Expatica's Dutch news in English: Court refuses to ban Dutch paedophile party
Expatica’s Dutch news in English: Court refuses to ban Dutch paedophile party
Court refuses to ban Dutch paedophile party
AMSTERDAM — A court in The Hague had turned down a request to outlaw pro-paedophile party PNVD.
The ban was sought by the Soelaas foundation which investigates instances of paedophilia in the Netherlands.
But Judge HFM Hofhuis ruled that the PNVD has the same right to exist as any other political party. The court also took into account that Soelaas did not have a compelling and urgent interest to justify a ban.
“They (Soelaas) only want to give expression to their moral concerns. That is far from being sufficient to outlaw a party,” Hofhuis said. Soelaas argued a preventative ban was needed to protect children from the PNVD.
There was an outcry in the Netherlands
and abroad earlier this year when the party was formed by three self-confessed paedophiles to campaign for the legalisation of child porn and sex between adults and children.The PNVD also seeks to allow teenagers older than 16 to act in porn movies, as long as the participation is voluntary. The age of consent should be cut from 16 to 12, the party says.
The arguments the Dutch judge uses are compelling, but of course because it is an ‘paedophile’ party it doesn’t feel right to me. Can you base a legal system on that kind of feelings?
Doesn’t every system go back to someone’s feelings eventually? Only they are not called feelings but something more legalese like ‘legislation’. I know the Netherlands is way beyond most countries in terms of its personal, legal freedoms but if you look at the laws you do have, they have to have started based on an individuals’ or a group of indviduals’ convictions. Those convictions can change as the years go on…for example in Canada we just had the past Liberal government work to legalise gay marriage. Ten years ago that never would have happened. What changed? People’s feelings – or convictions – or ideas… and can you really separate an idea from a feeling? I think they are intertwined.
I;m curious, what did the law enforcement community think of this case? Did they have an opinion about this party as to how it would affect the preying of adults on children in the country? How can an illegal activity be recognized legally as a political party? Isn’t that like allwoing thieves to form a party to campaign against their loot being taken away when they are caught (I mean possesion is nine tenths of the law) Lowering the age of consent to 12 …I mean their frontal lobes aren’t even fully developped yet! How are they supposed to make decisions like this? It’s like convicted rapists who want to legalise involuntary sex between adults as long as it’s “gentle”.
By the way you still owe me a translation from that previous post! 🙂
I fully agree with you on that. The problem is that this political party does not act as a paedophile, it ‘just’ wants to change to legislation on that. It is the same I guess with the debate about anti-democratic political parties. Should you ban or allow these parties?
I don’t know exactly what the law enforcement community thinks about this, but I assume that they are against such a party as most people are. The thing is if the law allows them that much space or own interpretation as to forbid this party. I doubt that. Maybe we should adjust the law? The fact that they want to adjust to law as well, cannot be a reason to forbid them. Forty years (or longer) ago a party that would allow gay’s to be be married, would also go against the law with that.
So on what grounds should we forbid them then? That they make ridiculous proposals (many politicians do…), that they are against the laws on sex (more parties are), that they are sick and therefore not mentally capable for an active and passive voting right?