David
Irving comments: SO MUCH for the great democracies.
Banning a country's biggest political
party. Rather reminds one of Iraq, where
the "free elections" to be held next
January 2005 (if all goes well) will allow
all parties to stand, except of course for
the previously most popular one, the
Ba'athists.. |
November 9, 2004 Vlaams Blok
Banned! In the
wake of Vlaams Blok's overwhelming popular support
in elections, the Belgian government has outlawed
it. TODAY, November
9th, 2004, our party, the Vlaams
Blok, has been condemned
to death. This afternoon, the Belgian Supreme Court
upheld the verdict, issued by the Court of Appeal
in Ghent on 21 April, which declared the Vlaams
Blok a criminal organisation. In order to preserve
our party members from prosecution, we are now
forced to disband. What happened in Brussels today
is unique in the Western world: never has a
so-called democratic regime outlawed the country's
largest political party. The Vlaams Blok was supported by
almost 1 million voters in last June's elections.
We got 24.1% of the vote in Flanders, where sixty
percent of the Belgian population lives. Voting is
compulsory in Belgium and no other party was
supported by more people. Our party has grown
continuously for two decades. Since 1987, it has
won twelve consecutive elections in a row. Belgium,
established in 1830 by French revolutionaries, is
an artificial construct dominated by the Socialist
Francophone minority in Wallonia. Our party's main
objective is the secession of Flanders from
Belgium. Flanders is the free-market oriented
Dutch-speaking and politically minorised northern
part of the country. We are the democratic voice of
an ever growing number of Flemings who, in an
entirely non-violent way, want to put an end to
Belgium. Our electoral strength is causing panic
amongst the Belgian establishment. A recent opinion
poll of the Brussels newspaper Le Soir and
the Francophone state television RTBF (24 October)
indicates that the Vlaams Blok currently stands at
26.9% of the Flemish vote. Despite the fact that a
political party should be fought in the voting
booth, the Belgian regime has been harassing the
Vlaams Blok with criminal prosecutions for over a
decade. The Belgian Parliament, where Francophones
are overrepresented, changed the Constitution in
1999 in order to limit freedom of expression. It
also voted a series of new laws with the sole
purpose of criminalising and defunding our party,
including an Anti-Racism Act and an
Anti-Discrimination Act which define
"discrimination" so broadly that every individual
can be prosecuted on the basis of them. (The text
of these infamous bills can be found on our website
www.flemishrepublic.org). Moreover, according to
Belgium's draconian new laws, every member and
collaborator of an organisation that propagates
"discrimination," can be punished with fines or
imprisonment. Furthermore, the onus of proof has
been reversed, so that the complainant does not
need to prove that the accused "discriminates"
or propagates "discrimination," but the latter
has to prove that he does not. Since 1993 the power to
prosecute for discrimination and racism was
transferred to a government quango, resorting
directly under the Prime Minister, the so-called
Centre for Equal Opportunities and the Fight
against Racism (CEOFR). This quango has now been
vindicated by the Supreme Court, an institution
composed of political appointees, half of them
Francophones. Have we ever condoned
discrimination on the basis of race? No, but that
did not matter to the Belgian establishment and its
political courts. We were condemned on the basis of
a selection of excerpts from texts provided by the
CEOFR. These excerpts were taken from an anthology
of no more than 16 texts published by local Vlaams
Blok chapters between 1996 and 2000. According to
the court what we wrote was not necessarily untrue,
but our "intentions" were of a criminal nature. The
Ghent ruling, today reaffirmed by the Supreme
Court, stated that our texts (though some were mere
quotes of official statistics on crime rates and
social welfare expenditure and another was an
article written by a female Turkish-born Vlaams
Blok member about the position of women in
fundamentalist muslim societies) were published
with "an intention to contribute to a campaign of
hatred." Such a procés d'intention
(a conviction based on speculation about our
supposed motives) is a real disgrace, and the fact
that the Belgian judiciary had to resort to this
proves that no other reasons for convicting us
could be found. We have never propagated, advocated
or practised any discrimination. Never. The consequences of the
conviction are, however, serious. According to the
law, every member of our party or everyone who has
ever cooperated with it, even if he has not
committed any crimes himself, becomes a criminal by
the mere fact of his membership of or his
cooperation with our party. The Ghent verdict
literally stated: "Rendering punishable every person who
belongs to or cooperates with a group or society
[...] serves as an efficient means to
suppress such groups or societies, as the
lawmaker intended. Rendering punishable the
members or collaborators of the group or society
inherently jeopardizes the continued existence
or functioning of the group or society
[...]." Indeed, the reaffirmation of the
Ghent verdict by the Supreme Court forces us to
disband our party in order not to endanger its
members and collaborators. Therefore, a party
congress next Sunday will convene to officially
disband the party. We will, however, put to the
congres the establishment of a new party to defend
the political priorities that the Vlaams Blok has
always fought for: an independent and democratic
Republic of Flanders; the traditional moral values
of Western civilisation; and the right of the
Flemings to protect their national identity and
their Dutch language and culture. I thank those who founded our
party in 1977 and all who have supported it in the
past 27 years. They have fought the good fight. I
thank our one million voters. They deserve a
democracy. Belgium does not want to grant them one;
we will. Today, our party has been killed, not by
the electorate but by the judges. We will establish
a new party. This one Belgium will not be able to
bury; it will bury Belgium. Frank
Vanhecke, MEP
Anti-Immigration
Party Banned In Belgium By Paul Belien EXACTLY one week
after the political assassination of Dutch
journalist Theo Van Gogh in Holland last
Tuesday, the Supreme Court in neighbouring Belgium
has banned the Vlaams Blok, an anti-immigration
party that happens to be the largest party in the
country.[Blow to Belgium's far right, BBC
News] Is there a connection between
the Van Gogh assassination and the judicial
execution of the Vlaams Blok? There sure is. In his last column, Van Gogh had
praised the Flemings, the Dutch-speaking
inhabitants of Flanders, the northern half of
Belgium, because they had managed to get rid of the
local Antwerp Muslim leader Dyab Abu
Jahjah. Van Gogh noted Jahjah's
announcement in a Flemish newspaper that he is
about to leave Belgium because too many Flemings
vote Vlaams Blok. "The sooner I can leave, the
better," Jahjah said. "Flemings are stupid idiots.
One million of them voted Vlaams Blok." He announced that he would soon
be returning to his native Lebanon. And he added a
farewell message: "Every American, British or Dutch
soldier that gets killed in Iraq, is a victory
to me. I hope many more will follow." But the next victim did not fall
in Iraq, but in the streets of Amsterdam, where Van
Gogh was slaughtered by a Muslim fanatic on
November 2. Today, however, it is less
certain that Jahjah will have to leave Belgium. Its
Supreme Court, the Cour de Cassation, ruled that
Jahjah's enemies in the Vlaams Blok (VB) belong to
a "racist" organization. The party, consequently,
has to be disbanded. This is the first time in the
history of Western Europe that a court ruling has
forced a democratic party to disband. The Belgian political
establishment has been pushing for this measure for
years. The VB is not only an anti-immigration party
but also a secessionist party, striving for the
independence of Flanders, the economic powerhouse
of Belgium. During the past decade, the Belgian
constitution was changed and five draconian laws
were voted in order to strangle the VB. This is the
latest, and most serious, attack. Belgium is a West European
kingdom that houses both the seats of the EU and
NATO. It was established by an 1831 treaty that
forced a Dutch-speaking majority of sixty percent
Flemings to coexist with a minority of forty
percent French-speakers living in the southern
provinces of Wallonia. From the start, Belgium was
governed by a French-speaking establishment. After
the World War II, when the Flemings claimed their
political rights, both Dutch- and French-speakers
were given a fifty percent say in running the
country. Both groups held veto power. This has led to a situation
where the free-market oriented Flemings are being
dominated by Socialist Walloons, who block all
social and political reforms. Stagnation has become the major
characteristic of Belgian political life. And, in
order to maintain the ethnic balance, the
establishment invited foreign immigrants, mainly
French-speakers from Morocco, to come to Belgium
and apply for citizenship. Thus in February 2001, Claude
Eerdekens, the parliamentary leader of the
Parti Socialiste declared in Parliament that 99% of
the immigrants in Brussels-historically a
Dutch-speaking town-filed their naturalisation
papers in French. "We do more to turn Brussels into
a Francophone city than the Flemings can ever do to
prevent it," he boasted. And in September 2000 Leona
Detiége, the Socialist mayor of Antwerp,
declared that immigrants should be given the right
to vote because "the Vlaams Blok is currently
overrepresented [in the city council] as
the immigrants are not allowed to vote." Flemish dissatisfaction with
Belgium has gained the VB the support of one
million voters in this country of only ten million
inhabitants-one million of whom are foreigners.
From three percent of the Flemish vote in the 1987
general elections, the VB has risen relentlessly to
24.1 percent in the regional elections last June.
That won the VB 32 of the 124 seats in the Flemish
regional parliament, making it the largest single
party. But, ostensibly because of its
position on immigration, the VB has constantly been
smeared by the establishment parties as a "racist"
organisation, And it has been excluded from
participation in the coalitions that typically
control Belgian federal, regional and municipal
legislatures by the so-called "cordon sanitaire"
agreement, in which all the other parties piously
vowed never to form a coalition with "racists." The VB's anti-immigration
rhetoric, however, is directed exclusively at
Muslim fundamentalists to whom its message is to
"assimilate or return home." In Antwerp, where the
party is supported by 34.9 percent of the
electorate, the VB has a large backing of orthodox
Jews who feel threatened by Islamic extremists like
Jahjah. Filip Dewinter, the leader of the Antwerp
chapter of the VB, said last March 23rd when he
introduced Israeli author Avi Lipkin, a former
spokesman of the Israeli army, to a VB audience,
that Israel is "the vanguard of the West in a
feudal Middle East." In fact, there are other reasons
why the VB is shunned by Belgium's establishment
parties. "Its conservative family policies, its
deeply felt ethical objections to abortion and
euthanasia, its radical pursuing of the
interests of Flanders, its republicanism, these
are the issues voiced by no other party, these
are in practice the indiscussable phantasms of
the Vlaams Blok," a leading left-wing columnist
wrote in the anti-VB Flemish newspaper De
Standaard last January. In October 2000, the Vlaams Blok
was brought to court by the Centre for Equal
Opportunities and the Fight against Racism (CEOFR),
a taxpayer-funded government quango reporting
directly to the Prime Minister, with
representatives of all political parties-except the
VB-on its board. The CEOFR has authority to
prosecute "racists" under the Belgian Anti-Racism
Act. Article 1 of this bill defines
"discrimination" as "each form of distinction, exclusion,
restriction or preference, which has or may have
as its aim or consequence that the recognition,
the enjoyment or exercise on an equal footing of
human rights and fundamental freedoms in the
political, economic, social or cultural sphere
or in other areas of social life, is destroyed,
affected or restricted." This, of course, is a dangrously
vague definition-note the weasel words "may have,"
the fact that the law covers all areas of social
life, and that it's an offense if "rights" or
"freedoms" are (or may be) only "affected", even
unintentionally ("as a consequence"). And last year, the Belgian
Parliament voted an enhanced Anti-Discrimination
Act which reversed the burden of proof. The
complainant no longer needs to prove that the
accused does indeed "discriminate." It is up to the
accused to prove that he does not. This April, after a prolonged
judicial battle of almost four years, the CEOFR
complaint led to a conviction of the VB as a
"racist" organisation by a Court of Appeal in
Ghent. The court cited a selection of
texts provided by the CEOFR. These texts were an
anthology of 16 different excerpts from
publications by various local VB chapters between
1996 and 2000. Many of the texts simply quoted
official statistics on crime rates and social
welfare expenditure. But they were, according to
the court, published with "an intention to
contribute to a campaign of hatred." One of the texts, which dealt
with the position of women in fundamentalist Muslim
societies, was written by a female Turkish-born VB
member who had herself been raised in such an
environment and had been subjected to a forced
marriage. But the court said that, although the
claims that were made in the story were not
necessarily untrue, the VB published it "not to
inform the public about the position of women in
the Islamic world, but to depict the image [of
non-indigenous people] as unethical and
barbarian." The Belgian Anti-Racism Act, in
its notorious Article 3, not only punishes
"racists," but everyone who, in whatever way, has
any dealings with them: "Punishment with imprisonment for one
month to one year and a fine of fifty francs to
one thousand francs or with either of these is
applied to whoever belongs to a group or society
which clearly and repeatedly practices or
teaches discrimination [...], as well as
to whoever cooperates with such a group or
society." The Ghent ruling, which was
upheld by the Belgian Supreme Court today, means
that the CEOFR can prosecute every politician,
every member and every "cooperator" of the
party. The verdict states
explicitly: "By 'belonging to' a group or society
is meant that the culprit [...] is a
part of the group or society [...]. It
is not necessary for him to have conducted any
activities within the group or society.
Similarly, 'cooperating,' by which is meant any
form of support for the functioning of the group
or society, does not imply the execution of
criminal acts. The punishability of 'belonging
to' and 'cooperating' follows from the mere
knowledge that the group or society, to which
one belongs or with which one cooperates,
[...] commits discrimination." The aim of the verdict is to
kill the VB. And this, too, is stated explicitly in
the court's ruling: "Rendering punishable every person who
belongs to or cooperates with a group or society
[...] serves as an efficient means to
suppress such groups or societies, as the
lawmaker intended. [It] inherently
jeopardizes the continued existence or
functioning of the group or society
[...]." In order to avoid criminal
prosecutions against its members and collaborators,
the VB will have to disband. "Anyone who 'cooperated' with us
in the past five years, can lose their political
rights," says VB Party Leader Frank Vanhecke
-- a member of the European Parliament. If the elections were not by
secret ballot, the Belgian authorities would even
be able to prosecute each of the one million VB
voters. To protect its people against
prosecution, the VB leadership has today decided to
disband the party. It wants to establish a new
party next Sunday, but this one, too, will probably
be prosecuted. The party leadership hopes,
however, that it can postpone a new verdict against
a new party for a number of years, allowing it to
win future electoral victories, force its way into
goverment and abolish Belgium. "Our voters deserve a democracy.
Belgium refuses to grant them one; we will," Mr.
Vanhecke said today. "We will establish a new
party. This one Belgium will not be able to bury;
it will bury Belgium." And, in the process, the Vlaams
Blok will bury mass immigration too. Paul Belien is a
Flemish historian and journalist. His wife,
Alexandra Colen, is a
member of the Belgian House of Representatives
for the Vlaams Blok
|