SCHIPHOL: A Dutch court convicted two Pakistani religious and political leaders in their absence Monday over calls to their followers to murder anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom that won last year’s general election in the Netherlands.
Wilders has lived under round-the-clock security for nearly 20 years due to the thousands of threats to his life following his outspoken criticism of Islam. His bodyguards and two armed military police sat in the courtroom for Monday’s hearing.
Neither of the defendants was in court to hear the verdicts. They are believed to be in Pakistan and are unlikely to be turned over as Pakistan has no extradition agreement with the Netherlands. Prosecutors said last week that requests they sent to Pakistani authorities seeking legal assistance to serve subpoenas on the two men were not executed.
The court found Muhammad Ashraf Asif Jalali guilty of attempting to provoke murder and incite Wilders’ murder with a terrorist intent and of issuing threats. He was sentenced to 14 years, in line with a sentence demand made last week by prosecutors.
The court said that Jalali is a religious leader whose website claims he has millions of followers around the world. It said his comments to his followers “infringed Wilders’ personal privacy very seriously,” and added that such threats “can also harm freedom of expression in general, while a democratic society benefits from being able to exchange opinions without physical danger.”
In the second case, the court convicted Saad Rizvi, who leads the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan, or TLP, for incitement to murder and threatening Wilders. He was sentenced to four years, two years less than prosecutors had requested. He got a lower sentence in part because the court ruled that his comments posted on social media did not amount to a terrorist crime.
Wilders welcomed the verdicts and sentences from the three-judge panel.
“I’m very pleased about it. It’s really, I believe, the first time ever in Holland that an imam, from abroad in this case, is being sentenced for an a long jail sentence for putting a fatwa on the head of a parliamentarian in the Netherlands. My head. And I’m very pleased about that,” he said outside the courtroom.
They are not the first Pakistani men convicted and sentenced in the Netherlands for threats targeting Wilders.
Last year, a former Pakistani cricketer, Khalid Latif, was sentenced to 12 years in prison over allegations that he had offered a reward for the death of Wilders. Latif also did not appear for trial and is not in custody in the Netherlands. Rizvi publicly praised Latif, the court ruled Monday.
Also, in 2019, a Pakistani man was arrested in the Netherlands, convicted and sentenced to 10 years for preparing an attack on Wilders, who is sometimes called the Dutch Donald Trump.
A prosecutor, who asked not to be identified for security reasons, told judges last week that threats began to be aired on social media after Wilders’ announcement that he was organizing a competition for cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in 2018. The planned contest sparked angry protests in Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world.
Physical depictions of the Prophet (PBUH) are forbidden in Islam and deeply offensive to Muslims.
Wilders told judge last week about the way the threats had affected his life.
“Every day you get up and leave for work in armored cars, often with sirens on, and you are always aware somewhere in the back of your mind that this could be your last day,” he said.

KARACHI: A Pakistani court on Monday denied bail to a woman accused in a high-profile hit-and-run case, dashing her hopes for immediate freedom after the family of two people who died in the crash pardoned her in a manslaughter case last week.
CCTV footage of the accident was widely circulated on social media last month, showing a Toyota Land Cruiser, allegedly driven by Natasha Danish, the wife of well-known businessman Danish Iqbal, hitting a motorbike from behind, resulting in the death of a female student and her father. Five others were also injured in the incident.
Initially, the defense lawyer told the local court his client was undergoing psychiatric treatment to secure her exemption from court appearances. However, hospital authorities said the suspect’s family could not provide any evidence of the claim, saying she was under the influence of drugs at the time of the accident.
Last week, the court granted the suspect bail in the manslaughter case after the families of those killed and injured submitted affidavits, saying they had forgiven her for the accident. However, the court reserved judgment in the second case filed against her for drug use.
“This Court in its humble view finds applicant/accused failed, to be admitted to post-arrest bail in absence of reasonable ground,” Judge Muhammad Raza Ansari, civil judge district east, declared in a written order. “Therefore, instant bail application stands dismissed, accordingly.”
According to the order, the defense attorney had challenged the applicability of Section 11 of The Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, arguing that the legal provision dealt only with alcohol, while his client was accused of using methamphetamine, commonly known as ice.
The judge, however, dismissed the argument, stating that the law was “not confined to intoxicating liquor only” but also covered other substances.
Section 11 of The Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, stipulates that any Muslim caught in violation can be punished with up to three years in prison, 30 lashes or both.
The defense lawyer further argued the blood test of his client had not returned positive for the drug and raised concerns over the safe custody of the urine sample, which showed the presence of methamphetamine, during a public holiday.
The judge rejected both arguments, citing expert opinion on the matter.
Additionally, the defense counsel claimed the accused had already been pardoned by the victims’ family.
However, the court rejected this reasoning as well, saying that the legal heirs’ pardon could not impact the second case, which was filed by the state.
The court emphasized that methamphetamine consumption was a “new evil” gripping society and must be curbed.
It also described the accused as a “well-educated lady with a good sense of living and law,” adding that she still decided to drive the vehicle while intoxicated, resulting in the deaths of two people and injuries to others.