CCPR/C/117/D/2124/2011 protection of the law without discrimination; protection of minorities Articles of the Covenant: 2 (3), 14 (1), 17, 20 (2), 26 and 27 Articles of the Optional Protocol: 1, 3 and 5 (2) (b) 1. The authors of the communication are Mohamed Rabbae, A.B.S. and N.A., all dual nationals of the Netherlands and Morocco. They claim to be victims of violations by the Netherlands of their rights under articles 2 (3), 14 (1), 17, 20, 26 and 27 of the Covenant. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the Netherlands on 11 March 1979. The authors are represented by counsel. The facts as submitted by the authors 2.1 Between 2006 and 2009, the police received hundreds of reports from individuals and organizations concerning insults and incitement to discrimination, violence and hatred by Geert Wilders, a Member of Parliament and the founder of the extreme right-wing political Party for Freedom. However, the public prosecutor decided not to prosecute Mr. Wilders, arguing that his statements were not criminal but fell within the space granted by freedom of expression in public debate. The prosecutor issued a letter to all those who had reported Mr. Wilders’ statements to the police explaining that no prosecution would take place because the reported facts were not liable to punishment under the Criminal Code. 2.2 Under domestic law, citizens who consider themselves victims of a crime have no right to have the alleged perpetrator prosecuted. They depend on the decision of the public prosecutor. However, a citizen who has a direct interest in a prosecution can lodge a complaint with a court of appeal against a decision not to prosecute.1 That is what a number of victims and other interested parties did in the present case. As a result, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, on 21 November 2009, ordered the prosecutor to prosecute Mr. Wilders before the Amsterdam District Court. Pursuant to that order, the prosecutor issued a summons in which Mr. Wilders was invited to defend himself on charges of insulting a group for reasons of race or religion, under section 137c of the Criminal Code,2 and for incitement to hatred and discrimination on grounds of religion or race, under section 137d.3 2.3 Under section 51 (a) and (f) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, anyone who has suffered direct damage as a result of a criminal offence may join the criminal proceedings as an aggrieved party and claim compensation. The injured party has a right to be informed about the proceedings and to access the case documents. Under article 334 of that Code, 1 2 3 2 The Code of Criminal Procedure indicates that if a criminal offence is not prosecuted, the directly interested party may file a complaint against that decision with the Court of Appeal (sect. 12). Sect. 137c indicates that any person who in public, either orally, in writing or through images, intentionally makes an insulting statement about a group of persons because of their race, religion or beliefs, their hetero or homosexual orientation or their physical, mental or intellectual disability, is liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine of the third category; sect. 137c (2) provides that if the offence is committed by a person who makes a profession or habit of it or by two or more persons in concert, a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years or a fine of the fourth category shall be imposed. Sect. 137d provides that any person who publicly, either orally or in writing or through images, incites hatred of or discrimination against persons or violence against an individual or property because of their race, religion or beliefs, their gender, their heterosexual or homosexual orientation or their physical, mental or intellectual disability, is liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine of the third category.