In other words, a real crap decision.
The Proscecution is definitively allowed to pursue Geert Wilders for inciting to hatred, inciting to discrimination and insulting groups. The Tundra Tabloids’ Dutch colleague, Timo, files the following translation of an Nu.Nl report of the court proceedings, which was viewable online here. KGS
Prosecution allowed to pursue Geert Wilders
Nu.Nl: Amsterdam – The Public Prosecution Service (PPS) is definitively allowed to pursue Geert Wilders for inciting to hatred, inciting to discrimination and insulting groups.
Wednesday prosecutors Birgit Van Roessel and Paul Velleman swept the objections from Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moszkowicz to pursue Geert Wilders from the table.
Different of what the lawyer argued on Monday, the PPS find that they stuck to the task to pursue the politician.
Moszkowicz thinks that the PPS are accusing Geert Wilders of more things than originally was described in their task.
Acquittal – During the first treatment of the trial the prosecution of Wilders led to acquittal on all points. With the trial brought up to new judges, it is not known yet if the PPS will change their point of views.
Moskowicz find among others that justice has stretched the task to prosecution in a intolerable way. According to the lawyer this is very clear when you look at the fact that both prosecutors presented the entire movie Fitna – the 16 minutes lasting anti-Islam movie of Wilders made in 2008 – in the accusation.
According to the PPS Fitna has only a meaning in its whole and therefore must be seen as one remark and one expression.
Moskozwicz also stated that the Netherlands have no jurisdiction when it comes to Fitna cause the movie was put online on the American website liveleak.com. “That circumstance is not relevant”, the PPS claimed. Fitna focuses on the Netherlands and the Dutch Law’s image has been damaged by it, according to the prosecutors.
Koran – Wilders noticed Wednesday that he annoyed himself to the PPS’ misrepresentation of the facts. The PPS claims that a page was torn out of the Koran in Fitna. “That is not true, only the suggestion is made”, prosecutor Van Roessel admitted.
Lawyer Moskowicz had no need to react once more at the arguments of both prosecutors. He said he would stuck with his objections.
On the 30th of March the court will come with a verdict. If Moskowicz carries his points, the porces of Wilders will come to an end.
Translation: Timo DDL
Prosecution takes stand at Wilders’ inciting hatred trial
Wednesday 16 March 2011
Dutch News: The trial of MP Geert Wilders on inciting hatred and discrimination charges continues on Wednesday with the public prosecution department’s reaction to the defence opening statement.
On Monday, Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moszkowicz called for the trial to be scrapped.
The public prosecution department did not originally want to take the case, but it was forced to do so by the appeal court in Amsterdam following protests from a variety of groups and individuals.
At last year’s trial, abandoned following claims of prejudice, the department called for Wilders to be found not guilty on all charges
Anti-Islam MP fails to block Amsterdam trial
RNW: A trial against Dutch MP Geert Wilders for hatemongering can go ahead after objections were brushed aside by the Public Prosecutor.
Mr Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moszkowicz had argued that his client was being accused of far more than was included in the formal charges, which mention hatemongering, discrimination and insulting a section of the population, public broadcaster NOS reports.
Another objection, that the Amsterdam court was not qualified, was rebuffed by the observation that the alleged offences by the accused were committed in Amsterdam, among others. The fact that Mr Wilders’ anti-Islam movie pamphlet, Fitna, was released through a US website was not considered relevant, seeing that the film was targeting a Dutch-speaking audience.
The Public Prosecutor was obliged, however, to apologise to Mr Wilders about the assertion that his film showed a page being torn from the Qur’an. This was beside the fact, as Mr Wilders argued. He explained that the book in question was a telephone directory.
The court will decide its next steps on 30 March.