|
EU genocide denial law to remove free speech Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=APGGRTNIPZGWNQFIQMFSFF4AVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2007/02/02/weu02.xmlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=APGGRTNIPZGWNQFIQMFSFF4AVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2007/02/02/weu02.xml
EU plans far-reaching 'genocide denial' law
By Bruno Waterfield
Last Updated: 2:03am GMT 02/02/2007
People who question the official history of recent conflicts in Africa and the Balkans could be jailed for up to three years for "genocide denial", under proposed EU legislation.
Germany, current holder of the EU's rotating presidency, will table new legislation to outlaw "racism and xenophobia" this spring.
Included in the draft EU directive are plans to outlaw Holocaust denial, creating an offence that does not exist in British law.
But the proposals, seen by The Daily Telegraph, go much further and would criminalise those who question the extent of war crimes that have taken place in the past 20 years.
The legislation will trigger a major row across Europe over free speech and academic freedom.
Deborah Lipstadt, the professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University, Atlanta, believes the German proposals are misplaced. "I adhere to that pesky little thing called free speech and I am very concerned when governments restrict it," she said yesterday.
"How will we determine precisely what is denial? Will history be decided by historians or in a courtroom?"
Berlin's draft EU directive extends the idea of Holocaust denial to the "gross minimisation of genocide out of racist and xenophobic motives", to include crimes dealt with by the International Criminal Court.
The ICC was set up in 2002 following international outcry about war crimes and alleged genocides in the former Yugoslavia and in Africa. It was felt that the courts in those countries were either unable or unwilling to ensure justice was done.
The draft text states: "Each member state shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the following intentional conduct is punishable: 'publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising of crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined in'... the Statute of the ICC."
General Lewis MacKenzie, the former commander of UN peacekeepers in Bosnia, courted controversy two years ago by questioning the numbers killed at Srebrenica in 1995.
He took issue with the official definition of the massacre as genocide and highlighted "serious doubt" over the estimate of 8,000 Bosnian fatalities. "The math just doesn't support the scale of 8,000 killed," he wrote.
Balkans human rights activists have branded Gen MacKenzie an "outspoken Srebrenica genocide denier" and, if approved, the EU legislation could see similar comments investigated by the police or prosecuted in the courts after complaints from war crimes investigators or campaigners.
A German government spokesman said: "Whether a specific historic crime falls within these definitions would be decided by a court in each case."
If agreed by EU member states, the legislation is likely to declare open season for human rights activists and organisations seeking to establish a body of genocide denial law in Europe's courts.
European Commission officials insist that the legislation is necessary: "racism and xenophobia can manifest themselves in the form of genocide denial so that it is very important to take strong action".
But the legislation faces stiff opposition from academics who fear it would stifle debate over some of the biggest issues in contemporary international relations.
Prof Lipstadt has an international reputation for challenging Holocaust denial.
She was sued unsuccessfully for libel in 2000 by David Irving, the British historian, after exposing his misrepresentation of historical evidence and association with Right-wing extremists. But she does not believe denying the Holocaust or genocide should be a crime.
"The Holocaust has the dubious distinction of being the best documented genocide in history," she said.
"When you pass these kinds of laws it suggests to the uninformed bystander that you don't have the evidence to prove your case."
The professor is also worried by broad-brush definitions of genocide denial, particularly applied to recent conflicts that are still being researched and investigated.
Even without the threat of prosecution, there is concern that academics will try to avoid controversy by ignoring or even suppressing research that challenges genocide claims or numbers of those killed.
David Chandler, the professor of international relations at the University of Westminster's Centre for the Study of Democracy, fears that the draft law could inhibit his work.
"My work teaching and training researchers, and academic work more broadly, is focused upon encouraging critical thinking. Measures like this make academic debate and discussion more difficult," he said.
Prof Chandler also worries that the legislators will close down democratic debate on foreign policy. "Genocide claims and war crimes tribunals are highly political and are often linked to controversial Western military interventions. Should this be unquestioned? Is it right for judges to settle such arguments?" he asked.
Norman Stone, the professor of history at Turkey's Koç University, argues that any attempt to legislate against genocide denial is "quite absurd".
"I am dead against this kind of thing," he said. "We can not have EU or international legal bodies blundering in and telling us what we can and can not say."
|
|
