Netherlands / Court of Appeal Amsterdam / Case no. 23-003039-12 ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2014:2752
Country
Netherlands
Title
ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2014:2752
Year
Decision/ruling/judgment date
Incident(s) concerned/related
Related Bias motivation
Groups affected
Court/Body type
Court/Body
Key facts of the case
In 2010, a man in the city of Zaandam wrote texts in graffiti on a residential building insulting Muslims and Turks . Examples of the texts include "Muslim Murder is top", "Turks stink" etc. The Court of Appeal decided that these texts constituted group insult as criminalised by article 137c of the Dutch criminal code. This article criminalizes group insults on several grounds including race and religion. Turks fall under the definition of race.
Main reasoning/argumentation
The Court decided that the statements by the accused were gratuitously offensive. The Court considered the possibility that the statements by the accused contributed to the public debate. It ruled that the statement had no additional value for the public debate. The Court also considered the possibility that the statements were an expression of an artistic idea. However and according to the Court, this was not the case here.
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
This case makes clear that gratuitously offensive insults targeting the groups mentioned in Article 137 c of the Dutch Criminal Code are criminal. Groups mentioned are: religion, race, belief, hetero or homosexual orientation or their physical, mental or intellectual disability.
Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case
The perpetrator was ordered a community service of 60 hours.
Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details
"De vraag of de uitlatingen van de verdachte dienstig waren of bijdroegen aan enig maatschappelijk debat dan wel zijn gedaan in verband met een geloofsopvatting of een artistieke expressie inhouden, moet naar het oordeel van het hof ontkennend worden beantwoord. De verdachte heeft in openbare ruimtes beledigende teksten aangebracht die geenszins opriepen tot enig debat noch kennelijk uit een geloofsovertuiging voortkwamen of als kunstuiting waren bedoeld, terwijl dat door de verdediging evenmin is aangevoerd."
"The question whether the statements of the accused were useful or contributed to any social debate or being done in connection with a belief or artistic expression must be answered in the negative by the court. The accused has put abusive texts in public areas, which in no way called for any debate or apparently evidenced by a belief or was meant to be artistic, while the defense did not argue this either."
The Netherlands,Court of Appeal Amsterdam (Gerechtshof Amsterdam) (2014), Case No. 14 July 2014, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2014:2752, available at: http://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2014:2752