E/CN.4/1996/72/Add.3 page 51 During the municipal elections campaign of March 1990, in C...(92), the candidate X. published an article in a local newsletter illustrated by a drawing of a queue at a municipal office for the allocation of low-rent housing showing four persons of African and Arab origin, the first of whom is being given a rent contract, while a local woman loses patience and says, “I often get the impression that I'm not welcome in C...”. In March 1990, X. published an article in the same newsletter alleging that the communist mayor of C... had “allowed the northern districts to be invaded by immigrants” and was turning the town into “a Soviet Muslim republic”. In March 1990, X. distributed yet another pamphlet entitled “(...) Do you recognize your mayor?”, illustrated on the back with a photograph of Muslims at prayer on Sunday, 26 February 1989, in the Place de la République in Paris, with the title “I am in favour of the right to vote for immigrants - Z., French Communist Party mayor of C...”. As the result of a complaint and criminal indemnification proceedings instituted by the Ligne des Droits de l'Homme, proceedings were brought against X. for these publications before the correctional court on the basis of article 24, paragraph 6, of the 1881 Act. On 7 October 1991, the Versailles court of appeal acquitted X. on the following grounds. With reference to the first of the texts in question, “The fact of portraying a queue at the low-rent housing office with a large proportion of residents made to look as if they were foreigners and behind them a person apparently of French nationality who states that she has the impression that she is not welcome in C... is neither discrimination nor incitement to racial hatred, since the text and the drawing merely reflect a local situation resulting from the town council's policy” and the immigrants are not in a particular ethnic, racial or religious category. With regard to the second document, the judges pointed out that the article is basically against municipal policy, that the term “invasion” is not necessarily pejorative, that the term “Soviet Muslim republic” refers to the town council which is in office and is Communist and that the article as a whole, which is intended for the election campaign, is not incendiary enough to constitute incitement to racial hatred. As to the third document, the judges point out that the photograph published represents an objective fact, the reproduction of which is no more reprehensible than the sight itself and that the fact of opposing the granting of the right of vote to foreigners cannot be regarded as a call to hate them, since the right of vote is, according to the law and the Constitution, reserved for French nationals only. By a decree of 18 January 1994, the Criminal Division of the Court of Cassation considered that the Court of Appeal had sovereignly weighed up the extrinsic elements of the documents submitted to it and had justified its decision of acquittal (No. 90-1718 A4). (2) Proceedings for racial defamation and insult By an order of 6 January 1994, the Versailles court of appeal sentenced Mr. X. to 18 months' imprisonment with a suspended sentence and three years' probation, with an obligation to compensate the victim (60,000 francs), on charges of destruction of property, racial defamation and insult.