This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/world/dutch-bill-insulting-king.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Dutch Parliament Reduces Penalties for Insulting King How Is Dutch King Like a Cop? Insulting Them Is to Be Treated Equally
(about 13 hours later)
BERLIN — The Dutch House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to strike down a centuries-old law that makes insulting the king and his immediate family punishable by as much as five years in prison. BERLIN — Insulting a king used to be dangerous business, but in the Netherlands, it could soon be the legal equivalent of trash-talking an ambulance driver.
By a vote of 120 to 30, lawmakers approved a bill that would instead make insulting the king (or any other head of state) equivalent to insulting police officers, ambulance drivers, emergency-room workers and social workers. These carry a maximum penalty of four months in prison. Under Dutch law, insulting the monarch is a crime — though it is rarely prosecuted — punishable by up to five years in prison. But the lower house of Parliament voted on Tuesday to reduce the maximum sentence to four months for speaking ill of the king, his immediate family, or any other head of state, putting them on the same level as police officers, emergency room workers, social workers and ambulance drivers.
“Our King, Willem-Alexander, and of course other heads of state should not be insulted, but if it does happen, then everyone should be equal in front of the law,” said Kees Verhoeven, the lawmaker with the progressive party Democrats 66 who introduced the bill. “Our king, Willem-Alexander, and of course other heads of state should not be insulted, but if it does happen, then everyone should be equal in front of the law,” said Kees Verhoeven, a lawmaker with the leftist party Democrats 66, who introduced the bill.
The bill will now go to Parliament’s other chamber, the Senate, which it is expected to be approved. The 120-to-30 vote sent the bill to the upper house of Parliament, where it is expected to get approval.
Despite the lopsided vote, the bill’s passage had not been certain. Introduced in 2016, a year before the last general election, the bill attracted relatively little attention as it made its way through Parliament. The monarchy is quite popular in the Netherlands, but there was little appetite for hashing out the details of these little-used laws. Despite the lopsided vote, the bill’s passage had not been certain. Introduced in 2016, a year before the most recent general election, the bill attracted relatively little attention as it made its way through Parliament.
“We have a very modern King, who binds the country, who is there when we grieve, and who is there when we celebrate, who stands above politics in our country,” said Chris van Dam, lawmaker from the Christian Democratic Appeal, a center right party, who fought hard to retain the current law. In the Netherlands, where the monarchy is quite popular, there was little public appetite for revisiting the law, and some traditionalist opposition to reducing the penalties.
“Everything that is valuable is also vulnerable, so we think that we must protect him,” said Mr. van Dam. “We have a very modern king, who binds the country, who is there when we grieve, and who is there when we celebrate, who stands above politics in our country,” said Chris van Dam, a lawmaker from the Christian Democratic Appeal, a center-right party, who fought hard to retain the current penalties in place.
Mr. Verhoeven added his own amendments to make the bill more palatable. These included raising the proposed maximum penalty for insulting the king to four months from three, so that it would match the penalty for civil servants working in stressful situations, and making it clear that the monarch does not have to personally report violations. “Everything that is valuable is also vulnerable, so we think that we must protect him,” Mr. van Dam said.
The line of Orange-Nassau has ruled the Netherlands since 1815, when William I, the current king’s ancestor, declared the country a kingdom (the rulers previously held less ostentatious titles). The so-called lèse-majesté law currently on the books dates to that era, and took its current form in the 1880s. Mr. Verhoeven added amendments to make the bill more palatable. These included making the maximum penalty for insulting the king four months rather than three, so that it would match the penalty for verbally abusing civil servants working in stressful situations, and making it clear that the monarch does not have to personally report violations.
According to public opinion polls, the royals enjoy tremendous approval. Part of their success is keeping a humble and people-friendly image, said Henk te Velde, a history professor at Leiden University, which is the king’s alma mater. Support for transforming the Netherlands into a republic is minimal. The line of Orange-Nassau has ruled the Netherlands since 1815, when William I, the current king’s ancestor, declared the country a kingdom (the rulers previously held less ostentatious titles). The so-called lèse-majesté law currently on the books dates from that era, and took its current form in the 1880s.
According to public opinion polls, the royals enjoy tremendous approval. Part of their success is keeping a humble and people-friendly image, said Henk te Velde, a history professor at Leiden University, the king’s alma mater. Support for transforming the Netherlands into a republic is minimal.
“The vast part of Dutch society might think that monarchy is not really modern,” Professor te Velde said. “But why should we get rid of it? It’s nice folklore.”“The vast part of Dutch society might think that monarchy is not really modern,” Professor te Velde said. “But why should we get rid of it? It’s nice folklore.”
During the 1960s and 1970s, when Dutch society was rethinking the role of government, there was more criticism of the monarchy and the royalty. But even then the law about insulting the king was only rare applied. During the 1960s and 1970s, when Dutch society was rethinking the role of government, there was more criticism of the monarchy and the royalty. But even then, the law about insulting the king was only rarely applied.
However, it does periodically get used.However, it does periodically get used.
Abdulkasim Al-Jaberi, an activist, was charged under the law in 2015 after repeatedly yelling an obscene phrase during a demonstration in Amsterdam. He was initially ordered to pay a fine, but then was threatened with prison when he refused to pay. The prosecutor eventually dismissed the case, saying that he had yelled his comments in the context of a public debate. Abulkasim Al-Jaberi, an activist, was charged under the law in 2015 after repeatedly yelling an obscene phrase during a demonstration in Amsterdam. He was initially ordered to pay a fine, but then was threatened with prison when he refused to pay. The prosecutor eventually dismissed the case, saying that he had yelled his comments in the context of a public debate.
From 2000 to 2012, the year before Queen Beatrix went into retirement, 16 people were prosecuted under the lèse-majesté law.From 2000 to 2012, the year before Queen Beatrix went into retirement, 16 people were prosecuted under the lèse-majesté law.
In March the European Court of Human Rights sided with two Spanish citizens who had burned a picture of the Spanish king and queen during a rally in 2007. The court, based in Strasbourg, France, found that Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees freedom of expression, superseded Spanish laws protecting the royal family from insults. In March, the European Court of Human Rights sided with two Spanish citizens who had burned a picture of the Spanish king and queen during a rally in 2007. The court, based in Strasbourg, France, found that Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees freedom of expression, superseded Spanish laws protecting the royal family from insults.
The new Dutch law also limits the maximum prison sentence for insulting a foreign head of state to four months, down from two years.The new Dutch law also limits the maximum prison sentence for insulting a foreign head of state to four months, down from two years.
In 2016, a German court was forced to decide whether a German comedian’s satirical poem mocking President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey was a criminal insult, after Mr. Erdogan pursued legal action.In 2016, a German court was forced to decide whether a German comedian’s satirical poem mocking President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey was a criminal insult, after Mr. Erdogan pursued legal action.
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany was criticized for initially allowing the prosecution. She later said that her having called the poem “deliberately offensive” was a mistake, given the importance of free speech.Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany was criticized for initially allowing the prosecution. She later said that her having called the poem “deliberately offensive” was a mistake, given the importance of free speech.
Mr. van Dam, the Dutch lawmaker who had fought against the bill approved on Tuesday, said he thought the measure was “more a statement than a practical thing — both the old law and the big change.” Mr. van Dam, the Dutch lawmaker who had fought the bill approved on Tuesday, said he thought the measure was “more a statement than a practical thing — both the old law and the big change.”