Dutch far-right election winner Geert Wilders has withdrawn a 2018 proposal banning mosques and the Holy Quran, in a concession to potential coalition partners, a day before talks to form the next government resume following the November election.
According to Euro News, the bill’s abandonment could be critical in gaining the trust and support of three more mainstream parties for Wilders’ coalition along with his Party for Freedom (PVV).
Pieter Omtzigt, leader of the reformist New Social Contract, has expressed concerns that Wilders’ policies may violate the Dutch Constitution, which protects freedoms, including religious freedom.
During a parliamentary debate last year, after the PVV won 37 seats in the 150-seat lower house of the Dutch parliament in the November 22 general election, Wilders flagged a softening of his party’s strident anti-Islam stance.
“Sometimes I will have to withdraw proposals and I will do that,” Wilders said in the debate. “I will show the Netherlands, the legislature, Mr Omtzigt’s party — anybody who wants to hear it — that we will adapt our rules to the constitution and bring our proposals in line with it.”
Wilders is due to resume coalition talks on Tuesday with Omtzigt, and the leaders of two other parties — the centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy of outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte and the Farmer Citizen Movement led by Caroline van der Plas.
Among three pieces of legislation axed by Wilders Party for Freedom was one dating back to 2018 that proposes banning “Islamic expressions.”
The text of the bill labels Islam a “violent, totalitarian ideology” and proposes bans on mosques, the Quran, Islamic schools and the wearing of burqas and niqabs.
Wilders announced the withdrawal of three proposed laws in 2017, 2018, and 2019 but never gained a majority in the lower house.
In an assessment of the proposed ban on Islamic expressions, the Council of State, an independent watchdog that evaluates legislation, called on Wilders to scrap it.
“The Advisory Division advises the initiators to abandon the bill,” the council said in advice published in 2019. “It is not compatible with the core elements of the democratic constitutional state; elements that the initiators intend to protect.”
