Does Britain have a Holocaust denial law?
02 Oct 2008

The arrest of Frederick Toben could have implications for freedom of expression in the UK, says Padraig Reidy

On Wednesday, Frederick Toben, a convicted Holocaust denier, was taken off a plane at Heathrow airport by Metropolitan Police officers. He had been on his way to Dubai. The Met officers were carrying out a European Arrest Warrant put out by German authorities, charging Toben with disseminating materials of an ‘anti-Semitic and, or, revisionist nature’ that ‘play down above all the mass murder of the Jews, planned and implemented, by the national socialist rulers’.

This was in compliance with Section 130 of the German criminal code, which covers crimes that do not yet exist in the United Kingdom. While, in 2007, the EU adopted a directive making ‘publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising crimes of genocide’ punishable by law, the UK (along with Ireland and Sweden) has chosen, as is its right, not to create statute reflecting this.

So why, if Holocaust denial, or ‘trivialisation’ is not a crime in the UK, was Toben arrested by UK police?

Anti-EU campaigners claimed, when European Arrest Warrants were introduced, that they would destroy the notion of dual criminality, whereby a person could only be extradited if they were charged with an offence that is a crime in both countries. Were they right?

The framework decision on European Arrest Warrants recognises 32 offences for which dual criminality does not have to apply — these include racism and xenophobia. As yet it is not clear whether the German authorities intend to charge Toben for broad racial incitement (which is a crime in the UK), or specifically Holocaust denial (which is not).

In 2003, the Daily Telegraph reported Home Office Minister Lord Filkin as saying ‘If someone went to Germany and stood up in Cologne market place and shouted the odds, denying the Holocaust, and then came back [to Britain], they would be subject to extradition under the European arrest warrant.’

This, it would seem, has come to pass.

If Toben is extradited after his hearing on Friday at City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, it may put us in the peculiar position where Holocaust denial is acknowledged as a crime by the UK courts, without actually being a crime under UK law. Index on Censorship will be following the story.

10 responses to “Does Britain have a Holocaust denial law?”

  1. Balder says:

    A case which could have similar implications as the Gerald Fredrick Töben Saga is going on in Denmark right now.

    Here some people accused by Germany of distributing ‘Nazi-music’ are demanded extradited by the Zionist controlled regime in Germany. This is not a punishable offense in Denmark, but a court has ordered for the extradition under the European Arrest Warrant to proceed. The victims have appealed.

    The treacherous Danish press which has a disproportionally large number of Jewish journalists in important positions, has not printed one discussion about the implications, and only very sparingly reported about the trial.

    The Danish press has not wasted one word on the Toben case either. They purposely keep the silence of the grave while our local legislation and our nations sovereignty is undermined by Brussels and Zionist controlled Germany.

    Help me break the silence and spread the word about this very similar case as well, we cannot let these controlled journalists get away with the crime of not reporting extensively on such important cases and the implications of this legislation..

    The latest news about the Danish case:

    October 23, 2008 – Denmark: Alleged Nazi-music distributors extradition case in court in Elsinore (

    Here my index of articles about the Danish case and the Toben case

  2. gncarlo says:

    The world grows weary of the Jew and his political movement posing as a religion, relentlessly attacking any who don’t share his delusions of being “God’s Chosen”, but crying “religious persecution” and “anti-semitism” whenever his victims object to the lies and eternal warfare against the rest of mankind. There is hope for a brighter future though: 1. the internet offers hope that the world’s people may continue to freely exchange ideas and experiences and get at the truth despite the efforts of the Jew’s puppets in the world’s parliaments, and 2. America is beyond bankruptcy. When the world realizes this, the imperial pretensions will be dropped and the troops will have to come home. We’ll see how many of her sons and daughters Germany will be willing to imprison without an American army of occupation, and we’ll see what Israel does without the yearly tribute from the West. We live in interesting times…

  3. llloyd says:

    Excellent that Index on Censorship is treating the Toben case as a censorship issue, even making it the main story. I wish I could say the same for Amnesty International that actively campaigns to have revisionists imprisoned. Not even Orwell could have imagined that.

  4. Hard cases make bad law, and Jewish international politics are largely about cultivating hard cases, so as to impose bad law.

  5. Syd Walker says:

    Please correct spelling if you publish my previous letter

    Hezollah > Hezbollah

  6. Syd Walker says:

    The Zionist lobby is clearly seeking to persecute its ideological enemies, using inside connections in Britain and Germany to seek application of laws overtly introduced to fight terrorism and serious crime.

    In Australia, more than 20 new ‘anti-Terrorism’ laws have been enacted in recent years, greatly constraining our civil liberties.

    An example is a law which made providing Hezollah with ‘material support’ punishable by staggering jail sentences. It meant that, during the 2006 Israeli assault on The Lebanon, Australian relatives of people defending their homeland from external agression risked imprisonment in Australia for sending flowers to a funeral! By contrast, when Israeli-Australian dual nationals fighting in the IDF were killed, it was an Australian national tragedy, judging by mainstream media coverage.

    It’s clear where the major push against freedom of expression is coming from – who gains and who loses.

    I believe the Zionist lobby is grossly overplaying its hand in this latest case.

    Freedom of speech is a basic human right and will be vigorously defended, even by people who usually find other ways to spend their time. The greater the push to criminalize beliefs, the greater the resistance. Truth does not require legal props.

    Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is unambiguous:

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

    It could reasonably be objected that The Holocaust is not a matter of opinion, but rather of a quasi-religious nature, given restrictions on free enquiry and dissent.

    Even so, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has that covered too.

    Here’s Article 18:

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

  7. Sophia says:

    Perhaps Dr. Toben was visiting in Aerica before going on to Dubai.

    More interesting is why do YOU choose to
    make an issue of the itinerary of his trip?

    He did not leave the plane so it needs asking how he could he of any threat to Britain. It is mind boggling that he could be arrested while awaiting the next phase of the trip and had nothing to do with Britain or Germany.

    what insanity is this?

    How huge are the lies that require such extreme measures to keep hidden?


  8. Geseke says:

    Frederick Toben lives in Australia. Why was he flying from the United States to the UK, to get to Dubai? Why didn’t he take a different route since he surely knows the EU laws? This is like David Irving going into Austria to give a lecture when he knew that there was a warrant for his arrest in Austria.

  9. Frank Fisher says:


    “racial incitement (which is a crime in the UK)” well no, not really. Incitment to racial hatred is an offence – I don’t think it should be, and I wonder what your views are Padraig – but racism, pure and simple, isn’t, nor is persuading others to adopt racist views etc. If the German charges relate to simple publication or dissemination of racist views, then there is no dual criminality.

    Regardless, this is a damn outrage – who makes the law here? There is no law forbidding holocaust denial in the UK, because there is no demand or support for such a law here. Do *you* suport such a law? When Irving was jailed the british government could keep quiet and pretend it was nothing to do with them – they cannot do this now. If they extradite him they are complicit in this outrage.

    Oh, and yes, they have abandoned our sovereignty into the bargain.

  10. Dear Editor,

    What sort of Truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?

    I wish to express my outrage that the Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical revisionist investigation. Furthermore I deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize public doubting of the Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace of scholarly discourse and not in our legislatures bodies and courthouses.

    Let’s end ‘thought crimes’ in the twenty-first century. Dr. Toben’s thoughts cannot be killed by his imprisonment.

    Michael Santomauro