Dutch politician Geert Wilders was visibly annoyed when he failed to get what he asked for from the three judges hearing his case at the Amsterdam District Court.
Mr Wilders, through his lawyer Bram Moszkowicz, had requested that 17 witnesses testify as part of his defence against charges that include inciting hatred of Muslims and non-western immigrants.
Murderer
Among others, Mr Wilders had asked that Mohammed Bouyeri, the convicted murderer of Theo van Gogh, be called as a expert witness.
The judges, however, will not allow Bouyeri to testify. They have also ruled that other 'Muslim extremists' on Mr Wilders' 'wishlist' will not be allowed to testify. The list includes Fawaz Jneid, imam at the Soennah Mosque in The Hague, and Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, chairman of the Guardian Council in Iran.
Ex-Muslims
Mr Wilders will be permitted to call three experts on Islam, out of the total of eight he had actually asked for. However, two ex-Muslims called by his defence team - in part to give their personal view about the impact of Islam - were also rejected.
In their ruling, the judges say Mr Wilders will have ample opportunity to tell the court whether he agrees with their decision to disallow some of his chosen witnesses
Staying in Amsterdam
The Amsterdam judges also ruled that they have jurisdiction in the case. Mr Moszkowicz had asked that the trial be moved to The Hague, since most of Mr Wilders' statements were made there.
Geert Wilders was visibly displeased with the rulings of the court, shaking his head repeatedly during the brief announcement.
Reacting to the rulings later, Mr Wilders told journalists outside the courtroom, "This court doesn't seem to be interested in the truth. I can only conclude that the court is not going to let me have a fair trial. I have no respect for this."
Mr Wilders bases his defence on his right to freedom of expression. He feels an important element in that respect is that in exercising that right he has in fact been telling the truth about Islam. So, in order to prove that what he says about Islam is true, Mr Wilders says he needs all of his witnesses.
However, some feared that had the judges allowed all seventeen defence witnesses, the trial would become a judgment on Islam, rather than a judgment on whether or not Geert Wilders has incited hatred.
Mr Wilders lawyer Bram Moszkowicz says the judges have overestimated themselves, and "when a judge overestimates himself, I get worried."
The proceedings have now been adjourned until further notice.
Lead photo: Bram Mosckowicz (l) and Geert Wilders (r) in court some time ago (photo ANP)
Email this Article
Printer-friendly version
Hello! ceekdfd interesting ceekdfd site!
This is a total disgrace. I'm sick and tired of politically correct freaks thinking they can control free speech. They get extra worried about having the finger pointed at them if they are not seen to be appeasing these religious fanatics. I mean come on i get the p*ss taken out of me all the time, does that give me the right to prosicute?! No i would get told to suck it up. Lets face it islam is not really a proper religion its a radical ideology that seeks to dominate and you only have to read the koran to see this is what they are instructed to do. When will people realise that islam is simply incompatable with western society? Sure you'l get mr mohammed that lives down the street that prob will never bother you and will get offended at what i say but lets face it he may or may not realise the gravity of islam either in the same way that many governments commit acts that a single countryman cannot be held accountable for. To see the point im making you only have to look at fully muslim countries and the mess they are in. Women can kiss goodbye to their rights, homosexuality and jews will be hated and murdered without any state help and any opposition to religious agendas will be met with servere punishment. I've even lived in saudi arabia and been shot at, spat on, hissed at and called an infidel. Do we really want this in our western countries? At this point people will still be quick to label me a bigot and if that eases *your* uncomfortable feelings when facing this reality then i emplore you to think what you will but im sure once this situation starts to infringe on your life and you actually have understanding and perspective ul feel alot different, thats a promise. It was only recently that sharia courts were started in UK so that muslims cases could be ruled and in one example an islamic judge ruled that a woman who had been beaten by her husband (which is acceptable behavour ((see koran))) was ruled in husbands favour. Had it been ruled in a UK court the male may of faced jail time. Also in another case a simple divorce the judge ruled that the male got all the money and assets; again had it been ruled in a UK court there would of been fair settlement. Democracy is a delicate and precious way of government and only works if we are all equal under the law - and seen to be equal under the law. Pandering to any one particular group by allowing and encouraging different rules/laws/social cohesion is to deny democracy to the country as a whole. Counter groups then have 'valid' grounds to demand their version of rules/laws/social cohesion. This is not the British way - it is not why we fought two world wars, not what our legal institutions are founded on and not what the British people want. Appeasement is very dangerous and stupid and those in power and with influence in Britain should think long and hard about their motivations and the consequences of their actions
Its not racist/discriminatory to disagree with an ideology/religion
otherwise it would of been racist to kill nazis in the war, imagine trying to integrate nazi law in uk law
If you are called racist just recite this back, don't be afraid when people try to label you for speaking free. It is your right, and you must exercise it or if we allow it will be taken away by fanatics who are ultimatly racist themselves but only seek to use our own fairness against us.
Freedom! Cherish It!
A fuller report I read on this states that Wilders' 3 witnesses will not testify in open court, but in private to the judges. Not clear why. In the U.S., where I live, all witnesses for the plaintiff can be heard in court.
My understanding: The question is not did he lie (commit libel) but did he deliberately slander Islam by exposing facts about it that are not widely known? I've viewed Fitna, and it told me nothing I didn't know already. Should we be denied the right to speak the truth when it insults someone? I say, of course not.
Christianity is slandered and ridiculed regularly. Caricatures of Jesus and God are not unusual in the media. I don't care. As an American Christian, I would not deprive anyone the right to any kind of speech, offensive or not. What people say about religion is between them and God.
In the U.S., our free speech has been curtailed somewhat by Political Correctness but I think not as much as in Europe. To deny one the right to speak the truth is more than chilling. I believe Wilders' accusers do not want the truth revealed.
In our country, the U.S. Constitution does not accord us protection from being offended. As we say here when someone's offended: Suck it up! Get over it! I believe the judges should tell the complainants just that.
Where were the real defenders of freedom when "Scrap Iron" Rita ver Donk fell into political obscurity? Geert never lifted a finger or acknowledged her as an ally, now he is really concerned over himself should fate lead him down the same path. If the cause Geert represents is so widespread among so many in Dutch society, why do you feel the whole thing can collapse after a single day in court? This should be a proverbial cakewalk for Geert, just show up, give his speeches, pay a silly fine with other people's funds, and then waltz onwards to being elected the next PM. Why is it not that there is not one single judge in the Netherlands who is fair and impartial? You are really helping Geert's case with statements like these!! One day in court and you have Geert already running for the hills!! Geert's supporters are "paper tigers" who have already surrendered the Netherlands on far less than a silver platter. This is becoming all too laughable to take seriously as a political battle!! Geert doesn't need political opponents, his own group in doing exceeding well at sabotaging him from within. David Berridge.
Wilders needs protection from USA and Israel or a European country with balls, to give Wilders Political asylum now! This case has gone too far! Look, this man is a victim of a sick political motivated prosecution fit for a third world banana republic justice system! All of you that stand behind Wilders right to free speech and a fair trial, contact your governments in your country now to help Wilders out of this nightmare! This should not be happening in a Western country!
Oh and Slapshot David, go live in Iran or Iraq if you want to live by laws that give you no right to a fair trial, because that is exactly what you wish for Wilders in this country. Shame on you David!
SJVP, you are right about Slapshot but don't send him to Iran or Iraq but to the UK. The UK wants to enact Sharia laws because of the vast amount of Muslims who have immigrated there. I bet he already knows that about the Muslims in the UK and he that is why he went to Canada. Thanks goodness for those (BNP) who stayed behind in the UK to stand-up against the government who gave away the Isles. Therefore, Wilders should not flee to the US, Israel or any country but stay in the Netherlands and stand-up for those who see the dangers of vast influx of Muslims. He and the BNP have much in common. They, (like Churchill in the 1930s saw the dangers of Hitler and confronted the powers to be in the UK about the dangers), saw the dangers of Islam and are shouting fire in a theater that is actually on fire but no one cares.
Geert Wilders should know that this case is not about freedom of speech or the real truth; it is about appeasing certain sections of the society!
"it is about appeasing certain sections of the society!"........Whose appeasement? The EU? Who is the EU appeasing? The Islamic power base in Europe and the Islamic countries from whom the EU buys oil. The truth is not on trial but free speech is. { One can bet that the EU has informed Wilders that his open confrontations about Islam are hurting the EU's image and for him to cease his attacks. He refused and now the EU and Dutch court are declaring martial law on freedom of speech "For the Protection of the People and the State". "Der Reichstagsbrand" fire was Hitler's excuse for gaining control over the German people and now the EU and the Dutch government are going to use Wilder's speechs against Islam "For the Protection of the People and the State 'EU' " or and to consolidate it's power over the Europeans.
What an absurd medieval trial! It has become a test case for Sharia in the Netherlands. How stupidly these Dutch judges ignore the Muslims who have incited hatred in their own country and around the world. If I were allowed to post the fotos of the Muslims who wave their signs declaring sharia for The Netherlands and "To Hell with Freedom", it might remind the spineless of who we are dealing with. It is the radical Muslims living in this country as well as others in Europe who incite hatred.
“Even if you have never been involved in a criminal prosecution wherein your very freedom is at risk, I want you to now imagine that you and your attorney have prepared a defense that includes a list of witnesses that will provide a mountain of exculpatory evidence. Then, imagine that the Court summarily and arbitrarily decides that it will not listen to nearly ninety percent of your case.”
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1259/How-Do-You-Say-Kangaroo-Court-in-Dutch.aspx
How can anyone respect such a court of law as one commenter here suggests.
If the judicial system is tainted by left wing radical politicians going out of their way to railroad the justice system in order to charge Wilders with a bunch of bogus charges, and, not to mention that the Court summarily and arbitrarily decides that it will not listen to nearly ninety percent of wilders defense witnesses in his case, then of course he isn´t going to have respect for the judicial system. It is amazing That the court has gone out of its way and hindered Wilders ability to defend himself. This shows that the railroad tracks are being laid into place to railroad Geert Wilders right to free speech. These charges are politically motivated and come at a time when political parties are fighting tooth and nail trying to gather votes. PVDA is very unpopular and had lost more than half of it´s support. It is more then suspicious that Minister Guusje ter Horst had a study done on Wilders without his knowledge of it until it was final and then sends the report to the court at this time of his trial. I hope that Wilders is offered political asylum in USA, Canada or Israel. I will certainly do my best to get as much support for him as I can.
Now that Geert has no respect for the judicial system in the Netherlands, what respect does he have for the legal code, the constitution, the monarchy, and the Oath of Office taken by the Prime Minister? Geert should take a valium and relax as there is always the appeals process available should it be needed. His remarks in court will not make for great electoral campaign material later on. How many PVV members feel comfortable now that their political efforts and aspirations ride upon whatever comments Geert and his legal counsel happen to blurt out at a given moment?!
Post new comment
Please be reminded all comments must be in English, short and to the point - guideline 250 words. Abusive and inappropriate comments will be removed.