March 11th, 2010

President Sólyom signs Holocaust denial bill

President Laszlo Solyom on Wednesday signed a recent law on penalising Holocaust denial, a senior official of the president’s office, told MTI.

Solyom signed the law since it does not contravene the Constitution, said Ferenc Kumin.

At the same time, Solyom said that adopting the law amid the campaign for the April general election had been inappropriate.

Parliament approved on February 22 an amendment to the Penal Code under which denial of the Holocaust in public is punishable by up to three years imprisonment.

The Alliance of Hungarian Jewish Communities (Mazsihisz) said in a statement that the approval of the law could be an important weapon in the fight against anti-Semitism and created the opportunity for the authorities to take action against groups posing a threat to a peaceful society.

The Hungarian anti-Fascist association (MEASZ) also welcomed Solyom’s decision to sign the amendment to the penal code, while at the same time arguing that further amendments would be needed before human dignity is properly protected.

Main opposition party Fidesz said that it intended to draw up legislation after the general election which penalises sympathy expressed for the Nazi- and Communist-era crimes on equal terms, said MP Robert Repassy.

The Socialist-initiated amendment was adopted with 197 votes for, one against and 142 abstentions.

At the time, politicians supporting the legislation criticised deputies of the main opposition Fidesz for abstaining.

Leaders of the Jewish community Peter Feldmajer and Gusztav Zoltai as well as several Holocaust survivors attended the parliamentary session in which the law was passed, the last before the general election.

The bill was submitted by Attila Mesterhazy, prime minister candidate of the Socialist Party, on January 27, Holocaust Remembrance Day. He said at the time that legislative action was required because anti-Semitism and extremist, neo-Nazi ideologies were on the rise in Hungary.

Visit www.hungarymatters.hu to receive Hungarian news agency MTI’s twice-daily newsletter.
Topics
Share
Please note that due to a large volume of trolling and false abuse flags, we are currently only accepting comments from logged-in users.
  • Elle

    ‘Legislative action was required’ by an EU Directive. Mesterházy, no novice to lying, seems to have missed this.
    I attempted to discuss this Directive yesterday. I am hoping that someone will express interest in it today. Please look on this thread:
    Elle at March 10, 2010 6:40 PM
    http://www.politics.hu/20100223/hungarian-mps-criminalize-holocaust-denial#c102

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I5BGsK5ZAU&feature=related Viking

    ‘Legislative action was required’ by an EU Directive. Mesterházy, no novice to lying, seems to have missed this
    Elle at March 11, 2010 2:09 PM

    Why should he?
    If that was Mesterházy’s reason, why not leave it to the next Parliament?
    Why try to blame the EU for pushing it through in this Parliament?
    Next Parliament can change the law how it want or even delete it (and face the consequences with the EU later)
    A simple majority is enough for this type of law, so no need for 3/3rd majority

    Any ‘debate’ with out reading the actual law and just relying on short telegrams is a bit dead proposal

  • http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aF4ye33tJ.18 BIG JIM on Veréb

    ‘Legislative action was required’ by an EU Directive. Mesterházy, no novice to lying, seems to have missed this.
    Elle at March 11, 2010 2:09 PM
    There was never any question about what Senkiházy is, a senki. However, Solyom signing an obviously twisted, one-sided bill that legitimizes the murder of millions of victims of Communist terror while creating a special provision for Jews is Solyom’s very own shame. From now on he shall be knows as Veréb, not Solyom.
    Fidesz said that they will modify it to include all victims, the victims of Communists as well as the victims of Nazis. A far better model is the French model that treats all genocides equally but the best thing would be to repeal the law because any infringement on freedom of speech is wrong.

  • Anonymous

    the only thing that is in real danger with these kind of laws IS freedom of speech….
    Bur again, this law is just the opening of a series of anti hate laws in the near future, to end all opesition against mass immigration…the only and real reason the EU wants this…

  • Elle

    @ BIG JIM
    ‘… the best thing would be to repeal the law because any infringement on freedom of speech is wrong’
    BIG JIM, at March 11, 2010 3:05 PM
    Unfortunately, BIG JIM, the EU ‘Framework Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law’, OJ L 328/55 [2008], Article 1(1)(c) and (d), has made something very like the French law obligatory. Bobs has provided this link to the Directive’s text:
    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:328:0055:0058:EN:PDF .
    All EU member states must include this Directive’s provisions in their legislative systems by 10 November 2010. So do not be so hard on Sólyom. He must have known that the bill he signed would have to be thrown out anyway, for it is not compliant with this Directive. Senkiházi no doubt also knew. But he was going to please his masters anyway. Sólyom was heroic when the refused to sign the previous one. We all know about the flack he copped for that! It would not have been worth his while to put himself in line for more over this one

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I5BGsK5ZAU&feature=related Viking

    Or, President Sólyom just believes in what he said:
    “Solyom signed the law since it does not contravene the Constitution”

    I do not know where you loonies get it from Sólyom is one of your kind:
    “He was one of the founders of the Hungarian Democratic Forum (MDF) in 1987, and represented that party in the Opposition Roundtable negotiations that played a very important part in Hungary’s transition to parliamentary democracy. In 1989, for a short time he was member of the executive committee of the MDF
    However, he left party politics in late 1989, as he was elected into the Constitutional Court of Hungary. He gained the presidency of the court half year later, and held that position until 1998. During this time, the Constitutional Court had a very important role in laying the groundwork for and strengthening democracy in Hungary. In this role, he significantly contributed to the removal of capital punishment, the protection of information rights, the freedom of opinion and of conscience, as well as the constitutional protection of domestic partnerships of homosexuals, which measures brought wide international acclaim for the Constitutional Court of Hungary”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/László_Sólyom

    So, he is that every bit what you hate about Hungary:
    * Part of the non-violent ‘System Change’
    * Founding member of MDF
    * Pro domestic partnerships of homosexuals

    So what positive do you have to say of him, really?

  • Simon London

    A shameful expansion of Jewish tyranny in Hungary.
    All Hungarians who care for their freedom should resist this law, and denounce the new religion of Holocaustianity.

  • http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aF4ye33tJ.18 BIG JIM ON FOR JEWS ONLY LAW

    A shameful expansion of Jewish tyranny in Hungary.
    All Hungarians who care for their freedom should resist this law, and denounce the new religion of Holocaustianity.
    Simon London at March 12, 2010 12:25 AM
    Agree, if these Jews running MSZP had one drop of decency, they would have opted for something like the French law. They would not do that because they were part of and responsible for Communist horrors.

  • olga

    @ Big Jim
    I am sure you will enlighten us about French Law as it relates to your posting.
    Trick question: Explain the difference strictly from a legal point of view the difference between denying the Holocaust and denying Communism? – that means no personal opinions are required.
    Hint: It would be free speech to say that since 2000, Canadians have tortured and murdered
    1. Communists
    2. Ultra right wing supporters
    3. Our First Nation
    4. Romas who claimed refugee status
    It would not be considered “hate speech” under the law while Holocaust denial is. K.M. would understand the difference but I don’t think she will explain it.

  • http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aF4ye33tJ.18 BIG JIM AND THE FRENCH DENIAL LAW

    I am sure you will enlighten us about French Law as it relates to your posting.
    olga at March 12, 2010 7:29 PM
    No, I will not. If you do not have enough up there to figure it out from my previous post, you never will.
    The French, may be whacky but in their own way, consistent. Their laws respect every victim of every genocide regardless of the race, religion or nationality of the victims and perpetrators.
    Lendvai, the leader of MSZP is a Jew and held high positions in MSZMP. They made this Jew law that would put people in prison for up to three years for denying the holocaust they suffered but not for denying the holocaust they perpetrated.
    Maybe that is the law that a Jew and a Communist considers the right law but unless someone is completely brainwashed, this law is a disgusting distortion of history and violates even the most minimal requirements for decency.
    If you are still confused, go ask your father.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I5BGsK5ZAU&feature=related Viking

    That the French Law would make any special mentions on ‘Communist Genocide’ is a bit strange argument by ‘mark/big jim':

    http://www.ask.com/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial#France

    “In France, the Gayssot Act, voted for on July 13, 1990, makes it illegal to question the existence of crimes that fall in the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945, on the basis of which Nazi leaders were convicted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-46
    When the act was challenged by Robert Faurisson, the Human Rights Committee upheld it as a necessary means to counter possible antisemitism”

    So, if no one can prove a link to that the French Law differ from the Hungarian, well…
    .
    The references to “London Charter of 1945, on the basis of which Nazi leaders were convicted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-46″ is what is ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ etc
    In the EU Framework the same reference is there, plus another more modern definition, which includes many more situations as punishable

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I5BGsK5ZAU&feature=related Viking

    If any one wants to read Robert Faurisson’s complaint to the
    CCPR
    Human Rights Committee
    Fifty-eighth session
    21 October – 8 November 1996
    it is here:

    http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/385c2add1632f4a8c12565a9004dc311/4c47b59ea48f7343802566f200352fea?OpenDocument

    “Communication No 550/1993 : France. 16/12/96. CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993. (Jurisprudence)”
    United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
    Retrieved 2009-05-29

    He lost both in France and at the UN CCPR

  • John Simpson

    I don’t believe that the document has been signed or the signing has ever taken place :)
    Now, back to suing MAV the national railway company!!!

More content from Hungary's leading foreign-language media network
About Politics.hu | Become an All Hungary Member | Newsletters | Contact Us | Advertise With Us
All content © 2004-2013 The All Hungary Media Group. Articles, comments and other information on the All Hungary Media Group's network of sites are provided "as is" without guarantees, warranties, or representations of any kind, and the opinions and views expressed in such articles and columns are not necessarily those of the All Hungary Media Group.