On the Level: Police Explained Why Turek Was Not Appointed Minister. Deleting His Statements Wasn't Fast Enough
In the post-factual era in which we live, the credibility of information is constantly under threat. From one side, it is attacked by frauds and an alternative reality increasingly generated by artificial intelligence algorithms, and from the other, we are bombarded with disinformation and manipulation of reality. The police have identified a member of parliament representing Motorists, Filip Turek, as the author of racist and, not only for that reason, illegal statements which he allegedly did not write but were meant just as humor.
Filip Turek is not currently charged with spreading hatred because he demonstrably committed these acts during a period now covered by the statute of limitations. These are applied in different ways. The general statute of limitations is 3 years. If we were to apply it to a politician’s behavior on social media that could potentially conflict with the law, it serves as a lesson: when an office term approaches, watch your language.
A campaign lasts some time, a mandate such as that of a member of parliament is 4 years, and within this period, the statute of limitations can fit. In the case of Filip Turek's neo-Nazi manifestations, which meet the criteria for inclination towards historical Nazism by glorifying Hitler's Germany or performing Nazi salutes in public as well as aligning with the ideological essence of this ideology (inciting violence against political opponents, racism, denial of democratic institutions such as the Constitutional Court, etc.), the statute of limitations can sustain much.
Filip Turek and Broken Paragraphs, But He's Not the Only One
He probably doesn't realize it himself; as investigative journalists have found out, a significant portion of his statements were cleaned from social media by his acquaintances. Normal people are aware that promoting Nazi ideas is not only frowned upon but also illegal.
On the other hand, we have freedom of thought here, so everyone can think what they want. The crime is the act or expression. Social networks are full of such expressions. Furthermore, MP Filip Turek excused himself by saying that he is not the author of those internet comments including e.g. § 355 - defamation of race, § 356 - incitement to hatred, § 365 - approval of a criminal act, and also § 404 - expression of sympathy for a movement aimed at suppressing human rights and freedoms (here they hit a wall with the neo-Nazism).
The second part of the defense argued that the statements he was trying to distance himself from were meant in the spirit of the dark humor of Česká soda. However, the authors of Česká soda distanced themselves from that.
One might want to shout that only the unfortunate Filip Turek is in the sights of the Czech Police! Unfortunately, that is not true. The mentioned paragraphs are investigated by the police in relation to social media environments quite commonly, and even back in 2018, the police were conducting an informational campaign warning that online discussions are not a space where the law can be broken. Some people, however, attract more attention. Politicians managing public assets on behalf of citizens should be the most visible.
"They have a greater range and reach than perhaps in a limited group of people. And that's why we always take it into consideration and can view similar acts with greater seriousness,"
explained Jakub Vinčálek, chief commissioner from the Communication Department of the Police Presidium of the Czech Republic, for SeznamZprávy, stating that the larger the user's reach, the stricter the scrutiny by the Police. At the same time, he mentioned that they are quite often surprised by the authors of anonymous accounts who vent their aggression online.
The President Did What He Had To
Apart from the aforementioned and a recent traffic accident, Filip Turek's name could have appeared before an even higher court. If the Prime Minister had filed a competency lawsuit against the President in the well-known case of refusing to appoint Turek as a minister, it would have been dealt with there as well.
The Constitution requires the President to uphold the Constitution, which according to its text is based on equality, human rights, and democratic values. The above is not in accordance with these. Everyone knows this, which is why no competency lawsuit was filed. Of course, if the text's author were someone else, who happened to be sitting next to Mr. Turek at the pub, it would be a different story.
According to the current findings of the police, that was not the case (what a surprise!). The bizarre ending is the discovery that these borderline legal statements had to be deleted by other people with instructions: "He gave me the password and said: Delete it," if he did it himself, he would be going against his conscience.
Sources: original text, commentary, SeznamZprávy, X, YouTube, E-bezpečí, Zákony pro lidi
