Czech Holocaust survivors are calling for the dismissal of a controversial senior education official who led a far-right party.
The Terezin Initiative, an organization of former Jewish prisoners of Nazi concentration camps, says Ladislav Batora should be fired because of his links to the far right scene "infamous for its anti-Semitic and xenophobic" views.
Batora denies he's an extremist. But he led a far-right party and praised an anti-Semitic book. He recently criticized U.S. ambassador Norman Eisen for his support of a gay pride parade in Prague.
Batora, the former director of the ministry's human resources department is a deputy head of Education Minister Josef Dobes' office.
The survivors also criticized President Vaclav Klaus on Tuesday for backing Batora.
Taiwan News
Thursday, 22 September 2011
SWISS DECIDE NOT TO BAN NAZI SYMBOLS
The issue of Nazi symbols has come to the fore over the last decade as Swiss National Day celebrations on the Rütli on August 1st have increasingly been disrupted by right-wing extremists, newspaper Tages-Anzeiger reports. The Rütli is a meadow above the slopes of Lake Lucerne in the Swiss canton of Uri where the oath of the Old Swiss Confederacy is remembered every year. There skinheads have openly displayed Nazi flags and symbols such as “SS”, a Nazi army emblem, and English sports brand Lonsdale, the middle letters of which stand for the first letters in the acronym for the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP), the Nazi party in Germany from 1919 to 1945. After former government minister Kaspar Villiger was booed by a neo-Nazi mob during his speech on the Rütli on August 1st 2000, politicians called for action to close a legal loophole. The public use and dissemination of racist symbols has actually been forbidden in Switzerland since a new anti-racism law came into effect in 1995. However, a clause states that the display of offensive symbols is only banned when they are used to promote a corresponding ideology, a correlation that is often difficult to prove. For example, Nazi war flags cannot be confiscated at the Swiss border if the owner claims not to be spreading propaganda.
After the neo-Nazi provocation on the Rütli both the Federal Council and National Council, the lower house of parliament, voted for the proposed ban, while the majority of cantons and associations also voted in favour. The Swiss police officers' association at the time said they would welcome “the introduction of a tool to fight this phenomenon, which is poisoning our society and democracy”. The police association called for a clear identification of the symbols that should be banned and several cantons and parties agreed. However, the far-right Swiss People’s Party (SVP) and the FDP (Liberals) rejected the new legal provision on the grounds that it was not sufficiently clear. Then in 2010, the Federal Council also decided to renounce the new legal provision. The government said it was too difficult to exactly define which symbols should be banned because right-wing extremists not only use unambiguous symbols like the swastika or Nazi salute, but also other symbols and codes such as the number 88, a numeric repesentation of of the phrase “Heil Hitler”. “Such a new legal provision would lead to boundary issues between legal and illegal behaviour,” the government noted. These arguments and the reference to the existing anti-racism law won the politicians over and in June the National Council also rejected the proposed legal change. On Tuesday the Council of States, the upper house of parliament, followed suit.
Marcel Niggli, a professor of criminal law at the University of Freiburg, told the Tages-Anzeiger he believed the hands-off approach was “a scandal”. “With their resistance, the parliament has cemented the unsatisfactory legal situation and delegated responsibility to the police.” After the scenes on the Rütli, police in Canton Uri asked what action they could take against Nazi symbols. “A police officer must decide if someone is campaigning with a Nazi symbol or not,” Niggli said. That leads to a dilemma. If the police do nothing, they are accused of inaction, he said, whereas if they react they are seen to be suppressing freedom of expression. According to Niggli, it is possible to clearly define a law banning Nazi symbols such as the swastika, as Germany has done.
The Local Switzerland
After the neo-Nazi provocation on the Rütli both the Federal Council and National Council, the lower house of parliament, voted for the proposed ban, while the majority of cantons and associations also voted in favour. The Swiss police officers' association at the time said they would welcome “the introduction of a tool to fight this phenomenon, which is poisoning our society and democracy”. The police association called for a clear identification of the symbols that should be banned and several cantons and parties agreed. However, the far-right Swiss People’s Party (SVP) and the FDP (Liberals) rejected the new legal provision on the grounds that it was not sufficiently clear. Then in 2010, the Federal Council also decided to renounce the new legal provision. The government said it was too difficult to exactly define which symbols should be banned because right-wing extremists not only use unambiguous symbols like the swastika or Nazi salute, but also other symbols and codes such as the number 88, a numeric repesentation of of the phrase “Heil Hitler”. “Such a new legal provision would lead to boundary issues between legal and illegal behaviour,” the government noted. These arguments and the reference to the existing anti-racism law won the politicians over and in June the National Council also rejected the proposed legal change. On Tuesday the Council of States, the upper house of parliament, followed suit.
Marcel Niggli, a professor of criminal law at the University of Freiburg, told the Tages-Anzeiger he believed the hands-off approach was “a scandal”. “With their resistance, the parliament has cemented the unsatisfactory legal situation and delegated responsibility to the police.” After the scenes on the Rütli, police in Canton Uri asked what action they could take against Nazi symbols. “A police officer must decide if someone is campaigning with a Nazi symbol or not,” Niggli said. That leads to a dilemma. If the police do nothing, they are accused of inaction, he said, whereas if they react they are seen to be suppressing freedom of expression. According to Niggli, it is possible to clearly define a law banning Nazi symbols such as the swastika, as Germany has done.
The Local Switzerland
Germany Bans Largest Neo-Nazi Group
Germany has banned its largest neo-Nazi association, the HNG, which supports prisoners with far-right views and their families, the Interior Ministry said on Wednesday, the government's latest step to curb the influence of radical groups. The Help Organization for National Political Prisoners and their Families (HNG) is, say German authorities, a threat to society and works against the constitution. With the slogan "A front inside and outside," the HNG seeks to reinforce prisoners' right-wing views and motivate them to continue their struggle against the system, said the ministry. "It is no longer acceptable that imprisoned right-wing extremists are being strengthened by the HNG in their aggressive stance against the free, democratic order," Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich said in a statement. "By rejecting the democratic constitutional state and glorifying National Socialism, the HNG tried to keep right wing radical criminals in their own milieu," the ministry said.
The group, founded in 1979, has some 600 members. The ban follows raids in which police seized material from leading HNG members across Germany. Although far-right groups attract most support in the eastern states, where unemployment is high and prospects few, the raids took place in western states including Bavaria and North Rhine-Westphalia. Germany's domestic intelligence agency has said that far-right groups have in the last few years sought to use the financial crisis and euro zone debt crisis to prove that the capitalist system has failed. The ban comes two weeks after the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD), which espouses the end of parliamentary democracy, regained seats in the state assembly of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. It is also represented in Saxony. Right wing groups in Germany, including the NPD, are more radical than populist, anti-immigration parties in the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Sweden which have enjoyed greater success at the ballot box.
Germany's Office for the Protection of the Constitution describes the NPD as racist, anti-Semitic and revisionist and says its statements prove its inspiration comes from the Nazis. The party says the German constitution is a "diktat" imposed by victorious Western powers after World War Two. Germany has banned several right-wing groups in the last few years but critics say the government needs to do more to weed out extreme views which permeate society. "It is a sensible, if overdue, step to ban a criminal Organization like the HNG," said Anetta Kahane, head of the Amadeu Antonio Foundation which supports projects to boost civil society. "But we need to do more to educate people so that they can resist right-wing ideas. For example, judges and the police need to be educated to deal with extremists," she told Reuters. "The problem of neo-Nazis has not gone away." The police and judicial systems in several eastern German states have been condemned for failing to recognize and tackle the problem of neo-Nazi crime.
Reuters
The group, founded in 1979, has some 600 members. The ban follows raids in which police seized material from leading HNG members across Germany. Although far-right groups attract most support in the eastern states, where unemployment is high and prospects few, the raids took place in western states including Bavaria and North Rhine-Westphalia. Germany's domestic intelligence agency has said that far-right groups have in the last few years sought to use the financial crisis and euro zone debt crisis to prove that the capitalist system has failed. The ban comes two weeks after the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD), which espouses the end of parliamentary democracy, regained seats in the state assembly of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. It is also represented in Saxony. Right wing groups in Germany, including the NPD, are more radical than populist, anti-immigration parties in the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Sweden which have enjoyed greater success at the ballot box.
Germany's Office for the Protection of the Constitution describes the NPD as racist, anti-Semitic and revisionist and says its statements prove its inspiration comes from the Nazis. The party says the German constitution is a "diktat" imposed by victorious Western powers after World War Two. Germany has banned several right-wing groups in the last few years but critics say the government needs to do more to weed out extreme views which permeate society. "It is a sensible, if overdue, step to ban a criminal Organization like the HNG," said Anetta Kahane, head of the Amadeu Antonio Foundation which supports projects to boost civil society. "But we need to do more to educate people so that they can resist right-wing ideas. For example, judges and the police need to be educated to deal with extremists," she told Reuters. "The problem of neo-Nazis has not gone away." The police and judicial systems in several eastern German states have been condemned for failing to recognize and tackle the problem of neo-Nazi crime.
Reuters
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)