@base .
@prefix geonames: .
@prefix owl: .
@prefix skos: .
@prefix schema-org: .
@prefix bio: .
@prefix conf: .
@prefix metalex: .
@prefix ocd: .
@prefix rel: .
@prefix dcterms: .
@prefix dbpprop: .
@prefix foaf: .
@prefix bbc: .
@prefix void: .
@prefix dbpedia-owl: .
@prefix dbpedia: .
@prefix frbr: .
@prefix dwc: .
@prefix claros: .
@prefix crm-owl: .
@prefix ehri: .
@prefix meta: .
@prefix bmuseum: .
@prefix ods: .
@prefix gml: .
@prefix muninn: .
@prefix xsd: .
@prefix yago: .
@prefix rdfs: .
@prefix units: .
@prefix rso: .
@prefix geo: .
@prefix oad: .
@prefix rico: .
@prefix crm120111: .
@prefix cdoc: .
@prefix bibleontology: .
@prefix prov: .
@prefix crm: .
@prefix cc: .
@prefix shoah: .
@prefix npg: .
@prefix org: .
@prefix gn: .
@prefix ibc: .
@prefix aemetonto: .
@prefix skos-xl: .
@prefix lgdo: .
@prefix rdf: .
@prefix eac-cpf: .
@prefix bibo: .
@prefix time: .
@prefix dc: .
@prefix prism21: .
@prefix po: .
a ehri:RecordSet ;
rdfs:seeAlso ;
rico:hasBeginningDate ;
rico:hasEndDate ;
rico:hasOrHadHolder ;
rico:hasOrHadSomeMembersWithLanguage
;
rico:identifier "9932960182904146"^^xsd:decimal ;
rico:isOrWasIncludedIn ;
rico:recordResourceExtent "2 electronic resources (42 pages)"@en ;
rico:scopeAndContent "The files contain an appeal to prevent the printing of the\"Protocols of the Wise Men of Zio\" from being re-legalized and the verdict on this case. On 2 August 1991 Adv. H. Shakenovsky S.C. and Adv. G.J. Marcus, attorneys employed by Feinsteins Incorporated, filed an\"Application for Right of Intervention by the South African Jewish Board of Deputies and the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (South African Chapter\". This appeal confronted the decision of the Directorate of Publications of 12 July 1991 making the Protocols (which were banned in 1945 and declared 'undesirable' in 1979) no longer considered undesirable. The lawyers argued that the publication violates three requirements for an 'undesirable' publication according to the Publication Act:\"Any publication shall be deemed to be undesirable if it [...] a) is blasphemous or is offensive to the religious convictions or feelings of any section of the inhabitants of the Republic or b) brings any section of the inhabitants of the Republic into ridicule or contempt or c) is harmful to the relations between any section of the inhabitants of the Republic\" Their appeal was supported by the historical context of the Protocols, scientific explanations in regard to the Publication Act and various comparable precedents (e.g. Grahamstown Trial, Bern Trial). The judgment ruled in favor of the appeal and put the\"Protocol\" on the list of undesirable publications once again. Although the documents at hand do not mention the contribution of Judge Hadassah Ben-Itto, the chapter\"Retrial in Johannesbur\" (p. 356-359) of her book\"The Lie That Wouldn't Di\" revolves around this appeal."@en ;
rico:title "[Appeal against the decision to re-legalize the publication of the\"Protocol\" and its Judgment]"@en .