The Fall and Rise of Blasphemy Law EDITED BY Paul Cliteur & Tom Herrenberg tt LEIDEN UNIVERSITY PRESS ;. i': .r' ', 4 On the Life and Times of the Dutch Blasphemy Law (1932 -2014) Pctul Cliteur & Tom Herrenberg Cliteur, Paul, and Herrenberg, Tom, " On the Life and Times of the Dutch Blasphemy Law (L993-2014)" , in: The FaII ønd Rise of Press, Leiden 20L6, pp' 71-71'1' TNTRSDUCTT9N Bløsphemy Løw, Leiden University when the Dutch criminal code entered into force in 18B6 it did not contain a general provision against blasphemy. In r88o, during a debate in Parliament about the Criminal Code, the minister of justice at the time, Mr. "God Anthony Ewoud Jan Modderman (1838-1885), opined that is able to preserve His own rights by Himself; no human laws are required for this proposal irrpor".,,'yet, five dãcades later things had changed. A legislative ãf z5 April r93r entitled "Amendment to the Criminal Code with provisions regarding certain utterances hurtful to religious feelings"' sought to add t-o provisions relating to the defamation of religion to the Criminal Code- Article l47 no. r was intended to criminalise "he who verbally, in writing, or in image, publicly exPresses himself by scornful blasphemy in a manner offensive to religious feelingsJ' In addition, Article 4z9bis made it illegal for people to 'displa¡ in a place visible from a public road, words or images that, as e"pressions of scornful blasphemy, are hurtful to religious feelings."3 In this chapter we will give an account of this blasphemy law. We will address the law's evolution in chronological order and start by describing the parliamentary debate on the introduction of the law in the r93os. Subsequently, we will focus on the reception of the blasphemy law in the courts, up to and including the trial of Dutch novelist Gerard Kornelis van dathet r pa¡Ì. Doc., House of Rep., i88o/8r, Debate of z5 october 1880, 1o2. In Dutch: Ihme'e'nde geen menscheliihe sedert long vaststond, dat God ziin regten zelf wel weet te hondhaven; daortoe ziin wettennoodig; daartoe ß de strofwetgever niet geroepen' met voorzíeningen z pa¡l.Doc., House of Rep., tg3o/3r, no. 348, z (Aanvullingwetboekvon straftecht betreffende bepaalde voor godsdíenstíge gevoelens krenkende uitingen) ' within t}re section 3 Parl. Doc., House of Rep., r93o/3r, no. 348, z. A¡ticle r47 no' r was placed "Crimes against public order" of the Dutch Criminal Code' 7L t These r of Van het Reve's trial- (1923-zoo6) in the r96os' The outcome het Reve writings-reduced the (Weg n charges íui' u"t'áb"' of blasphemous concerning phrase in the Tnbunt blasphemy to a m'or" or less hollow legal prohibition against of blar illustrate next, blasphemy did not Code. Howev"r, u' iu" hope to criminal of Dutch gruog the post-Van het Reve generation vanish from the Dutch scene' But for thr had to reckon with a more redoubtable freethinkers and "Ufu'pft"-"rs" and er christianity that had introduced blasphemy adversary than the purîtanicul Suprer legislationintheNetherlands.Post.VanhetReveauthorslikeTheodor blaspk face the informal interpretation Theo van Gõ,;;à others h-ad to Holman, since it Donnr murder of Theo van Gogh-particularly of holy law by ¡irruairii irre examl wasrevengefora,f'o'tfit,,,criticalofthepositionofwomlninlslamthat crafte Islamic extremist in November had co-created-by a ho-"-g'o*it Van Gogh murder could hemel to secularised Dutch society' The 2oo+ cameas a great shock cartot law in a new guise' In the last part as the ,""'g""* of blu'ph"*y be seen removed the hims< discuss law that ultimately of the chapter *" t'i'ff U""fly lhe poiso the Dutch Criminal Code' blasphemy provisions from mask in hir sprea BLASPHEMY LAW THE PROPOSAL OF THE DUTCH 'wear useful cont¡ that good god! He is an exceptionally O, he is a great pleasure, in hi war, he lends his lustre to the He leads;Ñ; in th""rour.h to thing! of every day I ug"i"'t the Soviet-Union' he is the patron smear campaign of Eastr exploiter' he symbolizes the stultification christian and unchiistian a her warfare' Christ means starvation the masses ..' G; ;""ns imperial ism the "Holy Spirit" means and exploitation of the working masses' Hoþ Virgin Mother clas¡ ,.rppr",,'o" of the colonld peoples' the bloody blessings' people in ordår tã preserve all these means ,t"lti'^;;he is the is no Christmas' For them there For the working"peopl"' tL"'" 4 la lanterne! song of the French revolution-A Christ onthe dunghill! 5 6 The HotY Virg¡n ín the stable! The HoIY Fathers to the Devil! Long\íve the voice of tlrc canon! The canon of the proletarian revolution! LAW 72 THE FALLAND RiSE OF BLASPHEMY r,: , ' ': :. .ij .,.::i,. i 'Away with christmas!" These sentences are taken from an articre entitled communist daily De (Weg met het Kerstfeestl) that appeared in the Dutch article was one example Tribune on 24 December r93o' This newspaper Donner (r89r-r98r) of blasphemous materiul ltiinirt", of Josti.e Jan his proposal "grudgingly''gave in the short explanatory note accompanying a Reformed Christian for the introduction of the blaspiremy law'a Donner' andeminentiuristwholaterinhiscareerbecamepresidentoftheDutch him to draft the Court, cited two more examples that inspired Supreme Mr' Iturpfr"*y law, both taken from the same communist newsPaper-in orientation'"s The first Donner,s words "a Dutch daily of anti-religious example.wasa..repulsive''Cartoonentitled..Plansforinterventionare (rnterventie-plannenwordenin de crafted in heaven anã curried out on eartir-' on r9 January r93r' The hemel gesmeed, en op aarde uìtgevoerd) thatappeared a hat wit\the words "God cartoon depicts a naked God in heaven *""tìttg "I have discovered a new himself" written on it. God is depicted as saying: entirely, my son"'A gas- poison gas with which we can d"stroy soviet-Russia maskedJesusisseerrhangingonacrucifix,holdingalargetankof..Pacifrsm,' "Before we start, let us frrst in his hands. Referring ,ä ,ñ" tank, Jesus says: the earth." The cartoon also pictures Petrus-also spread this powder ".io$ wearingagasmask_holdingasignthatreads:..Thisyear,Godcanonlybe Mr. Donner briefly mentioned contacted forwar affairsi, The other example inhisexplanatorynotewasacartoonthatappearedon4Aprilrg3r,the daybeforeEaster.ThiscartoonaccomPaniedanarticleentitled.Awaywith I Easter!,,(WegmethetPaasch.feest!).ItpicturesGodblowingaitatthesailsof to the Soviet Union. The sailing boat a h"arriþ urrãed sailing boat on its way that they belong to the uPPer is manned by people in top hats, suggesting at the sails'6 class of soci"ty, *ho are also blowing air "Christ r (footnote r)' Donner only cited the sentence 4 Parl. Doc., House of Rep', r93o/3t' no' 348' 3' onthedunghill!,,inhisnote.Hedidnotwanttocitet}reother..fargraver',blasphemouscontent from the newsPaPer article' lbid. 5 for the Leeszalen,a government body responsible 6 The so-calle à centralevereenigtngvoor openbare supervisionofsubsidisedpubliclibrariesandpublicreadingrooms,ob|ectedtotheplacementof "moral ha¡mfulness'" reading rooms on tle ground of editions or De Tnbuneat fubhc libraries and Subsequently,thecommrrnistdailywasbannedftomthoseplaces.Indefendingthisdecision' Terpstra (1888-1952)' pointed out that the Dutch minister of Education, Arts, a¡d Sciences, Jan would not be banned from the pub}ic ..an honest, reasonable defence of atheism or commrr¡ism', readingrooms,yettheproblemwi¡hDeTríbunewasthe.disgustingmanner,,inwhichthisdailyhad BLASPHEMY LAW 73 ON THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE DUTCH must be kel InarareinsightDonnergaveintohisinnerself,herevealedthatthe that it was scornful blar in De Tritune had deeply offended hi1.1nd opinions a ,.å "*pr"rrãd whether he could make use of his powers as question-of consci"nce" Freedom ministertoactagainstthis..vomitfromhell.,'TAndindeed,hecametothe developn had a role to fulfil here'8 conclusion that the state freedom Expressionslikethosecartoonsir-DeTribune'inwhich"ascorning' the target of the projected this field abusive, or reviling manner is choseni'e were between substance and unpunisl law. The proposal ,"li"d heavily on the distinction how fiercely' is not at in the in manner: "Contesting Theism no matter "s "''ch' is not crossed' the law as, in ãer-s of manner' a certain line issue; as long The ministr remainsidlei'Mr-I)onnerargued''oAlthoughtheministerwaswillingto about the divine were rale arrogates tl ..admit to a certain degree" that abusive remarks The Netherlands was in the othe in Dutch society, thefwere nonetheless intolerable." in "a State in which God pr.ao*ir.antly Ch,istian nation at the time" and " expressions "that directly scorn is a_cknowledged in multiple waysj' public Mr. Donner' "The public sphere PARLIAME] God ... cannot be tolerated." According to Despite tÌ explanator of a large number of our peoplel' See Pa¡l' "repeatedly scorned a¡rd offended the religious feelings provokeda 2754-2755' Doc. House of Rep', Debate of lz June 1931' of the Ho, t93z' 2634' 7 Patl. Doc., House of Rep., Debate ol3rMray Kamer)-i I rbid. lawwas pr r' 9 Parl. Doc., House of Rep" tg3oþt, no' 348' 3' a number roibid...EveryformofexpressionthatdoesnotscornorabuseGod,,wasoutsidethescopeofhis One o legislativeproposal.Thesamewast}lecasefor..thoughtlessutterances',and.tursing.',obviously, convincei Donnerwasoftheopinionthattheboundarieshadbeencrossedinthearticlesan<lcartoons "anti-relig Re t93ol3t, no. 3, z. Donner's in D¿ Tribune.See Parl. Doc., House of p., 348, that had appeared societY to separationofsubstanceandmannerechoesthefamousdistinctionmadebyLordColeridge,to I law. In Regina v. Romsay and Foote (1883) it criminal whom