POVRATAK DELIKTA MIŠLJENJA U SRBIJI: SLUČAJ VLADIMIRA DIMITIRIJEVIĆA
THE RETURN OF THOUGHT CRIME AS A PROSECUTABLE OFFENSE IN SERBIA: THE CASE OF VLADIMIR DIMITIRIJEVIĆ

Summary/Abstract: The author pleads that the freedoms of thought and expression are to be unconditionally respected as the core values of any civilized society that aspires to be democratic, highlighting the lawsuit against Vladimir Dimitrijević, who has been taken to court for publicly affirming the traditional, natural family. The author first offers an exhaustive overview of the historical evolution of the concept of thought crime and of the ways in which it has been abused for suppressing free critical thinking in authoritarian regimes. He points out that the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees freedom of expression, as well as the right to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority, and that a modern, democratic and lawful state differs from a totalitarian one in that it acknowledges differences of opinion and does not penalize their public expression. This becomes particularly relevant at the moment when the organs tasked with the protection of human rights adopt censorial competences to impose a decreed brand of „political correctness“. The author provides a comprehensive overview of the history of thought crime in former Yugoslavia and Serbia. This is followed by a detailed survey of the case of Vladimir Dimitrijević, who was been sanctioned in accordance with the Anti-Discrimination Law (Law on Prohibition of Discrimination) for publicly opposing initiatives for legalizing same-sex marriage. He concludes that Dimitrijević used his natural right to publicly state his opinion and that freedom of speech and thought cannot be qualified as discrimination. The Opinion of the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality and the lawsuit against Dimitrijević aim to prevent the expression of any opinion that might differ from the official narrative. This stands in direct violation of the basic right of freedom of expression, as defined in international law, the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantee freedom of thought and expression and freedom of conscience, belief and manifesting one’s religion. It is entirely possible that some views and phrases in Dimitrijević’s text were not formulated as well as they could have been and that some of his claims lack more exhaustive explanations. However, a critical evaluation of his views and their potential rectification would make sense only in an academic milieu, among experts, at a court of knowledge and scholarship, not in (dis)qualifications of public organs and certainly not in a courthouse as a criminal case. The lawsuit against Vladimir Dimitrijević is a lawsuit against human thought – a return of thought crime to the courthouse.

• Details
• Contents