antisemitismus.net / klick-nach-rechts.de / nahost-politik.de / zionismus.info

Judentum und Israel
haGalil onLine - http://www.hagalil.com
     

 
To silence anti-Nazi journalist:
Austrian judiciary uses laws prohibiting Nazi activities

Karl Pfeifer, Searchlight London

[German - Gegen einen kritischen "jüdischen Journalisten":
Österreich setzt das NS-Verbotsgesetz ein]

The verdict in the libel case against Mölzer is a graphic example of how Austrian justice has followed closely in the footsteps of the right-wing Austrian coalition government which, since being installed at the beginning of 2000 has been telling the world that Austria has very strict laws prohibiting Nazi activities but whose judiciary then uses precisely these laws to silence anti-Nazi journalists and smother any attempt to shed light on conditions in the country.

In a shameful expression of what passes for "justice" in Austria nowadays, internationally respected journalist and author Karl Pfeifer has lost a libel action that he brought against prominent right-winger Andreas Mölzer. Mölzer, editor of the far-right weekly rag Zur Zeit (ZZ), is also chief ideologist and cheerleader for Austria¹s leading right-wing extremist and former Freedom Party boss, Jörg Haider.

The case against Mölzer concerned a begging letter sent to ZZ's subscribers last year which recycled the lie that Pfeifer had caused the death of right-wing academic Werner Pfeifenberger who had sued him for libel, lost and then committed suicide two years ago.

The contested passage from Mölzer's long-winded fundraising letter read: "Then there is the case of Karl Pfeifer vs Zur Zeit. The long-time editor of the Jewish community¹s newspaper was pinpointed on the occasion of Professor Pfeifenberger's death as a member of the shooting party that drove the conservative political scientist to his death. As everybody knows, an investigation was opened against Pfeifenberger under Austria's anti-Nazi laws because of his statements in the Freedom Party's 1995 Yearbook. The Jewish journalist, Karl Pfeifer, denounced these statements for their "Nazi tone" and, as a result, unleashed the legal avalanche against Pfeifenberger. When Zur Zeit ventured to show that this was the cause of [Pfeifenberger's] suicide, Pfeifer sued."

The verdict in the case against ZZ, signed by Vienna judge Dr. Röggla, astonishingly accepts and repeats Mölzer¹s argument with the declaration that "In this case, the plaintiff charged Prof. Pfeifenberger, that his article in the Freedom Party¹s Yearbook contains "Nazi tones" and that he advocates "the glorification of the Volksgemeinschaft" [the ethnic German community from which Jews were excluded ­ GA] which is a reproach concerning Paragraph 3 of the law forbidding Nazi activities. Criticism of this reproach and its consequences can be equally harsh."

What Röggla's verdict means is quite simple: the high court in Vienna is using laws forbidding Nazi activities to gag a critical Jewish journalist. Incredibly, this very same Röggla, in another verdict, delivered in the Vienna criminal court in a case brought by Pfeifenberger against Karl Pfeifer in 1997, made no mention of any laws forbidding Nazi activities but, instead, stated explicitly that "the conclusions drawn by the accused [Karl Pfeifer] from Dr. Werner Pfeifenberger's article are true". The verdict then went on to affirm that "Karl Pfeifer has made criticisms based on facts, which is permissible."

Pfeifenberger also sued Karl Pfeifer for damages but that case was also thrown out by the Vienna commercial court in 1997 by judge Dr. Friedrich Heigl who rejected his demands. The high court in Vienna then confirmed both the above mentioned judgements against Pfeifenberger in 1998. Again, in neither the original verdicts in favour of Karl Pfeifer nor in their confirmation were the laws forbidding Nazi activities mentioned. Nor did Karl Pfeifer mention it in his review of Pfeifenberger¹s article in the Freedom Party¹s 1995 Yearbook which was published in the official monthly of the Vienna Jewish Community on 3 February 1995.

The verdict in the libel case against Mölzer is thus a graphic example of how Austrian justice has followed closely in the footsteps of the right-wing Austrian coalition government which, since being installed at the beginning of 2000 has been telling the world that Austria has very strict laws prohibiting Nazi activities but whose judiciary then uses precisely these laws to silence anti-Nazi journalists and smother any attempt to shed light on conditions in the country.

The latest Reporters sans Frontières Report correctly refers to "antisemitic insinuations against Pfeifer". No doubt Herr Mölzer would also take issue with that. All very strange considering that the German nazi "Deutsche Stimme", in its October edition, featured Mölzer in a report reproduced on the website of the anti-fascist Documentation Centre of the Austrian Resistance.

The Deutsche Stimme article described how a paper penned by Mölzer on European politics was presented at a gathering of the nazi Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (NPD) and then signed by NPD boss Udo Voigt, the nazi British National Party führer Nick Griffin and former German terrorist and nazi lawyer Horst Mahler. Mölzer should be known by his friends and supporters and the interests of Austrian justice would definitely have been better served if the disgraceful verdict against Karl Pfeifer had taken that into account.

hagalil.com 12-11-02


DE-Titel
US-Titel

Books

haGalil.com ist kostenlos! Trotzdem: haGalil kostet Geld!

Die bei haGalil onLine und den angeschlossenen Domains veröffentlichten Texte spiegeln Meinungen und Kenntnisstand der jeweiligen Autoren.
Sie geben nicht unbedingt die Meinung der Herausgeber bzw. der Gesamtredaktion wieder.
haGalil onLine[Impressum]
Kontakt: hagalil@hagalil.com
haGalil - Postfach 900504 - D-81505 München

1995-2013 © haGalil onLine® bzw. den angeg. Rechteinhabern
Munich - Tel Aviv - All Rights Reserved