Thomas Strømsholt is shaken, the day after he was on television in prime time.
“I have not smoked in the damper yet,” he says.
the Debate on the DR2 on Thursday night ended with pulling headlines for things other than the topic that was discussed.
“of Course he should be in prison.”
the Words came from folketingspolitikeren Ole Birk Olesen (LA) in debatprogrammet, aimed directly at Thomas Strømsholt, the president of the Stilladsarbejdernes Landsklub.
It was accusations, which attracted great attention subsequently.
“I’m still shaken. I am deeply shaken. The words came from a former minister. It is not at all to understand,” explains Thomas Strømsholt to B. T. day then.
the Accusations from Ole Birk Olesen comes in connection with the demonstrations on Monday, where stilladsarbejdere ended up toppling several cars and a scaffolding.
Stilladsarbejderne wanted to show their discontent against social dumping and the use of underpaid labor, but the demonstration escalated into a vandalism.
It was the situation that was debated on Thursday evening, in the programme Debate, where Ole Birk Olesen went violently to the attacks against the president of the Stilladsarbejdernes Landsklub.
The former transport minister accused Thomas Strømsholt for having organised the vandalism at the construction site in Nørrebro.
“You are the leader of the thugs, and you have helped to plan it. I am 100 percent sure,” said Ole Birk Olesen, among other things.
Subsequently, the politician on Facebook and write that he went over the line when he pointed out that Thomas Strømsholt should be in jail.
But the lookup gives Thomas Strømsholt not much.
“I don’t give much for the lookup. He draws in the country, because he certainly is afraid to have violated injurieparagraffen, but it alters not that he attack me, my person and my colleagues.”
“It is completely black, what he said is,” says Thomas Strømsholt.
the President of the Stilladsarbejdernes Landsklub tells that he later on Friday to meet with his union to discuss the episode in debatprogrammet through.
He wants to find out whether there is evidence to start a case from injurieparagraffen.
“I seek the assistance of my union. This is not a PR stunt, and it will not be a decision on the basis of feelings. But if they believe that it is the right thing to do, so I’m ready to run a case,” explains Thomas Strømsholt.
Richard Boberg, who is a lawyer and researcher in mediated and presseetik, has looked closely at the television program from Thursday night, and though there are many things that come into play in such a case, then there may be a case of libel.
“I believe, certainly, that there is something to work on in the case, and that there is reason to examine whether there is a case for libel,” she explains.
She points out that politicians have an expanded freedom of expression, because it is desirable to take important issues up and discuss them politically and in the public.
“But with that said, do not come with serious accusations without a factual justification for it,” explains Vibeke Boberg.
“And in this situation it is very doubtful if he has factual evidence of the attacks,” she says.
the Host of the Debate, Clement Kjærsgaard, stops several times Ole Birk Olesen in the course of the program to be sure that he believes what he really says.
“The more disagree, you are with someone, the nicer you will have to speak to them,” said Clement Kjaersgaard at a time.
But the host also asks several times what evidence Ole Birk Olesen has for its accusations, where there’s no clear answer.
“It can play a role, that there is talk of a politician, and that this is a debate. One must also remember that the concept of the Debate is that the waves often go very high,” says Vibeke Boberg.
“But there must so much to that one should be allowed to accuse people of having committed any crime without having evidence for it,” she explains.
the next Day they both laugh and rage Thomas Strømsholt of Thursday’s experience. He still has not quite understood what really happened.
“I can’t understand, that he is a former minister. I don’t really know what he was trying. I wanted that we should have a debate about the labour market and the labour inspectorate, but he got rid of the focus from it.”
B. T. has contacted Ole Birk Olesen, who has not returned on the inquiry.
