Home Europe Swiss court affirms convictions of protesters over ‘Kill Erdoğan’ banner

Swiss court affirms convictions of protesters over ‘Kill Erdoğan’ banner

by editor

Switzerland’s highest court has upheld the convictions of four individuals who were found guilty of inciting violence through a controversial banner at a protest held over eight years ago. The Federal Tribunal announced its decision on Wednesday, confirming the lower court’s ruling regarding the inflammatory message displayed during the March 2017 demonstration in Bern.

The banner, which bore the provocative slogan “Kill Erdoğan with his own weapons,” depicted Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan with a firearm aimed at his head. Following the public outcry over the imagery, a regional court imposed fines and suspended prison sentences on the protesters in 2020.

Court’s rationale on freedom of expression

In its ruling, the Federal Tribunal stated, “Based on the concrete circumstances — the selected image, associated with text — the banner cannot objectively be considered anything else than as a clear and urgent incitement to kill the Turkish president.” The court emphasized that the convictions were consistent with principles of freedom of expression and assembly. It acknowledged that while a democracy should protect free speech, even when it is unsettling, the banner in question “went beyond provocative speech or virulent criticism” that is typically safeguarded by law.

Context of the demonstration

The demonstration took place during a period of heightened tensions between Turkey and Europe, particularly surrounding a referendum in Turkey that would grant Erdoğan extensive new powers. This was only months after a failed coup attempt in Turkey, and Erdoğan himself had referenced the banner during his campaign for constitutional amendments, highlighting the political sensitivities involved.

As this case illustrates, the intersection of free speech and public safety continues to provoke debate, particularly when the political climate is fraught with controversy. The rulings serve as a reminder of the fine balance democracies must strike between allowing freedom of expression and protecting public order.

Related Posts