussion would be where the cartoons are illegal…
I can make statements denying the holocaust in Sweden without punishment (provided that I do not also break any laws) but not do the same in Germany. There are obviously countries where the publication of the Mohammed cartoons are illegal, and judging from the protests, muslims the world over were offended by what they were shown or told.
The fact that some statements are illegal somewhere, or offends someone, does not justify violent attempts to force a change in the legislation or behaviour in countries where these statements are not illegal, or considered particularly offensive.