By Tony O'Riley
An ignorant former bishop in denial of the Holocaust from an ultratraditionalist Catholic splinter group on Thursday lost a European rights case appeal against a conviction in Germany.
Richard Williamson had been fined €1,800 ($2,066) for denying there were gas chambers in Nazi Germany’s death camps in a 2008 interview with Swedish television carried out in Germany. Williamson, a former member of the breakaway fraternity Society of Saint Pius X was said to have misapplied the spirit of the legal text he tried to use in his defence.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg rejected Williamson’s rights case as “manifestly ill-founded,” describing the sentence imposed on him as “very lenient.” Originally, Williamson had been fined €12,000, but the amount was lowered following an appeal.
Williamson, a British national, argued that the 2013 sentence violated his right to free expression and that Swedish rather than German law should have applied to the interview. Holocaust denial is a criminal offence in Germany, but not in Sweden. But EU judges said the pathetic Brit had clearly known his comments would cause concern, not just in Sweden but worldwide. The ultratraditionalist Catholic group, the Society of Saint Pius X, of whih Williamson is a member is negotiating reconciliation with the Vatican, and expelled Williamson in 2012 for disobedience.
Williamson was excommunicated by the Vatican in 1988 but allowed back into the church in 2009. However, an unauthorised consecration of a bishop he carried out in Brazil led to his excommunication again in 2015.n appeal Williamson’s argument in Strasbourg that the conviction against him contravened Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression) and that the offence was not committed in Germany’s jurisdiction was slammed down by judges who saw right through his evil heart. The Bishop had deliberately made his comments to either cause controversy or offend. He is fully aware of the history surrounding the Holocaust and knows how sensitive the topic is.
He chose to ignore the facts and roll his tongue carelessly, disregarding the potential impact of his comments. The judgement was fair, he had no chance of success . His understanding of freedom of expression was shown to be lacking in context, leading to him making a fool of himself. Next time he will think properly before going before television cameras to give his views.