BY: W. Shadid, 5-4-2008

Islamofobic episodes in which Islam in the Netherlands is either directly or indirectly involved as a subject, increased considerably in the last six months. A so-called ‘ex-Muslim’ for example compared the prophet Mohammed with Hitler and announced the production of a film about his marriage life. Politicians, journalists and even scientists assisted and defended him in order to be able to express his feelings and ideas.

At the beginning of this year there was also the Iranian artist who painted two homosexual men wearing masks of the prophet Mohammed and his son-in-law and requested its exhibition in the municipality museum of The Hague. The museum director who refused the exhibition of the paintings was sharply criticised by politicians and the media because he was considered violating the principle of the ‘freedom of expression’.
However, in the previous six months most media attention was concentrated on the preparation and production of the anti-Islam film of the MP Wilders. Though the debates on this subject were still exhaustive, a new episode with Islam as the primary subject was born. The magazine Opinio published Friday 4 April 2008 a ‘faked speech’ of the prim Minister of the Netherlands, Mr. Balkenende, addressed to prominent members of his Christian Democratic Party (CDA), in which he has taken an anti-Islam attitude. In the speech, the magazine let the prime Minister say: “I want to say it directly and frankly: the big problem in the Netherlands is Islam. Yes, you hear me very well. I do not say: radical Islam or Islamic terrorism or fundamentalism in general – no, I say: the big problem is Islam”.
On behalf of the prime Minister, the government lawyer took legal action against the magazine and presented the case to the Court in Amsterdam by which he demanded rectification of the article. He blamed the magazine a lack of responsibility and journalistic decency. According to the head editor of the magazine the ‘faked speech’ has only been meant as a criticism of the CDA and of Balkenende as a its leader, because the party has hardly developed a strategy in the Dutch Islam debate and let his party be taken hostage by the MP Wilders, who has an outspoken anti-Islam political program.
On Friday the 4th of April 2008, the government lawyer has lost the case in Court and the magazine was not forced to rectify the article. The judge motivated his sentence saying that it was obvious that the article was based on a ‘faked speech’ and therefore the Magazine can not be accused of publishing incorrect or faulty facts. And, as far as the criticism of Balkenende is concerned, the judge stated that he as a prime Minister and leader of the CDA should accept criticism. The judge continued to say that as a result of the intensive media attention to the case, it became clear enough that the article was based on a faked speech. According to the judge, possible damage as a consequence of the article could be corrected by diplomatic channels. In a reaction, the RVD (The Government Information Service) stated that the sentence leaves many questions unanswered and requested the government lawyer to appeal to the higher court, where the casus can be thoroughly investigated. Although the RVD did not indicate which questions remained unanswered, the sentence of the Court was in my opinion not well considered or satisfactory motivated. The judge overestimated the capacity of critical reading of the public, especially as the case is dealing mainly with Islam, a religion that is continuously attacked in society. The fact that Balkenende did publicly condemned the anti-Islam Wilders’ film, will not contribute to enhance the critical reading of the public and has therefore to be considered as irrelevant in this case. I have the impression that the judge was much influenced by the public opinion in a society were the Islam debate is primarily used as public entertainment. Insulting Islam and its followers is continuously considered as art, freedom of speech, or as transparent fiction.
I doubt whether the same judge would have sentenced a comparable sentence in the same case in a different social climate, or in relation to another religion. However, this sentence has far-reaching consequences for society and for the protection of the personal integrity of citizens. Every newspaper or magazine can fabricate a compromising story about public figures. On the basis of this sentence, celebrities can then become outlawed, especially in a society where some have seriously been pleading for ‘the right to insult’ without being classified as mentally disturbed and where journalistic decency does not hardly play a significant role.
Perhaps the anti-Islam film of the MP wilders did not lead to a crisis in the Netherlands. But those who do not realise the existing moral crisis in the country are either dreamily or live at the fraying edge of society. However, there are some light points at the end of the dark Dutch Islam tunnel. A scheduled demonstration against the so-called ‘Islamisation of the Netherlands’ in The Hague has been cancelled because of lack of interest. The organisation committee expected 150 demonstrators, but only 25 persons showed up.

Klik hier voor meer columns

Prof.dr. W. Shadid is professor of intercultural communication. For more info: see page “About”