News / General

The promotion of xenophobia to criminal status took a major step forward on 19^th April 2007 when all twenty seven members of the European Union agreed that certain types of speech would require to be made criminal throughout the European Union within the next two years subject to penalties of up to three years in jail.  The new laws must criminalise public incitement to violence or hatred against ethnic, national or religious groups, as well as behaviour condoning, denying or trivialising certain specified (but not any other) instances of genocide and crimes against humanity, provided that such statements  are likely to incite hatred or violence against a certain group.  Concerns have been expressed by groups interested in the maintenance of freedom of speech in respect that persons may be prosecuted simply for holding and stating controversial views of history that other persons may find offensive.  It is not clear, for example, whether or not a statement of incontrovertible, historical truth which happened to reflect badly upon a particular group might be regarded as being likely to incite hatred or violence against that group and therefore fall with in the prohibition.. There is also concern that the new laws shall strike at denial of only certain, specified instances of genocide etc, namely, those that have been the subject of UN tribunals whereas the denial or trivialisation of other instances of genocide appear to be tacitly authorised by the new laws.  It is, hopefully, not xenophobic to point out that these new provisions were initiated by Germany which holds the current presidency of the EU and that the instances of genocide etc which are protected by the new provisions are those which already have similar and possibly greater protection in German, national law and that genocides which have affected other members of the EU appear to have been excluded from the new protection.  Of course, that may change when the presidency of the EU comes round to these other members who have, in the meantime, secured a pledge that the range of crimes included in the protection shall be reviewed with the next two years but there is no indication as to how recent the atrocity shall have to be in order to be considered for inclusion in the protection.  At the same time some member states, including Britain and some of the Nordic states have expressed reservations based upon considerations of freedom of speech.