Displaying items by tag: blasphemy laws

A court in Islamabad has sentenced Shagufta Kiran, a Christian mother of four, to death for sharing allegedly blasphemous content on social media. Convicted under Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, she also faces a seven-year prison sentence and a huge fine. Kiran was arrested in 2021 after forwarding a WhatsApp message which her husband claims she did not understand. Since then, the family has been threatened, forcing them to move repeatedly. Kiran's lawyer plans to appeal, while international concerns grow over the misuse of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, particularly against religious minorities. Nasir Saeed, director of CLAAS-UK, highlighted the urgent need for reform, stating that these laws are being used to persecute minorities and cause widespread injustice. He urged the international community to pressure Pakistan for legal reforms to safeguard religious freedom and protect innocent individuals from wrongful persecution.

72-year-old Christian Younis Bhatti has been discharged from a blasphemy case after the accuser, Sosan Fatima, admitted to falsely accusing him. Fatima had alleged that Bhatti desecrated the Quran, but confessed to a conspiracy to prevent him from dividing property. Bhatti has been reunited with his family, but it was not thought safe for him to return home immediately. The incident had led to protests, prompting many Christians to flee. Bhatti's discharge, facilitated by a Christian rights organisation, was hailed as a miracle. Blasphemy accusations in Pakistan,often used to settle personal scores, can result in death sentences. Fatima's husband escaped police custody, leading to the suspension of the policemen who were with him, but was later recaptured. This case highlights the misuse of blasphemy laws and the risks faced by religious minorities in Pakistan.

Marius Werner, a young German, anonymously donated stem cells that saved the life of British doctor Dr Nick Embleton, who was diagnosed with a rare blood cancer. Unable to find a match in the UK, the search extended globally, leading to Marius. Two years after the transplant, BBC News facilitated their meeting. Nick, a veteran neonatal doctor, feared for his life upon diagnosis but now cherishes family time. Bone marrow transplants require matching donors,and both donor and patient remain anonymous initially. After a successful transplant, Nick expressed a desire to meet Marius. They met in Newcastle. Marius, overwhelmed, shared how he had been suicidal, but this opportunity to save someone brought new purpose to his life. Their meeting saw the fostering of a bond between these two ‘blood brothers’, who were brought together by a life-saving act of kindness.

The Pakistani Supreme Court has issued a highly significant and welcome ruling, which includes the declaration that the preaching of Christianity ‘is not a crime, nor can it be made into one’. The nine-page ruling is a clear and comprehensive denunciation of the way in which ‘blasphemy’ laws are misused in Pakistan. The court raises issues such as false and malicious accusations, the lack of credible evidence in many cases, and the mob violence with which an accused person is often threatened. One judge said, ‘Many a time false allegations are levelled to settle personal scores, and cases are also registered for mischievous purposes or on account of ulterior motives’.

Raja Waris, a 25-year-old Christian lay reader, is in police custody in Lahore after he shared another person’s post critical of Islam on his Facebook page. Raja apologised to the Muslims in person, saying he had shared the post for academic understanding between Christians and Muslims and did not mean to offend any Muslims, and the issue appeared to be resolved. But then a huge mob gathered demanding his beheading. Fearing violence, hundreds of Christian residents fled their homes while around 400 anti-riot policemen were deployed to the area to thwart violence. When local church elders were taken to the police station, a large mob gathered outside, chanting slogans against Christians. Negotiations failed, and Raja was hiding due to threats to his life. Mob leaders only called off the siege after he was held under blasphemy laws that call for up to ten years in prison. He and his family are currently in a safe house for their security.

Islam, Christianity, and Free Speech

We think of Europe as secular, progressive, and confidently post-religious. But try criticizing Islam.

Should governments be in the business of protecting people’s feelings? Most Americans, I think would say no. The European Court of Human Rights, however, thinks otherwise. In a historic move last month, the international court affirmed a conviction by a lower court in Vienna against a right-wing speaker who criticized the prophet Muhammad.

Identified only as “E.S.,” the woman, at a seminar in Vienna in 2009, described the founder of Islam as a “pedophile.” According to Islamic tradition, Muhammad was in his fifties when he married his third wife, Aisha, who was six years old at the time. Tradition also says Muhammad waited to consummate their union until the girl was nine.

For describing this relationship in direct though accurate terms, “E.S.” was reported to Austrian authorities, who charged her with “publicly disparaging religious doctrines,” which, believe it or not, is illegal in that country. The Austrian court convicted, describing her statement as “a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance,” which was “capable of hurting the feelings” of Muslims, and of putting religious peace in Europe at risk.

After a lengthy appeal, the European Court of Human Rights reaffirmed this troubling verdict, ruling that the speaker’s remarks about Muhammad were not only “without factual basis,” but went “beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate,” thereby putting religious peace in jeopardy. So, peace is in jeopardy because Muhammad is critiqued, and not because of how his followers react to the critique?

Set aside for a moment the factual basis of Muhammad’s treatment of his nine-year-old child bride, and the fact that child brides are still shockingly common throughout the Muslim world. The rationale behind these rulings is genuinely scary for another reason.

This idea that speech should be illegal because it threatens “religious peace” is a capitulation to religious violence. Islamic extremists are well known for rioting and even killing whenever they believe someone has “insulted” the prophet Muhammad.

Exhibit A: Asia Bibi, the woman who was just acquitted by the Pakistani supreme court and taken off death row, where she sat for eight years after an alleged slight against the founder of Islam. Bibi now faces the very real possibility of retaliation or assassination by Pakistani radicals and remains trapped in the country.

What the European Court of Human Rights has essentially done is enact a blasphemy law like Pakistan’s, only in the West! Extremists who get violent over perceived insults have been granted veto power over citizens’ free speech. This, just a few years after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in which twelve people—including journalists—were gunned down in Paris over cartoons mocking (ironically!) the violent tendencies of Muhammad and many of his followers.

If guarantees to freedom of speech—which Europe has—do not include the right to say offensive things about religion, such guarantees are not worth the paper they’re written on. If anyone can shut someone else up simply by complaining of hurt feelings, your society is a dictatorship of the easily offended, not free. Caving to the threat of violence will ultimately embolden the violent, not appease them.

Protecting members of a minority religion from hurt feelings is unique to the West. Islamic extremists take advantage of Europe’s indulgence, demanding legal penalties against anyone who criticize Islam. They won’t, of course, ever return the favor. In countries like Saudi Arabia—the birthplace of Islam—a Muslim who converts to Christianity still, to this day, faces the death penalty.

Of course, religious tolerance and free speech arise historically from only one religion, and it isn’t the one founded by Muhammad. Those who think giving up freedom of speech will preserve peace in the long term aren’t insulting our religion. Just our intelligence.

More: http://www.breakpoint.org/2018/11/breakpoint-blasphemy-laws-in-europe/?utm_source=Colson+Center+Master+List&utm_campaign=cbe2533bb0-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_07_17_08_49_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_84bd2dc76d-cbe2533bb0-8581285

Pakistan came into being in the name of the religion of Islam. Islamisation is integral to government policy. Constitution, laws and policies restrict religious freedom and the government enforces these restrictions. Acts of violence and intimidation against religious minorities by extremists increases and exacerbates existing religious tensions. Extremists in some areas demand that all citizens follow strict versions of Islam, with brutal consequences if they don’t abide by it. Society is deeply opposed to amending the blasphemy laws and some religious leaders use incendiary rhetoric to convince much of the population that any attempt to amend the laws is an attack on the sanctity of Islam. In the name of religion people are silenced by the military, civil bureaucracy, and Jihadists. Issues involving the blasphemy law generate extremist responses. Aasia Bibi, a Christian woman, was sentenced to death in 2010 for blasphemy. Her lawyer says international support is encouraging, but he is not hopeful for clemency. See