The
trial and conviction in Germany of Adelaide's
Frederick Toben on the basis of material he
sent from Australia into Germany which parroted
Holocaust Denial mainstays, gave that particular
purveyor of anti-historical material a brief moment
in the spotlight Fortunately, most of the media reporting
emanating from Australia, as against Germany, noted
the fact that the Adelaide
Institute, Toben's personal internet-based
"organisation", does not merely argue that a
seemingly supernatural conspiracy has foisted a
belief in Nazi evil on the world's collective
conscience. The Site also carries defamations of
Jewish religious teachings, distortions of
historic and sacred documents, while
indicating an obsession with the promotion
at the pathetic misrepresentation of
history. anthropology, sociology and
political science which equates Jews and
Judaism with Communists and
Bolshevism. Toben and his supporters had made it
quite clear that the Adelaide Institute
director knew of German law and the high
chance that he would face prosecution in
Germany, once he made known his presence
there to the legal authorities. | | | From
what is already on the public record
concerning this case, it is conceivable
that the [Deborah
Lipstadt]
trial will be long and complex. |
In the manner of a
kidnapper who walked into a police station to
tell the officer on duty that he had a child
hostage and had come to engage the law officer
in a philosophical discussion on the merits of
the criminalisation of kidnapping, Toben
identified himself as a person who had committed
acts which were criminal and now sought the
opportunity to discuss their legality. It remains an open question as to whether or not
Toben thinks of all others as fools or expects to
be treated with the clemency one may give to a
fool, What is not in doubt is that the German
prosecutor had no real option but to seek a prison
term for his unwanted Australian visitor, or that
the judge was gentle in the penalty he
disbursed. Once found guilty in court, Toben joined a
select company of non-German citizens who have
received criminal records on the basis of their
Holocaust Denial.
The most notorious person in this category is
the British writer David Irving. David
Irving moved from a position of writing books,
drenched in historic trivia, covering aspects of
the Second World War to an international pariah,
due to his advocacy of selected misrepresentations
from the Holocaust Denial quiver. For this he has
earned the adulation of old and unreconstructed
Nazis and young and unrestrained neo-Nazis, while
moving ever further away from respect within the
discipline of history. Just as Toben has recently spent some days in
court, David Irving will be in court, commencing in
January, in London, having initiated libel
action against American academic Deborah
Lipstadt. Professor Lipstadt published the first
significant popular study of Holocaust Denial and
deniers, focusing on its pernicious political ends.
In it, she delivered a hostile judgement on David
Irving and his tenuous relationship to the
discipline of history, and less tenuous
relationship with a variety of unsavoury claques
and characters. From what is already on the public
record concerning this case, it is conceivable that
the trial will be long and complex. Given
the recourse to libel law by David Irving, it is
ironic that prosecution for
Holocaust Denial has been presented by its
advocates as a free speech litmus test for liberal
societies. Germany, with a sense of special
responsibility far the Nazi era, has not swallowed
that argument and has asserted that, like other
forms of speech which defame and endanger people,
Holocaust Denial is subject to the rigours of law
enforcement. Quite properly , human rights groups
have not in this instance been dragooned into
defending Toben as a 'prisoner of conscience'. More than year ago Toben faced a public inquiry
into the mater at on his website, following a
complaint from the Executive Council of Australian
Jewry under Australia's Racial Hatred laws. At the
time Toben seemed most set when he found that it
was his actions, and not the Shoah itself, which
was on trial. It is vital that, when such trials
are reported in the media that
[sic] the
focus remain firmly on offences against civilised
standards by Holocaust deniers, rather than
presenting them with a soap box on which to spread
further hatred. JEREMY JONES Return
to Index
|