Risks of a law on Holocaust denial | Freedom of speech
Freedom of speech This article is more than 17 years oldLettersRisks of a law on Holocaust denial
This article is more than 17 years oldUnfortunately the controversy over Germany's proposal to make Holocaust denial a criminal offence across Europe (Report, January 16) will just keep on the back burner - where it has been for five years - the essential European law against race-hate crime, into which Germany wishes to incorporate this offence.
Instead, Germany should ensure the EU cracks down on those who make the daily lives of Jewish, black, Asian and Roma Europeans a misery through harassment and violence.
I understand why countries like Germany and Austria felt they needed Holocaust denial laws after 1945, and it is up to them whether to keep those laws. But the mad fringe of Holocaust deniers, who have no historical leg to stand on, are best fought through the war of words based on incontrovertible fact. Their freedom of speech must be matched by our vigorous refutation and ridicule.
If criminalisation of Holocaust denial is made the priority, the sufferings of those who often endure violent hate crime risk not getting the urgent attention and action they deserve at EU level.
Sarah Ludford MEP
London, Liberal Democrat
The German proposal to ban the display of the swastika across the EU is uncalled for. While no sane person can overlook the Nazis' heinous crimes and the association of this symbol with them, the bona fide meaning of swastika should not be overshadowed. The word is derived from the Sanskrit words su (good) and vasti (being). Hence many of us Indians find it rather unfortunate that this auspicious symbol of India has become a symbol of disrepute.
Dr Upinder Fotadar
New York University
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7tbTEoKyaqpSerq96wqikaKaVrMBwfo9pbmiikaN8c3%2BOpZyanJWnwKK6w6ucqaSpY7qitc2snJysmaS7dA%3D%3D