Tweet
EXPERT QUESTIONS BLOCHER ANTI-RACISM REMARKS
Swissinfo, Switzerland
Oct 5 2006
Justice Minister Christoph Blocher should have defended and not
criticised the Swiss anti-racism law during a trip to Turkey, according
to a leading law expert.
Marcel Niggli, professor of law of Fribourg University, told swissinfo
that it was strange that Blocher should have made the comments made
during an official visit abroad.
Blocher unleashed a storm of political and media protest at home after
he remarked on Wednesday that part of the law gave him a "headache". He
referred to a "stress relationship" between anti-racism legislation
and the freedom of speech.
On Thursday Interior Minister Pascal Couchepin said that Blocher's
remarks were "unacceptable".
For his part, President Moritz Leuenberger said he was surprised,
adding that the cabinet would meet to discuss the issues arising from
Blocher's comments shortly.
Current Swiss law, dating from 1994, has led to investigations
against two Turks in Switzerland for allegedly denying the 1915
Armenian massacre.
"No one would have imagined that this law would have resulted in
proceedings against a prominent Turkish historian," he said, following
talks with his Turkish counterpart, Cemil Cicek.
Blocher said his ministry would examine ways to prevent a recurrence
of such a situation, adding that it was up to the government and
parliament to decide on any changes.
swissinfo: Christoph Blocher said that the anti-racism law was in some
respects in conflict with freedom of speech in Switzerland? What is
your view on that?
Marcel Niggli: That's not correct because the European Court of
Human Rights has decided in many cases already that... racism is not
protected by the freedom of speech.
Professor Marcel Niggli (RDB)
swissinfo: How strange is it for a justice minister to say that
article 216 bis of the Swiss penal code gives him a headache?
M.N.: To me that sounds very strange especially if someone does so
abroad. Basically, if you have a headache about the law you discuss
the law and try to make a proposal nationally to [change it], but as
the law has not been changed it stays as it is.
swissinfo: It strikes me that as justice minister, Blocher should be
defending the law, shouldn't he?
M.N.: That's correct because that law has been discussed, voted on
by the [Swiss] people and accepted. The party to which the minister
belongs [Swiss People's Party] has at different times tried to abolish
the law and always failed in the end, so basically it's clear that
the prevailing will at the moment in this country is that this is
law and hence he should defend that, yes.
swissinfo: How much do you think that Christoph Blocher was bowing
to the will of Turkey when he said his remarks?
M.N.: I think he did that to a certain extent, as many other people
also do, because Turkey has insisted for many decades that there has
not been a genocide [of Armenians]. Basically the question whether
there has been a genocide or not is ridiculous because [according to]
all the legal criteria we have... it's apparently evident that this
was a genocide.
swissinfo: What repercussions do you think this will have for Blocher,
if any?
M.N.: I don't think there will be important consequences because the
federal councillor [Blocher] has behaved in that way many times.
There have always been protests and discussions but there have never
been any consequences.
swissinfo: So you don't think if there are calls for him to step down
that he will do so?
M.N.: I don't think so. What he did in Turkey is the same as he's
done already [before]. He's representing more the opinion of his
party than of the government as a whole.
swissinfo: Isn't that a bad situation in Switzerland?
M.N.: If you have a government consisting of seven people it is a very
good idea that if they don't find consensus, they shouldn't show this
externally. If the justice minister goes abroad to discuss [Swiss]
national laws, it's certainly not a very happy situation.
swissinfo-interview: Robert Brookes
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Swissinfo, Switzerland
Oct 5 2006
Justice Minister Christoph Blocher should have defended and not
criticised the Swiss anti-racism law during a trip to Turkey, according
to a leading law expert.
Marcel Niggli, professor of law of Fribourg University, told swissinfo
that it was strange that Blocher should have made the comments made
during an official visit abroad.
Blocher unleashed a storm of political and media protest at home after
he remarked on Wednesday that part of the law gave him a "headache". He
referred to a "stress relationship" between anti-racism legislation
and the freedom of speech.
On Thursday Interior Minister Pascal Couchepin said that Blocher's
remarks were "unacceptable".
For his part, President Moritz Leuenberger said he was surprised,
adding that the cabinet would meet to discuss the issues arising from
Blocher's comments shortly.
Current Swiss law, dating from 1994, has led to investigations
against two Turks in Switzerland for allegedly denying the 1915
Armenian massacre.
"No one would have imagined that this law would have resulted in
proceedings against a prominent Turkish historian," he said, following
talks with his Turkish counterpart, Cemil Cicek.
Blocher said his ministry would examine ways to prevent a recurrence
of such a situation, adding that it was up to the government and
parliament to decide on any changes.
swissinfo: Christoph Blocher said that the anti-racism law was in some
respects in conflict with freedom of speech in Switzerland? What is
your view on that?
Marcel Niggli: That's not correct because the European Court of
Human Rights has decided in many cases already that... racism is not
protected by the freedom of speech.
Professor Marcel Niggli (RDB)
swissinfo: How strange is it for a justice minister to say that
article 216 bis of the Swiss penal code gives him a headache?
M.N.: To me that sounds very strange especially if someone does so
abroad. Basically, if you have a headache about the law you discuss
the law and try to make a proposal nationally to [change it], but as
the law has not been changed it stays as it is.
swissinfo: It strikes me that as justice minister, Blocher should be
defending the law, shouldn't he?
M.N.: That's correct because that law has been discussed, voted on
by the [Swiss] people and accepted. The party to which the minister
belongs [Swiss People's Party] has at different times tried to abolish
the law and always failed in the end, so basically it's clear that
the prevailing will at the moment in this country is that this is
law and hence he should defend that, yes.
swissinfo: How much do you think that Christoph Blocher was bowing
to the will of Turkey when he said his remarks?
M.N.: I think he did that to a certain extent, as many other people
also do, because Turkey has insisted for many decades that there has
not been a genocide [of Armenians]. Basically the question whether
there has been a genocide or not is ridiculous because [according to]
all the legal criteria we have... it's apparently evident that this
was a genocide.
swissinfo: What repercussions do you think this will have for Blocher,
if any?
M.N.: I don't think there will be important consequences because the
federal councillor [Blocher] has behaved in that way many times.
There have always been protests and discussions but there have never
been any consequences.
swissinfo: So you don't think if there are calls for him to step down
that he will do so?
M.N.: I don't think so. What he did in Turkey is the same as he's
done already [before]. He's representing more the opinion of his
party than of the government as a whole.
swissinfo: Isn't that a bad situation in Switzerland?
M.N.: If you have a government consisting of seven people it is a very
good idea that if they don't find consensus, they shouldn't show this
externally. If the justice minister goes abroad to discuss [Swiss]
national laws, it's certainly not a very happy situation.
swissinfo-interview: Robert Brookes
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress