Brussels anti-Islam march banned pending appeal

[dsmythy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6970862.stm

The mayor of Brussels has banned a march in the city by the 'Stop the Islamisation of Europe' alliance fearing it could cause public disorder.

The group intend appealing the ban to the highest court in Belgium. The march was due to take place on the sixth anniversary of the September 11th attacks.

Does freedom of speech extend to those who might use it to air negative views? Or does the right only come into effect if responsibility is attached? Who else could we ban?

[corkman2007]

There's no right to absolute freedom of expression. It can be curtailed in the interests of maintaining public order. That's why the Garvaghy Road march has been stopped from going ahead for the past few years. Decisions to ban marches etc. are normally reviewed by courts in democratic countries. They're the appropriate bodies to decide on whether the right to freedom of expression should be curtailed or not.

Why don't you wait for the verdict of the Belgian court?

[Defeated Romanticist]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6970862.stm

The mayor of Brussels has banned a march in the city by the 'Stop the Islamisation of Europe' alliance fearing it could cause public disorder.

The group intend appealing the ban to the highest court in Belgium. The march was due to take place on the sixth anniversary of the September 11th attacks.

Does freedom of speech extend to those who might use it to air negative views? Or does the right only come into effect if responsibility is attached? Who else could we ban?

Since when was the world run by Ned Flanders?

[saratoga]

There's no right to absolute freedom of expression. It can be curtailed in the interests of maintaining public order. That's why the Garvaghy Road march has been stopped from going ahead for the past few years. Decisions to ban marches etc. are normally reviewed by courts in democratic countries. They're the appropriate bodies to decide on whether the right to freedom of expression should be curtailed or not.

Why don't you wait for the verdict of the Belgian court?

While you're correct in saying that there is no absolute right to freedom of expression, there is a key difference between Garvaghy and this.

The Orange Order were deliberately going through an area populated by the opposing faction for no other reason that pure triumphalism. Granted, they're entitled to their triumphalism, but they hardly have an absolute right to walk down the Garvaghy Road in order to express it. So that was not a question of free speech so much as it was a question of where it can be practiced.

Brussells, the last time I checked, is the capital city of a Western democracy. The centre of Brussells is hardly a centre of Islamic population, so the similarity with Garvaghy is thus limited.

If the police fear violence, let them assign more police to the march. People should be entitled to stage such a march in the centre of their capital city, just as the Orange Order shouldn't be restricted from marching in, say, Belfast city centre, a 'neutral ground' of sorts.

But as you say, the decision of the court has yet to come.

[corkman2007]

Actually central Brussels does have a large Muslim population. Without knowing the exact route of the march you can't say whether it's akin to the Garvaghy Road march or not. I suspect the Mayor of Brussels has greater knowledge about this than you or me.

[nawbut]

Its a simple public order issue, the equivalent of some group of nutters applying to auhorities to hold a 'Stop the Ever Increasing numbers of Church of Ireland people in Dublin' on O Connell street - they wouldnt have a chance.

But with Islam...Europe....current levels of acceptable religious bigotry, it just might get the nod, who knows.

[saratoga]

Actually central Brussels does have a large Muslim population. Without knowing the exact route of the march you can't say whether it's akin to the Garvaghy Road march or not. I suspect the Mayor of Brussels has greater knowledge about this than you or me.

I suspect so too, but having visited the city, I'm certain that Central Brussells isn't three quarters Muslim the way three quarters (or whatever it was) of Garvaghy was Nationalist. In other words, there is no evidence that this march is deliberately intended to antagonise Muslims by marching through a heavily Islamic area. It may well be deliberately intended to antagonise Muslims, but of course there is nothing wrong with doing that. Only if it's routed past or through a heavily Muslim area should they consider re-routing it. If not, then police it to the extent it needs to be policed in order to prevent violence, and let it go ahead.

[Defeated Romanticist]

There's no right to absolute freedom of expression. It can be curtailed in the interests of maintaining public order. That's why the Garvaghy Road march has been stopped from going ahead for the past few years. Decisions to ban marches etc. are normally reviewed by courts in democratic countries. They're the appropriate bodies to decide on whether the right to freedom of expression should be curtailed or not.

Why don't you wait for the verdict of the Belgian court?

How can you say there ought to be no absolute right to freedom of expression. Is that not what democracy is, the right of the individual to dissent. The maintainance of pulic order is an extremely maliable concept whose interpretation depends on who is doing the interpretation. What was the differance between the protest planned on Sept 11 in Brussels and those held outside churches in UK after the Popes comments regarding Islam. Is offending others alright if they are to polite to answer back?
there is no democracy without at least de facto right to freedom of speech. I would propose we have that in this country.

[The Earl of Desmond]

Funny how Muslims can gather quickly with the flags of any number of countries to burn at a few minutes notice but they find it so hard to gather and march demanding peace and freedom for all religions to practice.

[saratoga]

Its a simple public order issue, the equivalent of some group of nutters applying to auhorities to hold a 'Stop the Ever Increasing numbers of Church of Ireland people in Dublin' on O Connell street - they wouldnt have a chance.

But with Islam...Europe....current levels of acceptable religious bigotry, it just might get the nod, who knows.

If someone takes it upon themselves to protest the number of Church of Ireland in Dublin, presumably they should be allowed to do so. There's very little prospect of that resulting in violence. Bemusement, and of course upset, but no-one's got a right to not be upset by people who don't like their religion. I'm sure there is a good deal of bigotry towards Islam in Europe, but as long as people aren't inciting or threatening violence, they should be allowed to the greatest possible extent to say what they like.