[Puffer Fish]

A Greek court has ruled that the (controversial) political party "Golden Dawn" is a "criminal organization", with the implication that it would be a crime to lead or participate in such a criminal organization.

This sets a concerning precedent.

Many Greeks are happy, because Golden dawn is seen by many as "fascist" and drawing inspiration from Nazism.

The court ruled that 7 of the 18 former party lawmakers, including party leader Nikos Michaloliakos, were "guilty of leading a criminal organization". The rest were found guilty of "participating in a criminal organization". In all, there were 68 defendants in a trial encompassing four cases.

Some individuals in the party were responsible for initiating violence and a single politically motivated killing of a rapper musician.
It seems the court imposed a collective responsibility onto the entire party for the actions of a some of the members.

Their argument is that the political party was operating like a gang of thugs. Which probably has some partial truth. But at the same time, there may likely be some unfairness going on due to the majority of the society hating what that political party stands for.

The trial had been assessing four cases rolled into one: the 2013 fatal stabbing of Greek rap singer Pavlos Fyssas, physical attacks on Egyptian fishermen in 2012, physical attacks on left-wing activists in 2013, and lastly whether the Golden Dawn political party was operating as a criminal organization.

Of the 43 people on trial for membership of a criminal organization, 15 were acquitted and the rest found guilty.

Only 11 of the 68 defendants were present, with the rest represented by their lawyers. None of the former lawmakers were present.

A lawyer representing the fishermen expressed his opinion: "The ruling demonstrates that they were just a gang of knife-wielding thugs who took their orders from the top."

Politicians from several different political parties, the more conservative New Democracy party, the Communist Party, and the former governing left-wing Syriza party, were outside the courthouse.

The issue of the case was whether the string of violent attacks could be linked to Golden Dawn's leadership. Golden Dawn denied any direct link to the attacks.

There were 18 members from the Golden Dawn Party in Greece's Parliament (out of 300) from 2015 to 2019.

https://apnews.com/article/hip-hop-and- ... 2675b8d25c

[Rich]

First they came for the Kornilovists, but I was not a Kornilovist so I did nothing
.....

[Atlantis]

A Greek court has ruled that the (controversial) political party "Golden Dawn" is a "criminal organization", with the implication that it would be a crime to lead or participate in such a criminal organization.

This sets a concerning precedent.

A constitutional democracy has the right/duty to outlaw any political movement that's not based on the constitution. A neo-fascist movement that seeks to overthrow constitutional democracy by violence ought to be banned. That's not a "concerning precedent." To deprive the enemies of democracy of the means for overthrowing democracy is the duty of every democrat.

[Puffer Fish]

A constitutional democracy has the right/duty to outlaw any political movement that's not based on the constitution.

That's very vague, vague enough to be near meaningless in actual application.

A neo-fascist movement that seeks to overthrow constitutional democracy by violence ought to be banned.

That sounds reasonable on the surface, but the context of the situation about which you are saying that does not warrant such an obvious connection.
To be able to claim that, you would have to be able to parse out unreasonable illegal activity from legitimate political activity.

That's not a "concerning precedent." To deprive the enemies of democracy of the means for overthrowing democracy is the duty of every democrat.

It depends how you define "enemies of democracy". Are you saying that as something that should be blatantly obvious, or is that something actually more grey and open to interpretation and opinion?

There's a logical fallacy called the oversimplification fallacy.

[Puffer Fish]

First they came for the Kornilovists, but I was not a Kornilovist so I did nothing
.....

I understand the irony of what you are referring to, but there is no evidence this Party was planning to stage a coup.

[Atlantis]

@Puffer Fish, the truth basically is simple, if it's not made simplistic. The bottom line is that liberal democracy has been far too tolerant of the enemies of democracies. Far-right populists, admirers of autocrats and dictators, conspiracy theorists, etc., are allowed to create their alternative reality in order to destroy democracy. They use democracy to destroy democracy. The truth has to be seen in the context. The context is the global threat to democracy posed by far-right populism. Democracy doesn't have to tolerate those who want to destroy it.

That would be taking liberalism too far.

[Rugoz]

Democracy doesn't have to tolerate those who want to destroy it.

All democracies have certain mechanisms to change the constitution. If enough people want it to change, there's nothing a democracy can do against it.

[Atlantis]

We are not talking here about changes to the constitution. That happens all the time. We are talking about extremist groups that are prepared to use violence in order to overthrow constitutional democracy. That's a common trait to all right-wing populists including Trump, who is threatening the institutions of democracy.

[Puffer Fish]

We are talking about extremist groups that are prepared to use violence in order to overthrow constitutional democracy.

Is there actual evidence this Party was "prepared to use violence to overthrow constitutional democracy"?

Claiming that is quite a stretch, based on the stuff these people were actually accused of doing and charged with in that trial.

[Puffer Fish]

@Puffer Fish, the truth basically is simple, if it's not made simplistic. The bottom line is that liberal democracy has been far too tolerant of the enemies of democracies.

If I create a political party to support an ideology that there should be some other system besides democracy, should that political party be banned, and it be made a crime?

And what about when there's no way to prove what a political party would do if they got into power?


I see what you're saying, and you may have a point, but the methods that would need to be implemented to try to stop this seem almost as totalitarian as what they are purporting to prevent.

[Rugoz]

We are not talking here about changes to the constitution. That happens all the time. We are talking about extremist groups that are prepared to use violence in order to overthrow constitutional democracy. That's a common trait to all right-wing populists including Trump, who is threatening the institutions of democracy.

"Democratic backsliding" is a lot more common nowadays. There was no violent coup in Russia, Venezuela, Turkey or Hungary.

[Atlantis]

@Puffer Fish, if you are unhappy with a particular court ruling, you have to appeal it. That is how the rule of law works in a democracy. Questioning the validity of the legal system is questioning democracy.

Considering that Golden Dawn is one of the most extreme neo-fascist organizations in Europe, the only question is why it wasn't outlawed before.

Why did Golden Dawn's neo-Nazi leaders get away with it for so long?

The party’s campaign of violence goes back to the 1990s, yet Greece’s political class seemed to turn a blind eye

[Atlantis]

If I create a political party to support an ideology that there should be some other system besides democracy, should that political party be banned, and it be made a crime?

The modern state has a monopoly on power. The institutions of the state are the only institutions to use coercion such as police custody or the like. Nobody else can have that power. If we have the rule of law of a democracy in Berlin, we cannot have Sharia law in Duesseldorf. The state has to use all of the power at its disposal to prevent the rule of Sharia law in Duesseldorf.

"Democratic backsliding" is a lot more common nowadays. There was no violent coup in Russia, Venezuela, Turkey or Hungary.

True, but right-wing populists gradually undermining democracy isn't any better than a violent coup. Anyways, the undermining of democracy in Russia and Turkey does involve a lot of violence. They can use a "silent coup" because they are already in power and don't need a full-scale civil war to overthrow the regime.

That's exactly why democracy needs to defend itself against usurpation by right-wing populism. Once they get into power by a democratic vote, they will manipulate the system to stay in power indefinitely, thus gradually destroying democracy.

[Puffer Fish]

The modern state has a monopoly on power. The institutions of the state are the only institutions to use coercion such as police custody or the like. Nobody else can have that power.

We could get into another interesting discussion about that.
What happens when the law is crap law and, due to what the law is, things are not actually running on rule of law.
I mean where law basically hands over huge amounts of discretion to appointed individuals.
I think that is a different concept from what's normally envisioned by the concept of "rule of law".

How about a law that is written so that the authorities in current government could legally shut down any political party?
Still okay with that?

I've looked at history, and there were a lot of democracies that failed because they passed stupid careless laws that, taken together as a whole, allowed cogs to be thrown into the wheels of free democracy and allowed one person to consolidate all the real power.
It's not merely the laws themselves, it's the people wielding the laws. And laws can be used in all sorts of unanticipated ways.

[Potemkin]

We could get into another interesting discussion about that.
What happens when the law is crap law and, due to what the law is, things are not actually running on rule of law.
I mean where law basically hands over huge amounts of discretion to appointed individuals.
I think that is a different concept from what's normally envisioned by the concept of "rule of law".

How about a law that is written so that the authorities in current government could legally shut down any political party?
Still okay with that?

I've looked at history, and there were a lot of democracies that failed because they passed stupid careless laws that, taken together as a whole, allowed cogs to be thrown into the wheels of free democracy and allowed one person to consolidate all the real power.
It's not merely the laws themselves, it's the people wielding the laws. And laws can be used in all sorts of unanticipated ways.

This is why politics exists, @Puffer Fish. And, ultimately, it's why revolutions sometimes happen....

[Black Consequense]

This is why politics exists, @Puffer Fish. And, ultimately, it's why revolutions sometimes happen....

Careful it may not be the revolution you want....

[Potemkin]

Careful it may not be the revolution you want....

Revolutions are never the revolutions that people want, @Black Consequense. But they are always the revolutions that they deserve and that the historical process requires at that moment.

[noemon]

Golden Dawn was convicted for 5 murders and several beatings of either political opponents or immigrants, hence its new appellation as a criminal gang rather than a political party.

The Court did not just establish that GD used a vague idea of violence to promote its political message but that it used violence & murder.

The court was not about "democracy or the constitution or the role of GD or fascism in modern politics and society", it was a criminal court about a plethora of murders that were committed by high ranking members and leaders of the organisation. In Greece, no political party can be banned for its political ideology.

To aspiring neo-nazis and fascists, the Court did not ban these ideologies or set any precedent relating to them, it just convicted murderers.

[Puffer Fish]

The court was not about "democracy or the constitution or the role of GD or fascism in modern politics and society", it was a criminal court about a plethora of murders that were committed by high ranking members and leaders of the organisation. In Greece, no political party can be banned for its political ideology.

But this appeared to be used as an excuse to ban the party.

I don't have too much of problem if the gears of the criminal justice system turned their normal way, and individuals were prosecuted for violent crimes (when there is appropriate evidence), but banning an entire political party is taking it to another level.

[ThirdTerm]

The verdict is in and Nikos Michaloliakos got a 13-year jail term. Following the murder of Greek musician Pavlos Fyssas seven years ago, the entire leadership was charged with running an organised crime syndicate. Golden Dawn supporter Giorgos Roupakias had already confessed to the murder of rapper Pavlos Fyssas and slapped with life in prison. Police officers on the scene of Fyssas’s murder failed to act. He is reported as saying to the police officer who arrived on the scene: ‘Don’t give me away, I am Golden Dawn.’ However, Greek Solution, which is less focused on violent activism, stole some of GD’s voters and managed to enter the Greek parliament last year with ten MPs.

A Greek court on Wednesday handed a 13-year jail term to the leader of the neo-Nazi group Golden Dawn, Nikos Michaloliakos, for running a criminal organization under the guise of a political party.

Six other former senior members were sentenced between 10 and 13 years on similar charges, and 11 former Golden Dawn lawmakers were sentenced to between five and seven years in prison for being members of a criminal group.

Golden Dawn has been blamed for organizing multiple, violent attacks targeting immigrants and left-wing activists. Most were carried out in Athens.

Closing a violent chapter
The landmark ruling is the culmination of a five-year court case that involved more than 50 defendants convicted of crimes ranging from illegal weapons possession, murder and assault.

The trial has been described as one of the most important in Greece's political history.

The judges will now decide if any of the sentences can be suspended pending appeals by the defendants. Those denied appeal will likely be detained later in the week.

None of Golden Dawn's main members attended the sentencing.

The extremist party's leaders were arrested in 2013 after the killing of anti-fascist rapper Pavlos Fyssas by a Golden Dawn supporter sparked nationwide protests. That led to a government crackdown on the party.

https://www.dw.com/en/greece-leader-of- ... a-55273388