I think I can understand what Ahmads wanted to say:
A personal opinion is not a FACT, right?
Then a judgment can´t aply a punishment to a conclussion of theories. Laws are for judge facts, not suposissions.
What the writter did is analyse documents about holocaust, and MAYBE in any place he find something that make him think gas chamber never exist, he said that, "I think acording to my analysis that the chamber never exist" and then the bomb explot.
I think is an exageration of the law. The statement of the writter don´t mean that holocaust don´t exist. The proof of holocaust are the survivers. All they are facts.
In this case the book of that writter is only a confirmation that there are hundred, thousands that want to finish with the holocaust story because any political reazon, and that´s the confirmation that the holocaus existed.
In that case what people must to do about the writter is Laugh, poor crazy man, who is going to belive his words,
And that´s all, but judge for an opinion, a suposotion, donesn´t has any utility.