Newspapers initial reactions After his arrest, many mainstream media supported Gregorius Nekschot by publishing his cartoons, as for example on the front page of Amsterdams
Het Parool newspaper. All mainstream newspapers raised questions about at least the way the prosecutor handled the arrest and expressed doubts about the prosecutor's chances of winning a conviction. Only the small, but influential with the government's Christian parties,
Trouw newspaper has been somewhat supportive of the prosecution itself, stating in its chief editorial that only a judge can decide whether the cartoons constitute a crime. In an editorial, the newspaper most closely associated with the government
PvdA party,
de Volkskrant, immediately condemned the decision to police satire or other 'cultural candy'. Many cartoonists of newspapers made drawings in support of Gregorius Nekschot. The nation's largest newspaper
De Telegraaf on its front page on May 22, 2008, focused its readers attention on a colourful painting of two rather abstract female nudes by artist Ellen Vroegh that the municipality of
Huizen removed from public space at city hall at the request of a Muslim gentlemen. A sideshow. Other sideshows turned up bearing witness to tension within the
social-democratic PvdA party which accommodates both traditional socialists and immigrants. In
de Volkskrant (May 22, 2008) two University Law School professors advised the justice minister not to interfere with the case to conserve the prosecutors neutrality. MP
Fred Teeven for the
VVD, a former prosecutor, however denied the prosecutor's neutrality and declared it a political case.
Paul de Beer, a labor relations professor at the
University of Amsterdam, in the same
de Volkskrant shared his concern that the
freedom of the press was not in safe hands with the governments Christian CDA party. He cited several other muzzlings of the press, most importantly the prime-ministers continued legal action against weekly
Opinio, which had published a fictional speech by the prime-minister challenging his official position on Islam.
Weekly magazines Syp Wynia in
Elsevier magazine argued that events pointed to a sudden and conspicuous change of policy within the prosecutor's office, and by its highest authority: the justice minister. Also he expressed surprise that cartoons insulting Christians did not receive police attention.
Vrij Nederland May 24, 2008 issue in a short article
Lange tenen (Long toes) attempted to downplay the media hype. Denying exaggerated talk on internet of a
clash of civilizations and wanting to be evenhanded, the editors reminded readers of recent arrests of protestors against Wilders and concluded that the government is nervous about all trespassing. Crying
Bwehhh! Scandalous the
Opheffer column in
De Groene Amsterdammer, was pissed off by the intellectual crowd that distanced itself first from the rudeness of the cartoons, before criticizing the arrest.
Opheffer said the cartoons were excellent and a great comfort to him after Van Gogh's murder.
Newspapers continued Cartoonist
Ruben L. Oppenheimer in
NRC Handelsblad (May 24–25, 2008, pg 14) presented a fictional, signed and stamped, document of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, headed (in translation):
PLEDGE OF LOYALTY, SUPREME NATIONAL AUTHORITY FOR WISDOM OF THE PRESS AND HUMOUR EXPERIENCE, SUB-DEPARTMENT CARTOON ARTS. One of the stamps was from the 'Interdepartementale Werkgroep Cartoonproblematiek' or the 'Interdepartemental Studygroup Cartoonproblems' the existence of which and its discussion of the Nekschot cartoons was revealed in parliament by the minister of justice. On the same page, in a satirical column the paper's editor
Marc Chavannes pretended to have received a document from the governments legal counsel, addressed to the PM, advising him to declare a state of limited emergency in order to win his lawsuit against
Opinio magazine, which had published a secret speech under his name to his political advisors (obviously a pastiche), admitting that not extremist Islam was the problem, but Islam itself. Another and important contribution was made by Frenchman
Sylvain Ephimenco, a regular
columnist in
Trouw, in the weekend special
De Affaire (May 24, 2008), believing that the intimidating action against Gregorius Nekschot bears an uncomfortable resemblance to a posthumous reckoning with Theo van Gogh. Although he judged the cartoonist as merely provocative, he pointed to his obvious relationship in style and real life with the murdered filmmaker. While Europe celebrated its May 1968 heritage, he saw the Netherlands turning its head the other way. He documented the way in which Christian politicians within a few weeks after the murder of Van Gogh changed the issue from the filmmakers very real slit throat to the virtual wounds of the religious soul. He agreed that there should be a limit to free speech, but only when it incites hate or violence. He refrained from a personal opinion whether such was the case with Gregorius Nekschot, but said he had been informed by (unnamed) specialists that this was not the case. The Nekschot-affair thus became 'a serious incident, without precedent' in modern times, associating the Netherlands with regimes for which works of art are threatening. Following the weekend
Trouw on Monday May 26, 2008 offered a third of a page to Thomas Mertens, a professor at both the Nijmegen and Leiden universities in 'theory and philosophy of the law' and 'human rights and obligations.' Mertens, reacting to both the Nekschot and
Jonas Staal affairs, shared with his readers his surprise at so many defending some absolute right to speak freely. He said this belief in 'free speech' was legally undefendable and in this case very likely abused to serve a wish to discredit a certain minority in society. Defending justice minister Hirsch Ballin he said the government was held to protect 'the good standing and rights' of this minority.
NRC Handelsblad the same day, in a twist, had one of its illustrators comment in words instead of pictures, actually writing that life for Dutch cartoonists was made too easy in a world with absolute freedom of speech. Also he believed they used too many words in their cartoons and should concentrate on the drawing, being less explicit. Cyprian Koscielniak, a Pole by birth, drew on his fifteen years of experience as an illustrator in a country with a communist regime. Naturally, he said, he was not in favor of censorship.
de Volkskrant on May 28, 2008, informed us that the liberal
VVD party would be turning its parliament offices into an art gallery for 'freethinkers'. Gregorius Nekschot had agreed to an exhibition.
Weekly magazines (2) In
Out of range, a supposedly new series about censorship,
Rudi Kagie reveals a name that may be the real identity of Gregorius Nekschot. He considers the dilemma that this name had asked him not even to quote him as 'not being Gregorius Nekschot'. But Kagie points out his own freedom of speech to share with us the name, which is not repeated here. (
Vrij Nederland, May 31, 2008).
Becoming rich in Dubai is the cover story of
HP/De Tijd of May 30, 2008 in which two articles deal with the arrested critic of Muslims trying their luck in the Netherlands. One is an interview with Esther Gasseling of Nekschots publisher Xtra telling us which bookshops are, and which are not selling his books. The other is an interview with influential philosopher
Paul Cliteur. He thinks the cartoons ask legitimate questions. He objects to the 'blaming ourselves' habit of the Dutch, even quoting the queen's Christmas message after the Van Gogh murder in which she said on equal terms that 'extremism in both word and deed' was dividing the country. As long as people didn't call for violence you should allow them their speech. He agreed however with interviewer
Boudewijn Geels that one could expect politicians to be a little more careful.
Geert Wilders, he believed, was learning. The real problem was that the MP could not live without security measures. ==Political reactions==