Luxembourg/First Instance Court of Luxembourg City/no. 1551/2022

Country

Luxembourg

Title

Luxembourg/First Instance Court of Luxembourg City/no. 1551/2022

View full Case

Year

2022

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Friday, June 03, 2022

Incident(s) concerned/related

Incitement to violence or hatred

Related Bias motivation

Religion

Groups affected

Third country nationals

Court/Body type

National Court

Court/Body

First Instance Court of Luxembourg City (nineteenth chamber) [Tribunal d’arrondissement de Luxembourg (dix-neuvième chambre)]

Key facts of the case

On the 7th of February 2020, the Anti-Terrorist Section of the Judicial Police Service was informed of the existence of several comments on Facebook which contained xenophobic remarks. The comments were related to an article from «LEQUOTIDIEN.LU» shared by a user on his Facebook page. The investigation later revealed that the Facebook profile associated with the comments belonged to the defendant. In his comments, the defendant declared that Muslims were scum, adding emoticons such as "nausea" or "I'm throwing up" to his comments. He also claimed that Muslims were not adapting and were imposing their religion on Europe and that he did not consider Muslims to be welcome in Luxembourg. He concluded by stating that they (Muslims) should be shot.

Main reasoning/argumentation

In view of the fact that in his comments the defendant refers to the full veil and the burqa, the Court considers that those comments were aimed at a group of people who are distinguished by their origin and by their supposed membership of a particular religion, namely the Muslim religion. Furthermore, it concludes that, given the unambiguous and degrading terms that were used, the comments constitute messaging likely to provoke feelings of deep dislike, contempt, rejection and hostility towards Muslims among the public. Finally, the Court declares that, by publishing abject comments on Facebook which insulted Muslims by calling them scum, the aim of the defendant was none other than to provoke a feeling of hatred and incite to violence due to an alleged membership of the Muslim religion.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

In its reasoning, the Court interprets the constituting elements of the crime of incitement to hatred or violence. Firstly, the controversial statements must be public. This includes comments freely accessible to a significant number of Facebook users. Secondly, the statements need to be of such a nature as to cause hostility or rejection. The writings must therefore be likely to cause hatred against those targeted, i.e. a violent feeling of wanting to harm or a deep dislike and rejection. Thirdly, the statements need to be aimed at a group of persons because of one of the protected characteristics referred to in Article 454 of the Criminal Code relating to discrimination. Fourthly, there needs to be a deliberate intention of the perpetrator to provoke a reaction of hatred in the public mind

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The Court concluded that the defendant had committed a crime of incitement to hatred or violence under articles 457-1 and 454 of the Criminal Code. As such, the defendant was convicted to a €750 fine.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

"En effet, en publiant sur Facebook des commentaires abjects, faisant référence aux musulmans, en les insultant, entre autres, d’ordures, le but de PREVENU1.) n’était autre que de provoquer un sentiment de haine envers ces derniers, et d’inciter à la violence à leur égard, notamment en ce qu’il propose de les abattre, et ce en raison de leur appartenance supposée à la religion musulmane" " Indeed, by publishing abject comments on Facebook, referring to Muslims, and insulting them, among other things, as "scum", DEFENDANT1's aim was none other than to provoke a feeling of hatred towards them, and to incite violence against them, in particular by proposing to shoot them, and this because of their supposed belonging to the Muslim religion".

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.