The diplomatic isolation of Austria by its 14 EU partners appears likely to end shortly to the relief of many of them.
The truth is that in February, bypassing foreign ministries, the French and the Portuguese, then the Presidency, with strong German and Belgian support, bounced fellow heads of government into a decision to impose diplomatic sanctions with little thought of the consequences and no clear exit strategy. They regretted it almost immediately and the face-saving vehicle of a "wise men's" report came as a welcome relief.
Yet, it is worth putting the sanctions in perspective - they largely consisted in the refusal to support Austrian candidates for jobs in international bodies and a reduction in diplomatic contacts in the capital. Not exactly sending in the tanks.
The psychological effects were far more dramatic, both in Austria, where the government used the sanctions to rally support, and in the Danish referendum, where they have been used effectively by the No campaign to raise fears of "Brussels bullying".
Whether or not the sanctions were counter-productive, as the wise men found, they mark an important symbolic stage in the political integration of the EU. Member-states have for the first time declared and acted upon the idea that the political complexion of a partner state is a matter of common concern.
Clearly, however, such a hamfisted approach can not be used again, and hence the advice from the wise men that the EU should refine an instrument for measuring when member-states are in what the treaty refers to as "serious and persistent" breach of their human rights obligations. That task is currently being considered by the Inter-Governmental Conference.
In examining the political character and evolution of the far-right Freedom Party the report warns of the dangers to democracy of the party's regular, indeed systematic, use of the libel laws as a strategy to silence critics. Such cases not only penalise legitimate criticism but can create a climate of fear, in which people refrain from criticism, the report says.
It cites in particular the successful prosecution by the Freedom Party of Prof Anton Pelinka, a political scientist from Innsbruck, who had accused the party's former leader, Mr Jorg Haider, of trivialising the Nazi concentration camps by referring to them in a speech as straflager or "punitive camps".
Although the court found that Mr Haider had indeed used the word, it fined Prof Pelinka for not referring in his own speech to Mr Haider's mention of the near-extermination of an ethnic minority in the camps. Prof Pelinka is appealing to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
The wise men note that it is now well established case law in the latter court, the German Constitutional Court, and the US Supreme Court, that the use of libel proceedings by politicians may be in breach of guarantees of freedom of expression.
They quote the 1986 Lingens decision of the ECHR: "The limits of acceptable criticism are . . . wider as regards a politician as such than as regards a private individual.
Unlike the latter, the former inevitably and knowingly lays himself open to close scrutiny of his every word and deed by both journalists and the public at large and must consequently display a greater degree of tolerance."
Such warnings about the threat posed to democracy by the political use of defamation laws are by no means academic. Similar strategies have been used by ruling parties in a number of the new democracies of central and eastern Europe, once simple police harassment was no longer an option.
Closer to home, there have repeated assurances by Governments that reform of the defamation laws is on its agenda.
The Attorney General, Mr Michael McDowell, admitted recently at a UN hearing that Ireland may well be forced by the ECHR to limit the size of libel awards.
Perhaps we need some wise men to look at our democratic credentials.
The report was produced by the former Finnish president, Mr Martii Ahtisaari; Mr Jochen Frowein, director of the German Max Planck Institute and a former member of the European Commission on Human Rights, and Mr Marcelino Oreja, a former Spanish European commissioner. It is available at www.diplomatie.fr
psmyth@irish-times.ie
