The criminal case of the Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders has stirred up feelings both at home, in the Netherlands, and abroad. Because of his statements about Muslims and their religion, Wilders is being charged for the criminal offences ‘inciting hatred’ and ‘group defamation’. The case is almost as complex as the public debate in which Wilders made his statements. Shouldn’t politicians in a democratic society have ample opportunity to freely express their opinions? Or do religious groups deserve protection on the basis of freedom of religion and the nondiscrimination principle? What is the relationship between these three fundamental rights? How do these fundamental rights relate to the criminal law framework of the offences for which Wilders is being prosecuted, i.e. group defamation and inciting hatred? And finally, what are the principal legal arguments for and against a conviction of Wilders?

Target group

Academics

Author's information

Lisanne Groen studied Law at the VU University Amsterdam. She is currently writing a PhD thesis in the field of property law and environmental planning, and working as a lecturer at the constitutional and administrative law department. She is also editor of the Dutch migration law journal, Asiel & Migrantenrecht, which is published by FORUM.

Martijn Stronks studied Law and Philosophy at the VU University Amsterdam and the University of Cape Town. He is currently working as Editor-in-Chief of the Dutch migration law journal Asiel&Migrantenrecht, published by FORUM.