The Amsterdam Court of Appeal on March 9 acquitted a 37-year-old man of insulting Muslims. The public prosecutor had demanded a fine of 500 euros. The lower court had also acquitted the suspect.

In 2010, the documentary Wilders - The Movie, about the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, was broadcast. In this, the documentary makers looked into Wilders's motives and those of his adherents. One of the interviewees was the suspect, who was presented as a supporter of Geert Wilders. Among others, the suspect talked about Arabs as "ass bangers" who also have sex with little boys - "that is normal in their culture." He made statements such as:

"Yes, simply as putting the question: Would someone miss the Muslims if they suddenly dissapeared? Personally I think the answer would be no everywhere, because, well, they don't contribute anything to society. It is really the Muslims that are continually nagging and fussing... and want special privileges and threaten other people. And... fancy they wouldn't do all that, nothing would be wrong. But, well, they do and that is the trouble."

Two people reported against the suspect for group defamation, because his statements were supposed to be defaming Arabs, as the case may be.

Offensive statements to Muslims

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal holds the view that the suspect meant to say Muslims when speaking about Arabs. The court also finds that statements such as "Muslims are fervent ass bangers" and "are guilty of f*cking little boys" without reservation can be considered offensive to those of the Muslim faith.

When judging these utterances, it is important to note that they were made in the context of the public debate. He made these statements, after all, during a recorded interview - and prior to an anti-Islam protest in Berlin in which the suspect took part - that, according to his knowledge, was being held for the benefit of a documentary that was to be broadcasted on the Dutch public television network (by the VPRO broadcasting association) about the politician Geert Wilders.

Within the limits of the free speech

According to the appeals court, someone has to be able to actually address issues of general interest in a political context, even if these utterances may offend, shock or disturb.

We're not dealing with reasoned statements about Muslims in general in distasteful formulations, but the public debate is occasionally characterized by that type of provocative speech.

According to the court, the expressions are not of such an offensive degree that they should be considered as incitement to hate, violence, discrimination or intolerance. The utterances are not unnecessarily hurtful, and the suspect did not exceed the limits of his right to freedom of speech.

Read the court's ruling here (in Dutch).