The discussion about the proposed amendment to the Criminal Code is a disturbing signal about what society considers permissible and what is already beyond the limits of humanity. This was announced by the president of the Bishops’ Conference of Slovakia (KBS), Bernard Bober.
- KBS Chairman Bernard Bober criticized the discussion on the amendment to the Criminal Code.
- He called for the rejection of racism, anti-Semitism and hateful nationalism.
- He warned that extremism leads to violence and divides society.
- SNS MPs propose a reduction in criminal rates for extremist acts.
- They also suggest deleting provisions on extremist material in order to provide legal certainty.
“Christian values lead us to respect every person, regardless of their origin or beliefs. That is why we must say a clear ‘no’ to all forms of racism, anti-Semitism and hateful nationalism. History has painfully taught us that these attitudes in the past have led to persecution, attacks on the innocent and destructive wars“, emphasized Bober.
He reminded that extremism is not just another opinion, but is often a breeding ground for violence. “Therefore, let’s avoid populist ideologies that divide us. Let’s protect an environment in which the safety and dignity of every inhabitant of Slovakia is a priority,” he appealed.
A group of MPs for the SNS coalition submitted an amendment to the Criminal Code to the parliament. In it, she proposed, among other things, the adjustment of criminal rates for extremist crimes. He wants to reduce the upper limits of rates for several of them. She justified it by the fact that penalty rates should be set more rationally and differentiated.
The nationalists also want the amendment to delete the provisions on the production, distribution and storage of extremist material. They argued that this would eliminate legally uncertain regulation and reduce the dependence of criminal law assessment on expert opinions on normatively indeterminate questions. They drew attention to the fact that the criminal law protection of protected interests would remain after the change.
