It happened in "this" then Austria: Political Justice, the day before Christmas 2009
Leopold Figl, Austrian Chancellor
Christmas speech 1945
Justice Western democracies is very strange. Over the fall of the Berlin Wall recedes in time, the more likely it is when wearing public judgments on those involved in human rights cases. Justice is soon to hear his wrath - libel!
But what is "defamation"? The interpretations of this word, which is also found in the laws governing the media, seem rather elastic. A word that has not already enjoyed and you are charged with defamation of individuals. That value judgments (moral to boot!) Based on evidence or on a narrow interpretation no longer seems to play a role. The context does not matter. Only the word count. Here is an example.
From mortui nihil nisi bene
It happened in Austria. On January 31, 2006 Liese Prokop, a former Interior Minister died suddenly. Clearly the deceased was appreciated by her colleagues. The former high-level sports, silver medalist in the pentathlon at the Mexico Olympics in 1968, came shortly after in politics, the right wing of the Conservative Party ÖVP. This allowed him to be welcome in the coalition government that the former chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel formed in 2004 with the far-right party FDP. The all-new Minister of the Interior began to work immediately. She reformed the police and appeared hard and unyielding towards asylum seekers. She undertook to amend
(ie decreasing) the right of asylum and foreigners, in particular because it believed that 45% of Muslim rebels were
any integration.
The sudden death of the minister was regretted by all parties. Wilhelm Molterer, Secretary General Office of Volkspartei (ÖVP) was "speechless." Alfred Gusenbauer, then President of the Social Democratic Party and the future chancellor, hailed a "large woman" and an "outstanding politician", while Alexander von Bellen, which this year then presided over the destinies of the Greens, praised the openness of the deceased minister. We then made it to the solemn funeral, attended by the highest moral authority in the country, the Austrian Federal President.
While VIPs celebrated mourning public, a common man dared express another opinion. It was the officer of the association "Asyl in Not" (Asylum endangered audios), Michael Genner. Less than 24 hours after the death of Mrs. Prokop, he published a press release that began: "The good news early this year: Mrs. Prokop, Minister of Torture and Deportation, died. The memory of the suffering endured by people searching desperately but in vain, shelter, will remain forever linked to his name. "And ended with this sentence: "Mrs. Prokop was a white collar criminal, a species whose cruel history of this country offers many examples."
These words, published in a simple statement of an association, had the effect of a bomb. All Austrian conservative newspapers (none in fact exists no other), since the "Press" to the underground newspaper "Heute" nailed pillory the lack of heart of its author. In nihil nisi mortui bene ( The dead, one should speak only well ): media recalled the good old custom that respected the peoples of antiquity. As the article by Michael Genner there was infringement, the family of the deceased took a hand and his own (or maybe not?) Filed a complaint for defamation.
"I appeal to the freedom of the press" 
The first trial was held May 25, 2007 and lasted half an hour. Judge Lucie Kaindl-König has tried to treat the facts with objectivity. In his view, regardless of the formal written apology that Genner was presented on January 8 for the offending sentence. Let alone the tragedy of refugees and their families because of the stringent measures that they had applied when Mrs. Prokop was a minister and abuse which had been the corollary. "The Tribunal is aware that refugees suffer trauma because of administrative detention" said the judge, thus sweeping out of hand the arguments of Genner relating to physical and psychological torture suffered by refugees. Only interested in what Genner meant by "deportations" and "white collar criminals" as well as "racist." In this context she asked (provocation), "Mrs. Prokop was it racist too, or was it just the case of his servants?" At the parade Genner " officials who were pressured, "the judge responded by attacking: "Did you, in writing this article, he would do as many waves? Did you know that what you write is dishonorable? Were you aware that it is defamation? "Genner's answer was clear:" I appeal to the freedom of the press. "
was apparently the crux of problem. Do we have the right to criticize national policy makers on measures applied against a group of people without being dragged to court for defamation? Obviously not, because if we refer to the words used by Justice Kaindl-König it will "[too] wave." Yet only last totalitarian states are afraid of "waves." Or would they not alone?
The "defamation" is mentioned, a somewhat elastic concept. Any direct criticism, since it is public, can be "defamatory". The facts or evidence have less then, for justice, that the terms used. It is therefore be very careful and s (self) censorship in time, and if possible to avoid any direct controversy, even in the form of an open letter! The contents or reasons of public criticism directed at political figures do not interest of justice. It is in vain that Michael Genner said at his first trial that he had apologized to the family of the deceased and even offered to "remove" the offending sentence. The judge has merely noted that "there are various ways to formulate". Maybe because Michael Genner, while apologizing, said they "changed nothing" in his argument.
The procedure has remained there, as has already been said, and was adjourned ... until 19 September. And then the verdict is: Michael Genner at trial was convicted of defamation. According to the judge, he wore a "judgment excessive" and is accordingly sentenced to a fine of 1200 € with partial suspension of execution. Michael Genner has appealed. He considered this decision "... not only as an attack on media freedom (...) but also an expression of solidarity with the tribunal's legal system also indirectly criticized him." But this was not the opinion of the Supreme Court. Shortly before Christmas 2009 it upheld the ruling of the Court of First Instance.
"A legitimate condemnation?
The media took note the ruling. The highly respected newspaper "Die Presse" was the comment : "The officer of the association Asyl in Not, Michael Genner, received a legitimate conviction for defaming the late Minister of the Interior." That's what he wrote in delivery of 20 December. It must be said that in the same text, it was noted that "The Supreme Court sets limits to freedom of opinion even in politics." What does it mean? Is this an endorsement or a discrete point of a disturbing trend of the system?
hard to decide because the public remains silent. Even supporters of Michael Genner not pipent word. It is very surprising, because some of the yet had praised Michael Genner October 27, 2008, on the occasion of his 60th birthday
th. President of SOS-Mitmensch Burgenland (SOS
Our next Burgenland, the easternmost federal state of Austria, audios), Rainer Klien, for example, had said: "A note on your record Prokop obituary on: we must be allowed - regardless respect for the dead to express such an opinion. I wait every day to see the dock officials of the dead at the external borders of the EU ". Volker Kier, Honorary President of
Asyl in Not and former Liberal MP, pointed out that "Michael Genner committed to human rights without fear of risk itself, including that of its own destruction
. "All the approvals were made before about 150 people to mark the sixtieth anniversary of Genner. But now there is silence around him.
What strikes most is the silence of the opposition parties, left or environmentalists, especially in regard to the latter, Michael Genner was the Green candidate in the National Council [parliament's lower chamber , NDE ]. Green MP Teresija Stoïsitz awarded him the praise: "The case against Michael Genner is a political trial. If it is illegal to say that refugees need protection and that we provide our assistance to prevent deportation, so I am willing to enter into delinquency. "The Weekly" Falter " had reported these words May 17, 2006. And now?
A heavy silence
Good. It was in full Christmas season and the decision of the Supreme Court against Genner fell just before Christmas. At this time we are generally concerned that any other thing of delicate legal issues. This allowed the Supreme Court issued its decision to confirm charges of defamation and the relatively light sentence imposed at trial without causing any adverse reaction. The media have widely reported. At least for a short time. Then silence fell around Michael Genner. No organization, no personality, not even after the middle of immigration, has dared to challenge the ruling. Yet one might have expected, because Michael Genner has been fighting for years, and with all his strength, so that asylum seekers are treated humanely. But his verbal slip appeared to be an insurmountable obstacle. Have hurt the relatives of Madame Minister Prokop just after his death weighs heavier in public opinion, that the deportation of asylum seekers and legal dislocation of families, what happened with her consent and knowledge of all the cream when she was minister. It seems in any case that Genner and his "news good news" had provided his political opponents senior welcome an argument to discredit his organization and himself.
And indeed: from May 24, 2008 Gerald Freihofner columnist, in his "Notes from bottom to top," Genner dealt with "small communist leader." Not content to blame Genner his past membership in the organization of far-left "Spartacus", accuses Freihofner being the author of the slogan appearing on the website "Kommunistische Initiative (Initiative Communist KI) under the symbol of sickle and hammer," We're fighting for the overthrow of the established order! In any case the message is clear: "Let's drop Genner!"
associations supporting migrants and treated as they think it is better to be silent and in the case Genner? It would be surprising. These associations are dependent on subsidies some foundations, quite related to the establishment
. Besides government circles do not just tolerate their claims of non-discrimination on racial, ethnic or religious: they encourage their participation in political institutions. They gave a signal of great symbolic significance: in Vienna, was erected a monument in memory of Marcus Omofuma, a Nigerian asylum seeker died of police abuse during his deportation in 1999. A modern monument, but impersonal and abstract. Maybe not to arouse more emotion than the authorities can tolerate? Since the authorities do something to integrate, what meaning would it have to show solidarity with an outsider critical of the company if it is perfectly possible in this respect, work with them ? Genner the rest was wrong. Under the successors of Mrs. Prokop the situation of asylum seekers is getting worse. On second thought, about the Genner was perhaps not just the "defamation" ?
It would surely have considered it from that angle, if the arguments of Michael Genner were pure fiction. But it is not. The examples he provided are sufficient to justify his reaction. The systematic violation of human rights in the name of the law is, in terms of universal morality , much worse than the holding of disrespectful comments about those responsible for violations that just died. Suffering, not a few, but thousands of people in distress who have failed in Austria do not evoke compassion from the judge Genner, and no more than the establishment. Why could it be otherwise? J. and establishment merely apply the decisions of the Dublin Conference . is the European Union itself is behind this policy. It is not in the case of humanity, but, in the words of the final solution Adolf Eichmann, the model of the perfect bureaucrat Nazi statistics. If we eliminate the Jews, the people of Lords will have more to eat. This was the logic then. And the logic now? If we deport migrants and asylum seekers to their country shaken by wars and crises to die, Austria, Europe and all rich countries the situation on the labor market will be less tense. Hide in his house refugees facing deportation will return as before for those who hid Jews persecuted, to be in breach of the law. Yet Michael Genner, in 2006 in Innsbruck, has dared to call his fellow citizens.
Do we have the right to blame him? Maybe just as much as those who were not afraid to oppose Nazi rule. Civil courage is needed now because the Holocaust has unfortunately not limited to the Nazi era. This time he threatens not a particular ethnic or religious community, but all mankind. We continue to commit, but in another form, more treacherous, but no less effective, and not a single country, but worldwide, through global solidarity leaders. Deportation or forcible expulsion, which is the real difference? Discriminate against asylum seekers by denying them their rights or being anti-Semitic at one time, where is the difference? Even marriages are criminalized, they are broken by force and it shatters families. But while leaders demonstrate their solidarity by atonement ritual in memory of the Holocaust, and washing their hands of all sins against the company they keep committing the victims, they do not shake the elbows . That is why the few individuals who fight for the humanization of society, as Michael Genner, found no support. For how long?
Dubai police issued warrants for international arrest against eleven Europeans, including a woman suspected of killing Mahmoud Abdel Raouf Al-Mabhouh last on January 20 the territory of the emirate. 
