Article by Greta Maria Sorani

Translation by Alice Segato

“Everyone may express themselves freely about the government of the State and on any other subject,” this is what the Article 100 of the Constitution of the Norwegian Kingdom claims, and it seems that the members of the so-called group SIAN (Stop Islamization of Norway) have decided to apply it literally by publicly attacking the Islamic religion.

The documentary, directed by the French filmmaker and producer Fabien Greenberg, and the Norwegian writer and director Bård Kjøge Rønning, focuses on the disturbing yet real story. The concept of free speech, a hotly debated issue in contemporary democracies that struggles to define the fine line between right and duty, is what the two authors wanted to focus on in their film. The fact that this group originated in one of Europe’s most avant-garde countries in terms of human rights, whose policy since World War II has been run by social-democratic governments, just adds up to the level of madness of this story.

The documentary follows step by step the events of the members of the group SIAN, led by Lars Thorsen and partner Fanny Braten. They call themselves anti-Islamic activists who have a “duty” to protect Norway from all “foreigners who are rapist, violent and dangerous to the tradition and peace of the nation.” They do not claim to be racist because they believe that their opposition to Islam is not a religious choice but rather a political one, which is why they consider it their right to publicly set on fire the Koran, one of the sacred texts to Islam. The filmmakers focus on public debates, revealing the protection that the State offers to such people, showing the contradictory attitude of law enforcement agencies, which seem to want to defend those who incite hatred and may become a danger to themselves and others.

The direction attempts to maintain an attitude of neutrality, and the editing is as objective as possible: it does not show their human side, it does not empathize with them, but it is precisely in the objectivity of the camera that one senses the authors’ stance, which ultimately shows a grotesque portrait of the extremist group. This is emphasized by the choice to show in parallel the political activity of Axel, a young student who tries to convey his ideals of equality and freedom with the calmness and rationality that characterize Norwegians.