Sunday, June 21, 2015
Blasphemy Wikipedia pages
Blasphemy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation , search
For other uses, see Blasphemy (disambiguation).
Sufi teacher Mansur Al-Hallaj was executed in Baghdad for blasphemy in 10th century CE.[1]
Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.[2][3][4]
Some religions consider blasphemy as a religious crime.[5] As of 2012, anti-blasphemy laws existed in 32 countries, while 87 nations had hate speech laws that covered defamation of religion and public expression of hate against a religious group.[6] Anti-blasphemy laws are particularly common in Muslim-majority nations, such as those in the Middle East and North Africa.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Christianity 2.1 Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy
2.2 Punishment
3 Islam 3.1 Blasphemy in different Islamic schools of jurisprudence
3.2 Notable cases and debate on blasphemy
4 Judaism
5 Blasphemy laws
6 The United Nations
7 Colloquial usage
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Etymology[edit]
The word "blasphemy" came via Middle English blasfemen and Old French blasfemer and Late Latin blasphemare from Greek βλασφημέω, from βλάπτω "injure" and φήμη "utterance, talk, speech". From blasphemare also came Old French blasmer, from which English "blame" came. Blasphemy: 'from Gk. blasphemia "a speaking ill, impious speech, slander," from blasphemein "to speak evil of."'[7] "In the sense of speaking evil of God this word is found in Ps. 74:18; Isa. 52:5; Rom. 2:24; Rev. 13:1, 6; 16:9, 11, 21. It denotes also any kind of calumny, or evil-speaking, or abuse (1 Kings 21:10 LXX; Acts 13:45; 18:6, etc.)."[8]
Christianity[edit]
Christian theology condemns blasphemy. It is spoken of in Mark 3:29, where blaspheming the Holy Spirit is spoken of as unforgivable—the eternal sin. However, there is dispute over what form this blasphemy may take and whether it qualifies as blasphemy in the conventional sense; and over the meaning of "unforgivable". In 2 Kings 18, the Rabshakeh gave the word from the king of Assyria, dissuading trust in the Lord, asserting that God is no more able to deliver than all the gods of the land.
In Matthew 9:2-3, Jesus told a paralytic "your sins are forgiven" and was accused of blasphemy.
Blasphemy has been condemned as a serious, or even the most serious, sin by the major creeds and Church theologians (apostasy and infidelity [unbelief] were generally considered to be the gravest sins, with heresy a greater sin than blasphemy, cf. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae).[9]
Thomas Aquinas says that “[if] we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbor, than blasphemy does to God.”[10]
The Book of Concord calls blasphemy “the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed”.[11]
The Baptist Confession of Faith says: “Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God…is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. …For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns.”[12]
The Heidelberg Catechism answers question 100 about blasphemy by stating that “no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of His Name”.[13]
The Westminster Larger Catechism explains that “The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane...mentioning...by blasphemy...to profane jests, ...vain janglings, ...to charms or sinful lusts and practices.”[14]
Calvin found it intolerable “when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ebullition of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked.”[15]
Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy[edit]
In the Catholic Church, there are specific prayers and devotions as Acts of Reparation for blasphemy.[16] For instance, The Golden Arrow Holy Face Devotion (Prayer) first introduced by Sister Marie of St Peter in 1844 is recited "in a spirit of reparation for blasphemy". This devotion (started by Sister Marie and then promoted by the Venerable Leo Dupont) was approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885.[17] The Raccolta Catholic prayer book includes a number of such prayers.[18] The Five First Saturdays devotions are done with the intention in the heart of making reparation to the Blessed Mother for blasphemies against her, her name and her holy initiatives.
The Holy See has specific "Pontifical organizations" for the purpose of the reparation of blasphemy through Acts of Reparation to Jesus Christ, e.g. the Pontifical Congregation of the Benedictine Sisters of the Reparation of the Holy Face.[19]
Punishment[edit]
The most common way to punish the ones who committed blasphemy was through hanging or stoning, due to what is said in Leviticus 24:13-16. Then the LORD said to Moses: "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. Say to the Israelites: 'If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him."
Writer Salman Rushdie was accused of blasphemy and subject of a fatwā issued by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Supreme Leader of Iran, in February 1989.
The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was Thomas Aikenhead aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.[20]
Islam[edit]
Main article: Islam and blasphemy
In Islamic literature, blasphemy is of many types, and there are many different words for it: sabb (insult) and shatm (abuse, vilification), takdhib or tajdif (denial), iftira (concoction), la`n or la'ana (curse) and ta`n (accuse, defame).[21] In Islamic literature, the term blasphemy sometimes also overlaps with infidel (kufr, disbeliever), fisq (depravity), isa'ah (insult), and ridda (apostasy).[22][23] There are a number of surah in Qur'an and sunnah in hadith relating to blasphemy, from which Quranic verses 5:33-34 and 33:57-61 have been most commonly used in Islamic history to justify and punish blasphemers.[24] For example,[24]
The only punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is that they should be murdered, or crucified, or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides, or they should be imprisoned. This shall he a disgrace for them in this world, and in the Hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement. Except those who repent before you overpower them; so know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
—Qur'an, [Quran 5:33–34]
Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment. Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City, desist not, We shall certainly stir thee up against them: Then will they not be able to stay in it as thy neighbours for any length of time: They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy).
—Qur'an, [Quran 33:57–61]
A variety of actions, speeches or behavior can constitute blasphemy in Islam. Some examples include insulting or cursing Allah, or Muhammad; mockery or disagreeable behavior towards beliefs and customs common in Islam; criticism of Islam's holy personages. Apostasy, that is act of abandoning Islam, or finding faults or expressing doubts about Allah (ta'til) and Qur'an, rejection of Muhammed or any of his teachings, or leaving the Muslim community to become an atheist is a form of blasphemy. Questioning religious opinions (fatwa) and normative Islamic views can also be construed as blasphemous. Improper dress, drawing offensive cartoons, tearing or burning holy literature of Islam, creating or using music or painting or video or novels to mock or criticize Muhammad are some examples of blasphemous acts.[25][26][27][28] In the context of those who are non-Muslims, the concept of blasphemy includes all aspects of infidelity (kufr).
Blasphemy in different Islamic schools of jurisprudence[edit]
The Quran does not explicitly mention any worldly punishment for blasphemy (sabb allah or sabb al-rasul), as it does for apostasy (riddah). Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) of Sunni and Shia madhabs have declared different punishments for the religious crime of blasphemy, and they vary between schools. These are as follows:[29][30][31]
Hanafi – views blasphemy as synonymous with apostasy, and therefore, accepts the repentance of apostates. Those who refuse to repent, their punishment is death if the blasphemer is a Muslim man, and if the blasphemer is a woman, she must be imprisoned with coercion (beating) till she repents and returns to Islam.[32] If a non-Muslim commits blasphemy, his punishment must be a tazir (discretionary, can be death, arrest, caning, etc.).[33][34]Maliki – view blasphemy as an offense distinct from, and more severe than apostasy. Death is mandatory in cases of blasphemy for Muslim men, and repentance is not accepted. For women, death is not the punishment suggested, but she is arrested and punished till she repents and returns to Islam or dies in custody.[35][36] A non-Muslim who commits blasphemy against Islam must be punished; however, the blasphemer can escape punishment by converting and becoming a devout Muslim.[37]Hanbali – view blasphemy as an offense distinct from, and more severe than apostasy. Death is mandatory in cases of blasphemy, for both Muslim men and women, and repentance is not accepted.[38][39]Shafi’i – recognizes blasphemy as a separate offense from apostasy, but accepts the repentance of blasphemers. If the blasphemer does not repent, the punishment is death.[23][40]Ja'fari (Shia) – views blasphemy against Islam, the Prophet, or any of the Imams, to be punishable with death, if the blasphemer is a Muslim.[41] In case the blasphemer is a non-Muslim, he is given a chance to convert to Islam, or else killed.[42]
Some jurists suggest that the sunnah in hadith[43] provide a basis for a death sentence for the crime of blasphemy, even if someone claims not to be an apostate, but has committed the crime of blasphemy. Some[44][45] modern Muslim scholars contest that Islam supports blasphemy law, stating that Muslim jurists made the offense part of Sharia.
The Islamic law considers blasphemy against Muhammad a more severe offense than blasphemy against God. Repentance can lead to forgiveness by God when God is blasphemed, however since Muhammad is no longer alive, forgiveness is not possible when Muhammad is blasphemed, and the Muslim community must punish his blasphemy by avenging blasphemer's death.[29][46][47]
In Islamic jurisprudence, Kitab al Hudud and Taz'ir cover punishment for blasphemous acts.[48][49] The penalties for blasphemy can include fines, imprisonment, flogging, amputation, hanging, or beheading.[50] Many nations prescribe and carry out the death penalty for apostasy, a similarly motivated action, and Pakistan and Egypt demand execution for some blasphemers. Muslim clerics may call for revenge against an alleged blasphemer by issuing a fatwa (legal ruling), or simply provide guidelines on behaviors and lifestyle that is blasphemous. For example, in Malaysia, Islamic scholars issued a fatwa declaring yoga as blasphemous, because yoga is a form of spiritual practice in Hinduism.[51][52][53]
Notable cases and debate on blasphemy[edit]
One famous case of the Islamic blasphemy law was the fatwa against English author Salman Rushdie for his book entitled The Satanic Verses, the title of which refers to an account that Muhammad, in the course of revealing the Quran, received a revelation from Satan and incorporated it therein until made by Allah to retract it (see Satanic verses). Several translators of his book into foreign languages have been murdered.[54]
As of 2011, all Islamic majority nations, worldwide, had criminal laws on blasphemy. Over 125 non-Muslim nations worldwide did not have any laws relating to blasphemy.[55][56] In Islamic nations, thousands of individuals have been arrested and punished for blasphemy of Islam.[57][58] Several Islamic nations have argued in the United Nations that blasphemy against Muhammad is unacceptable, and laws should be passed worldwide to place "limits on the freedom of expression." Non-Muslim nations that do not have blasphemy laws, have pointed to abuses of blasphemy laws in Islamic nations, and have disagreed.[59][60][61]
Judaism[edit]
See also: List of capital crimes in the Torah
Leviticus 24:16 states that he that blasphemes the name of the LORD "shall surely be put to death".
The Seven laws of Noah, which Judaism sees as applicable to all people, prohibit blasphemy. In Jewish law the only form of blasphemy which is punishable by death is blaspheming the Ineffable Name.[62]
Blasphemy laws[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law
In some countries with a state religion blasphemy is outlawed under the criminal code. Such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.[63][64]
As of 2012, 33 countries had some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code.[6] Of these, 21 were Muslim-majority nations – Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Turkey, UAE and Western Sahara. The other twelve nations with anti-blasphemy laws in 2012 were Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Nigeria, Poland and Singapore.[6] Blasphemy was treated as a capital crime (death penalty) in many Muslim nations.[5]
Other countries have removed the ban of blasphemy, this is the case of France which did it to allow the freedom of religion and the freedom of press. Where blasphemy is banned, it can be either some laws which directly punish religious blasphemy,[65] or some laws that allow those who are offended by blasphemy to punish blasphemers. Those laws may condone penalties or retaliation for blasphemy under the labels of blasphemous libel,[66] expression of opposition, or "vilification," of religion or of some religious practices,[67][68] religious insult,[69] or hate speech.[70]
The United Nations[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy and the United Nations
In the early 21st century, blasphemy became an issue in the United Nations. The United Nations passed several resolutions which called upon the world to take action against the "defamation of religions".[71]
The campaign for worldwide criminal penalties for the "defamation of religions" had been spearheaded by Organisation of Islamic Cooperation on behalf of the United Nations' large Muslim bloc. The campaign ended in 2011 when the proposal was withdrawn in Geneva, in the Human Rights Council because of lack of support, marking an end to the effort to impose worldwide blasphemy strictures along the lines of those in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. This resolution had passed every year since 1999, in the United Nations, with declining number of "yes" votes with each successive year.[72]
Colloquial usage[edit]
In contemporary language, the notion of blasphemy is often used hyperbolically. This usage has garnered some interest among linguists recently, and the word 'blasphemy' is a common case used for illustrative purposes.[73]
See also[edit]
Alexamenos graffito
Apostasy
Blasphemy Day is a holiday in which individuals and groups are encouraged to openly express their criticism of, or even disdain for, religion.
Eternal sin
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Heresy
Impiety
Minced oath
Profanity
Gerard Reve
Sacrilege
Victimless crime
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Avery, Kenneth (2004). Psychology of Early Sufi Sama: Listening and Altered States. Routledge. p. 3. ISBN 978-0415311069.
2.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy". Random House Dictionary. Retrieved 12 January 2015. "Quote: impious utterance or action concerning God or sacred things.; the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God."
3.Jump up ^ Blasphemy Merriam Webster (July 2013); 1. great disrespect shown to God or to something holy
2. irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable
4.Jump up ^ Blasphemies, in Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Ed,
1. profane or contemptuous speech, writing, or action concerning God or anything held as divine.
2. any remark or action held to be irreverent or disrespectful
5.^ Jump up to: a b Blasphemy Divide: Insults to Religion Remain a Capital Crime in Muslim Lands The Wall Street Journal (January 8, 2015)
6.^ Jump up to: a b c d Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread Pew Research (November 21, 2012)
7.Jump up ^ "Online Etymology Dictionary – Blasphemy". Etymonline.com. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
8.Jump up ^ (from Easton's Bible Dictionary) Romans.2:24 – Revelation.13:1;Rev.13:6;Rev.16:9;Rev.16:11;Rev.16:21 – 1Kings.21:10;Acts.13:45;Acts.18:6
9.Jump up ^ ST II-II q10a3, q11a3, q12. Q11A3: "With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
10.Jump up ^ Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica 2:2, q. 13.
11.Jump up ^ The Book of Concord The Large Catechism, §55.
12.Jump up ^ The Baptist Confession of Faith Ch. 23, §2–3.
13.Jump up ^ The Heidelberg Catechism Q. 100.
14.Jump up ^ Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 113.
15.Jump up ^ Jean Calvin: Harmony of the Law vol. 4. Lev. 24:10.
16.Jump up ^ Act of Reparation for Blasphemies Uttered Against the Holy Name, Righting Wrongs Through Prayer By Scott P. Richert, About.com
17.Jump up ^ * Dorothy Scallan. The Holy Man of Tours. (1990) ISBN 0-89555-390-2
18.Jump up ^ Joseph P. Christopher et al., 2003 The Raccolta, St Athanasius Press ISBN 978-0-9706526-6-9
19.Jump up ^ Letter for 50th anniversary of the Benedictine Sisters of Reparation of the Holy Face, 2000 Vatican archives
20.Jump up ^ "Thomas Aikenhead". 5.uua.org. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
21.Jump up ^ See: Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick Ph.D., Adam Hani Walker), ISBN 978-1610691772, pp. 59-67;
Hassner, R. E. (2011). Blasphemy and Violence. International Studies Quarterly, 55(1), pages 23-4;
Lewis, Bernard. "Behind the Rushdie affair." The American Scholar 60.2 (1991), pages 185-196;
Stanfield-Johnson, R. (2004). The tabarra'iyan and the early Safavids. Iranian Studies, 37(1), pages 47-71
22.Jump up ^ Talal Asad, in Hent de Vries (Ed.), Religion: Beyond a Concept, Fordham University Press (2008), ISBN 978-0823227242; pages 589-592
23.^ Jump up to: a b L Wiederhold L, Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah) : The introduction of the topic into Shafi'i legal literature, Jrnl of Sem Studies, Oxford University Press, 42(1), pp. 39-70
24.^ Jump up to: a b Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick Ph.D., Adam Hani Walker), ISBN 978-1610691772, pp. 59-67
25.Jump up ^ Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, The Types of Blasphemy (2010)
26.Jump up ^ Lawton, D. (1993). Blasphemy. Univ of Pennsylvania Press
27.Jump up ^ CW Ernst, in Eliade (Ed), Blasphemy - Islamic Concept, The encyclopedia of religion, New York (1987)
28.Jump up ^ Marshall and Shea (2011), Silenced, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199812288
29.^ Jump up to: a b Saeed, Abdullah; Hassan Saeed (2004). Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam. Burlington VT: Ashgate Publishing Company. pp. 37–39. ISBN 978-0-7546-3083-8.
30.Jump up ^ Wiederhold, Lutz. "Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah): The introduction of the topic into shafi'i legal literature and its relevance for legal practice under Mamluk rule."Journal of semitic studies 42.1 (1997): 39-70.
31.Jump up ^ Saeed, Abdullah. "AMBIGUITIES OF APOSTASY AND THE REPRESSION OF MUSLIM DISSENT." The Review of Faith & International Affairs 9.2 (2011): 31-38.
32.Jump up ^ Abu al-Layth al-Samarqandi (983), Mukhtalaf al-Riwayah, vol. 3, pp. 1298–1299
Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (933), Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama, vol. 3, p. 504
Ali ibn Hassan al-Sughdi (798); Kitab al-Kharaj; Quote: “أيما رجل مسلم سب رَسُوْل اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أو كذبه أو عابه أوتنقصه فقد كفر بالله وبانت منه زوجته ، فإن تاب وإلا قتل ، وكذلك المرأة ، إلا أن أبا حنيفة قَالَ: لا تقتل المرأة وتجبر عَلَى الإسلام”; Translation: “A Muslim man who blasphemes the Messenger of Allah, denies him, reproaches him, or diminishes him, he has committed apostasy in Allah, and his wife is separated from him. He must repent, or else is killed. And this is the same for the woman, except Abu Hanifa said: Do not kill the woman, but coerce her back to Islam.”
33.Jump up ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (933), Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama, vol. 3, p. 504
34.Jump up ^ P Smith (2003), Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law, UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy, 10, pp. 357-373; N Swazo (2014), The Case Of Hamza Kashgari: Examining Apostasy, Heresy, And Blasphemy Under Sharia, The Review of Faith & International Affairs, 12(4), pp. 16-26
35.Jump up ^ Qadi 'Iyad ibn Musa al-Yahsubi (1145), Kitab Ash-shifa (كتاب الشفاء بتعريف حقوق المصطفى), pp. 373-441 (Translated in English by AA Bewley, OCLC 851141256, (Review Contents in Part 4, Read Excerpts from Part 4, Accessed on: January 10, 2015)
36.Jump up ^ D Jordan (2003), Dark Ages of Islam: Ijtihad, Apostasy, and Human Rights in Contemporary Islamic Jurisprudence, The. Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. Law Journal, Vol. 9, pp. 55-74
37.Jump up ^ Carl Ernst (2005), "Blasphemy: Islamic Concept", Encyclopedia of Religion (Editor: Lindsay Jones), Vol 2, Macmillan Reference, ISBN 0-02-865735-7
38.Jump up ^ Abdullah Saeed and Hassan Saeed (2004), Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam, Ashgate Publishing, ISBN 978-0754630838
39.Jump up ^ Ibn Taymiyyah (a Salafi, related to Hanbali school), al-Sārim al-Maslūl ‘ala Shātim al-Rasūl (Translation: A ready sword against those who insult the Messenger), Published in 1297 AD in Arabic, Reprinted in 1975 and 2003 by Dar-ibn Hazm (Beirut)
40.Jump up ^ P Smith (2003), Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law, UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy, 10, pp. 357-373; F Griffel (2001), Toleration and exclusion: al-Shafi ‘i and al-Ghazali on the treatment of apostates, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 64(3), pp. 339-354
41.Jump up ^ Ayatullah Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei (1992), Minhaj al-Salihin, vol. 2, pp. 43-45; Ali ibn Ahmad al-Amili al-Thani (1602), Sharh al-Luma al-Dimashqiya, vol. 9, pp. 194-195;
Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Tusi (1067), Al-Nihaya, pp. 730-731 and Tadhib al-Ahkam, vol. 10, p. 85;
Ali ibn al-Hussein “Sharif al-Murtada” (1044). Al-Intisar, pp. 480–481;
Ali ibn Babawaih al-Qummi al-Saduq (991), Al-Hidaya fi al-Usul wa al-Furu, pp. 295–297
42.Jump up ^ Ali ibn al-Hussein al-Murtada (1044), Al-Intisar, pp. 480-481
43.Jump up ^ Sahih al-Bukhari, 3:45:687, Sahih al-Bukhari, 5:59:369
44.Jump up ^ Declan O'Sullivan (2001), The Interpretation of Qur'anic Text to Promote or Negate the Death Penalty for Apostates and Blasphemers, Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 3(2), pp. 63-93
45.Jump up ^ Islamic scholar attacks Pakistan's blasphemy laws Guardian 20 January 2010. Retrieved 23 January 2010
46.Jump up ^ Jordan, David A. "Dark Ages of Islam: Ijtihad, Apostasy, and Human Rights in Contemporary Islamic Jurisprudence, The." Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. LJ 9 (2003): 55.
47.Jump up ^ Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Freedom of expression in Islam. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1997.
48.Jump up ^ Peters, R. (2005). Crime and punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
49.Jump up ^ Schirrmacher, C. (2008). "Defection from Islam: A Disturbing Human Rights Dilemma" (PDF). islaminstitut.de.
50.Jump up ^ "Islamic Voice". Islamic Voice. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
51.Jump up ^ "Malaysia: Muslims warned to avoid blasphemous yoga - DIE WELT". DIE WELT. 22 November 2008.
52.Jump up ^ Holike, C. (2011), in Andrea Fleschenberg, Claudia Derich (Eds), THE STATE OF ISLAM–NEGOTIATING DEMOCRACY, MUSLIM WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND MORALITY IN INDONESIA AND MALAYSIA, Women and Politics in Asia: A Springboard for Democracy?, LIT Verlag (Zurich), 15, page 71-80
53.Jump up ^ New York Times, Seeking to clear a path between yoga and islam (April 8 2012)
54.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy Salman Rushdie". Constitutional Rights Foundation. 2009. Retrieved 10 July 2009.
55.Jump up ^ "Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread". Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. 21 November 2012.
56.Jump up ^ Rehman, Javaid. "THE SHARI ‘AH, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND THE RIGHT TO HOLD OPINIONS AND FREE EXPRESSION: AFTER BILOUR’S FATWA." Islam and International Law: Engaging Self-Centrism from a Plurality of Perspectives (2013): 244.
57.Jump up ^ Forte, David F. "Apostasy and Blasphemy in Pakistan." Conn. J. Int'l L. 10 (1994): 27.
58.Jump up ^ Silence. How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide. By Paul Marshall and Nina Shea. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
59.Jump up ^ Michael Totten, Radical Islam's global reaction: the push for blasphemy laws (January/February 2013)
60.Jump up ^ "Islamic states to reopen quest for global blasphemy law". Reuters.
61.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy Laws Exposed - The Consequences of Criminalizing Defamation of Religions" (PDF). humanrightsfirst.org. 2012.
62.Jump up ^ "BLASPHEMY - JewishEncyclopedia.com". jewishencyclopedia.com.
63.Jump up ^ Bad-mouthing: Pakistan’s blasphemy laws legitimise intolerance The Economist (November 29, 2014)
64.Jump up ^ Sources of claims: World of Intolerance Religious Watch. Retrieved 5 October 2011
United Nations will violate Human Rights International Humanist and Ethical Union. Retrieved 5 October 2011
"Muslim scholar says Scrap blasphemy laws". Herald Malaysia Online. 11 August 2009. Retrieved 5 October 2011.
Annual Report of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009 (Pakistan, etc.). Retrieved 5 October 2011
A call upon states to work toward abolishing the juvenile death penalty U.N. January 1999. Retrieved 5 October 2011
Indonesia – Amnesty International Report 2009 Amnesty International. Retrieved 5 October 2011
65.Jump up ^ See Blasphemy law
66.Jump up ^ Kerr, ine (9 July 2009). "Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail". The Irish Independent. Retrieved 17 November 2009.
67.Jump up ^ "ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1991 – SECT 124A 124A Vilification on grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity unlawful". Austlii.edu.au. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
68.Jump up ^ "Victoria Police – Racial and religious vilification". Police.vic.gov.au. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
69.Jump up ^ "European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), ''Report on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult and incitement to religious hatred'', 17–18 October 2008, Doc. No. CDL-AD(2008)026". Merlin.obs.coe.int. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
70.Jump up ^ See Blasphemy law and Hate speech.
71.Jump up ^ U.N. Resolutions: A/RES/60/150
Vote on 16 December 2005 (A/60/PV.64)
72.Jump up ^ An Anti-Blasphemy Measure Laid to Rest Nina Shea, National Review (MARCH 31, 2011)
73.Jump up ^ Recanati, F. (1995) The alleged priority of literal interpretation. Cognitive Science 19: 207–32. Carston, R. (1997) Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed? Linguistische Berichte 8: 103–127.Carston, R. (2000). Explicature and semantics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 1–44. Revised version to appear in Davis & Gillon (forthcoming).Sperber, D. & D. Wilson (1998) The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In Carruthers & Boucher (1998: 184–200).Glucksberg, S. (2001) Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Wilson, D. & D. Sperber (2002) Truthfulness and relevance. Mind 111: 583–632.
Further reading[edit]
Maledicta: The International Journal of Verbal Aggression (ISSN US 0363-3659)
Levy, L. Blasphemy. Chapel Hill, 1993.
Comprehensive academic study comparing global legal approaches to blasphemy in light of the Jyllands-Posten controversy
Dartevelle, P., S Borg, Denis, Ph., Robyn, J. (eds.). Blasphèmes et libertés. Paris: CERF, 1993
Plate, S. Brent Blasphemy: Art that Offends (London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006) [ISBN 1904772536]
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Blasphemy.
The Rational Response Squad: The Blasphemy Challenge
A More4 news film report on how insulting the prophet Mohammed in Pakistan is a capital offence, and defiling the Koran carries life imprisonment.
review of laws relating to blasphemy and sacrilege in various jurisdictions
Wikisource-logo.svg John Webster Melody (1913). "Blasphemy". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
Jewish Encyclopedia – Blasphemy
Wikisource-logo.svg "Blasphemy". Encyclopedia Americana. 1920.
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Blasphemy law by country
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Ten Commandments
Categories: Blasphemy
Religious terminology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
বাংলা
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Føroyskt
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
Ligure
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
اردو
Vèneto
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 12 June 2015, at 21:31.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy
Blasphemy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation , search
For other uses, see Blasphemy (disambiguation).
Sufi teacher Mansur Al-Hallaj was executed in Baghdad for blasphemy in 10th century CE.[1]
Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.[2][3][4]
Some religions consider blasphemy as a religious crime.[5] As of 2012, anti-blasphemy laws existed in 32 countries, while 87 nations had hate speech laws that covered defamation of religion and public expression of hate against a religious group.[6] Anti-blasphemy laws are particularly common in Muslim-majority nations, such as those in the Middle East and North Africa.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Christianity 2.1 Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy
2.2 Punishment
3 Islam 3.1 Blasphemy in different Islamic schools of jurisprudence
3.2 Notable cases and debate on blasphemy
4 Judaism
5 Blasphemy laws
6 The United Nations
7 Colloquial usage
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Etymology[edit]
The word "blasphemy" came via Middle English blasfemen and Old French blasfemer and Late Latin blasphemare from Greek βλασφημέω, from βλάπτω "injure" and φήμη "utterance, talk, speech". From blasphemare also came Old French blasmer, from which English "blame" came. Blasphemy: 'from Gk. blasphemia "a speaking ill, impious speech, slander," from blasphemein "to speak evil of."'[7] "In the sense of speaking evil of God this word is found in Ps. 74:18; Isa. 52:5; Rom. 2:24; Rev. 13:1, 6; 16:9, 11, 21. It denotes also any kind of calumny, or evil-speaking, or abuse (1 Kings 21:10 LXX; Acts 13:45; 18:6, etc.)."[8]
Christianity[edit]
Christian theology condemns blasphemy. It is spoken of in Mark 3:29, where blaspheming the Holy Spirit is spoken of as unforgivable—the eternal sin. However, there is dispute over what form this blasphemy may take and whether it qualifies as blasphemy in the conventional sense; and over the meaning of "unforgivable". In 2 Kings 18, the Rabshakeh gave the word from the king of Assyria, dissuading trust in the Lord, asserting that God is no more able to deliver than all the gods of the land.
In Matthew 9:2-3, Jesus told a paralytic "your sins are forgiven" and was accused of blasphemy.
Blasphemy has been condemned as a serious, or even the most serious, sin by the major creeds and Church theologians (apostasy and infidelity [unbelief] were generally considered to be the gravest sins, with heresy a greater sin than blasphemy, cf. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae).[9]
Thomas Aquinas says that “[if] we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbor, than blasphemy does to God.”[10]
The Book of Concord calls blasphemy “the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed”.[11]
The Baptist Confession of Faith says: “Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God…is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. …For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns.”[12]
The Heidelberg Catechism answers question 100 about blasphemy by stating that “no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of His Name”.[13]
The Westminster Larger Catechism explains that “The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane...mentioning...by blasphemy...to profane jests, ...vain janglings, ...to charms or sinful lusts and practices.”[14]
Calvin found it intolerable “when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ebullition of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked.”[15]
Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy[edit]
In the Catholic Church, there are specific prayers and devotions as Acts of Reparation for blasphemy.[16] For instance, The Golden Arrow Holy Face Devotion (Prayer) first introduced by Sister Marie of St Peter in 1844 is recited "in a spirit of reparation for blasphemy". This devotion (started by Sister Marie and then promoted by the Venerable Leo Dupont) was approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885.[17] The Raccolta Catholic prayer book includes a number of such prayers.[18] The Five First Saturdays devotions are done with the intention in the heart of making reparation to the Blessed Mother for blasphemies against her, her name and her holy initiatives.
The Holy See has specific "Pontifical organizations" for the purpose of the reparation of blasphemy through Acts of Reparation to Jesus Christ, e.g. the Pontifical Congregation of the Benedictine Sisters of the Reparation of the Holy Face.[19]
Punishment[edit]
The most common way to punish the ones who committed blasphemy was through hanging or stoning, due to what is said in Leviticus 24:13-16. Then the LORD said to Moses: "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. Say to the Israelites: 'If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him."
Writer Salman Rushdie was accused of blasphemy and subject of a fatwā issued by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Supreme Leader of Iran, in February 1989.
The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was Thomas Aikenhead aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.[20]
Islam[edit]
Main article: Islam and blasphemy
In Islamic literature, blasphemy is of many types, and there are many different words for it: sabb (insult) and shatm (abuse, vilification), takdhib or tajdif (denial), iftira (concoction), la`n or la'ana (curse) and ta`n (accuse, defame).[21] In Islamic literature, the term blasphemy sometimes also overlaps with infidel (kufr, disbeliever), fisq (depravity), isa'ah (insult), and ridda (apostasy).[22][23] There are a number of surah in Qur'an and sunnah in hadith relating to blasphemy, from which Quranic verses 5:33-34 and 33:57-61 have been most commonly used in Islamic history to justify and punish blasphemers.[24] For example,[24]
The only punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is that they should be murdered, or crucified, or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides, or they should be imprisoned. This shall he a disgrace for them in this world, and in the Hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement. Except those who repent before you overpower them; so know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
—Qur'an, [Quran 5:33–34]
Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment. Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City, desist not, We shall certainly stir thee up against them: Then will they not be able to stay in it as thy neighbours for any length of time: They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy).
—Qur'an, [Quran 33:57–61]
A variety of actions, speeches or behavior can constitute blasphemy in Islam. Some examples include insulting or cursing Allah, or Muhammad; mockery or disagreeable behavior towards beliefs and customs common in Islam; criticism of Islam's holy personages. Apostasy, that is act of abandoning Islam, or finding faults or expressing doubts about Allah (ta'til) and Qur'an, rejection of Muhammed or any of his teachings, or leaving the Muslim community to become an atheist is a form of blasphemy. Questioning religious opinions (fatwa) and normative Islamic views can also be construed as blasphemous. Improper dress, drawing offensive cartoons, tearing or burning holy literature of Islam, creating or using music or painting or video or novels to mock or criticize Muhammad are some examples of blasphemous acts.[25][26][27][28] In the context of those who are non-Muslims, the concept of blasphemy includes all aspects of infidelity (kufr).
Blasphemy in different Islamic schools of jurisprudence[edit]
The Quran does not explicitly mention any worldly punishment for blasphemy (sabb allah or sabb al-rasul), as it does for apostasy (riddah). Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) of Sunni and Shia madhabs have declared different punishments for the religious crime of blasphemy, and they vary between schools. These are as follows:[29][30][31]
Hanafi – views blasphemy as synonymous with apostasy, and therefore, accepts the repentance of apostates. Those who refuse to repent, their punishment is death if the blasphemer is a Muslim man, and if the blasphemer is a woman, she must be imprisoned with coercion (beating) till she repents and returns to Islam.[32] If a non-Muslim commits blasphemy, his punishment must be a tazir (discretionary, can be death, arrest, caning, etc.).[33][34]Maliki – view blasphemy as an offense distinct from, and more severe than apostasy. Death is mandatory in cases of blasphemy for Muslim men, and repentance is not accepted. For women, death is not the punishment suggested, but she is arrested and punished till she repents and returns to Islam or dies in custody.[35][36] A non-Muslim who commits blasphemy against Islam must be punished; however, the blasphemer can escape punishment by converting and becoming a devout Muslim.[37]Hanbali – view blasphemy as an offense distinct from, and more severe than apostasy. Death is mandatory in cases of blasphemy, for both Muslim men and women, and repentance is not accepted.[38][39]Shafi’i – recognizes blasphemy as a separate offense from apostasy, but accepts the repentance of blasphemers. If the blasphemer does not repent, the punishment is death.[23][40]Ja'fari (Shia) – views blasphemy against Islam, the Prophet, or any of the Imams, to be punishable with death, if the blasphemer is a Muslim.[41] In case the blasphemer is a non-Muslim, he is given a chance to convert to Islam, or else killed.[42]
Some jurists suggest that the sunnah in hadith[43] provide a basis for a death sentence for the crime of blasphemy, even if someone claims not to be an apostate, but has committed the crime of blasphemy. Some[44][45] modern Muslim scholars contest that Islam supports blasphemy law, stating that Muslim jurists made the offense part of Sharia.
The Islamic law considers blasphemy against Muhammad a more severe offense than blasphemy against God. Repentance can lead to forgiveness by God when God is blasphemed, however since Muhammad is no longer alive, forgiveness is not possible when Muhammad is blasphemed, and the Muslim community must punish his blasphemy by avenging blasphemer's death.[29][46][47]
In Islamic jurisprudence, Kitab al Hudud and Taz'ir cover punishment for blasphemous acts.[48][49] The penalties for blasphemy can include fines, imprisonment, flogging, amputation, hanging, or beheading.[50] Many nations prescribe and carry out the death penalty for apostasy, a similarly motivated action, and Pakistan and Egypt demand execution for some blasphemers. Muslim clerics may call for revenge against an alleged blasphemer by issuing a fatwa (legal ruling), or simply provide guidelines on behaviors and lifestyle that is blasphemous. For example, in Malaysia, Islamic scholars issued a fatwa declaring yoga as blasphemous, because yoga is a form of spiritual practice in Hinduism.[51][52][53]
Notable cases and debate on blasphemy[edit]
One famous case of the Islamic blasphemy law was the fatwa against English author Salman Rushdie for his book entitled The Satanic Verses, the title of which refers to an account that Muhammad, in the course of revealing the Quran, received a revelation from Satan and incorporated it therein until made by Allah to retract it (see Satanic verses). Several translators of his book into foreign languages have been murdered.[54]
As of 2011, all Islamic majority nations, worldwide, had criminal laws on blasphemy. Over 125 non-Muslim nations worldwide did not have any laws relating to blasphemy.[55][56] In Islamic nations, thousands of individuals have been arrested and punished for blasphemy of Islam.[57][58] Several Islamic nations have argued in the United Nations that blasphemy against Muhammad is unacceptable, and laws should be passed worldwide to place "limits on the freedom of expression." Non-Muslim nations that do not have blasphemy laws, have pointed to abuses of blasphemy laws in Islamic nations, and have disagreed.[59][60][61]
Judaism[edit]
See also: List of capital crimes in the Torah
Leviticus 24:16 states that he that blasphemes the name of the LORD "shall surely be put to death".
The Seven laws of Noah, which Judaism sees as applicable to all people, prohibit blasphemy. In Jewish law the only form of blasphemy which is punishable by death is blaspheming the Ineffable Name.[62]
Blasphemy laws[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law
In some countries with a state religion blasphemy is outlawed under the criminal code. Such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.[63][64]
As of 2012, 33 countries had some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code.[6] Of these, 21 were Muslim-majority nations – Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Turkey, UAE and Western Sahara. The other twelve nations with anti-blasphemy laws in 2012 were Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Nigeria, Poland and Singapore.[6] Blasphemy was treated as a capital crime (death penalty) in many Muslim nations.[5]
Other countries have removed the ban of blasphemy, this is the case of France which did it to allow the freedom of religion and the freedom of press. Where blasphemy is banned, it can be either some laws which directly punish religious blasphemy,[65] or some laws that allow those who are offended by blasphemy to punish blasphemers. Those laws may condone penalties or retaliation for blasphemy under the labels of blasphemous libel,[66] expression of opposition, or "vilification," of religion or of some religious practices,[67][68] religious insult,[69] or hate speech.[70]
The United Nations[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy and the United Nations
In the early 21st century, blasphemy became an issue in the United Nations. The United Nations passed several resolutions which called upon the world to take action against the "defamation of religions".[71]
The campaign for worldwide criminal penalties for the "defamation of religions" had been spearheaded by Organisation of Islamic Cooperation on behalf of the United Nations' large Muslim bloc. The campaign ended in 2011 when the proposal was withdrawn in Geneva, in the Human Rights Council because of lack of support, marking an end to the effort to impose worldwide blasphemy strictures along the lines of those in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. This resolution had passed every year since 1999, in the United Nations, with declining number of "yes" votes with each successive year.[72]
Colloquial usage[edit]
In contemporary language, the notion of blasphemy is often used hyperbolically. This usage has garnered some interest among linguists recently, and the word 'blasphemy' is a common case used for illustrative purposes.[73]
See also[edit]
Alexamenos graffito
Apostasy
Blasphemy Day is a holiday in which individuals and groups are encouraged to openly express their criticism of, or even disdain for, religion.
Eternal sin
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Heresy
Impiety
Minced oath
Profanity
Gerard Reve
Sacrilege
Victimless crime
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Avery, Kenneth (2004). Psychology of Early Sufi Sama: Listening and Altered States. Routledge. p. 3. ISBN 978-0415311069.
2.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy". Random House Dictionary. Retrieved 12 January 2015. "Quote: impious utterance or action concerning God or sacred things.; the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God."
3.Jump up ^ Blasphemy Merriam Webster (July 2013); 1. great disrespect shown to God or to something holy
2. irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable
4.Jump up ^ Blasphemies, in Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Ed,
1. profane or contemptuous speech, writing, or action concerning God or anything held as divine.
2. any remark or action held to be irreverent or disrespectful
5.^ Jump up to: a b Blasphemy Divide: Insults to Religion Remain a Capital Crime in Muslim Lands The Wall Street Journal (January 8, 2015)
6.^ Jump up to: a b c d Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread Pew Research (November 21, 2012)
7.Jump up ^ "Online Etymology Dictionary – Blasphemy". Etymonline.com. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
8.Jump up ^ (from Easton's Bible Dictionary) Romans.2:24 – Revelation.13:1;Rev.13:6;Rev.16:9;Rev.16:11;Rev.16:21 – 1Kings.21:10;Acts.13:45;Acts.18:6
9.Jump up ^ ST II-II q10a3, q11a3, q12. Q11A3: "With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
10.Jump up ^ Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica 2:2, q. 13.
11.Jump up ^ The Book of Concord The Large Catechism, §55.
12.Jump up ^ The Baptist Confession of Faith Ch. 23, §2–3.
13.Jump up ^ The Heidelberg Catechism Q. 100.
14.Jump up ^ Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 113.
15.Jump up ^ Jean Calvin: Harmony of the Law vol. 4. Lev. 24:10.
16.Jump up ^ Act of Reparation for Blasphemies Uttered Against the Holy Name, Righting Wrongs Through Prayer By Scott P. Richert, About.com
17.Jump up ^ * Dorothy Scallan. The Holy Man of Tours. (1990) ISBN 0-89555-390-2
18.Jump up ^ Joseph P. Christopher et al., 2003 The Raccolta, St Athanasius Press ISBN 978-0-9706526-6-9
19.Jump up ^ Letter for 50th anniversary of the Benedictine Sisters of Reparation of the Holy Face, 2000 Vatican archives
20.Jump up ^ "Thomas Aikenhead". 5.uua.org. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
21.Jump up ^ See: Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick Ph.D., Adam Hani Walker), ISBN 978-1610691772, pp. 59-67;
Hassner, R. E. (2011). Blasphemy and Violence. International Studies Quarterly, 55(1), pages 23-4;
Lewis, Bernard. "Behind the Rushdie affair." The American Scholar 60.2 (1991), pages 185-196;
Stanfield-Johnson, R. (2004). The tabarra'iyan and the early Safavids. Iranian Studies, 37(1), pages 47-71
22.Jump up ^ Talal Asad, in Hent de Vries (Ed.), Religion: Beyond a Concept, Fordham University Press (2008), ISBN 978-0823227242; pages 589-592
23.^ Jump up to: a b L Wiederhold L, Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah) : The introduction of the topic into Shafi'i legal literature, Jrnl of Sem Studies, Oxford University Press, 42(1), pp. 39-70
24.^ Jump up to: a b Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick Ph.D., Adam Hani Walker), ISBN 978-1610691772, pp. 59-67
25.Jump up ^ Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, The Types of Blasphemy (2010)
26.Jump up ^ Lawton, D. (1993). Blasphemy. Univ of Pennsylvania Press
27.Jump up ^ CW Ernst, in Eliade (Ed), Blasphemy - Islamic Concept, The encyclopedia of religion, New York (1987)
28.Jump up ^ Marshall and Shea (2011), Silenced, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199812288
29.^ Jump up to: a b Saeed, Abdullah; Hassan Saeed (2004). Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam. Burlington VT: Ashgate Publishing Company. pp. 37–39. ISBN 978-0-7546-3083-8.
30.Jump up ^ Wiederhold, Lutz. "Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah): The introduction of the topic into shafi'i legal literature and its relevance for legal practice under Mamluk rule."Journal of semitic studies 42.1 (1997): 39-70.
31.Jump up ^ Saeed, Abdullah. "AMBIGUITIES OF APOSTASY AND THE REPRESSION OF MUSLIM DISSENT." The Review of Faith & International Affairs 9.2 (2011): 31-38.
32.Jump up ^ Abu al-Layth al-Samarqandi (983), Mukhtalaf al-Riwayah, vol. 3, pp. 1298–1299
Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (933), Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama, vol. 3, p. 504
Ali ibn Hassan al-Sughdi (798); Kitab al-Kharaj; Quote: “أيما رجل مسلم سب رَسُوْل اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أو كذبه أو عابه أوتنقصه فقد كفر بالله وبانت منه زوجته ، فإن تاب وإلا قتل ، وكذلك المرأة ، إلا أن أبا حنيفة قَالَ: لا تقتل المرأة وتجبر عَلَى الإسلام”; Translation: “A Muslim man who blasphemes the Messenger of Allah, denies him, reproaches him, or diminishes him, he has committed apostasy in Allah, and his wife is separated from him. He must repent, or else is killed. And this is the same for the woman, except Abu Hanifa said: Do not kill the woman, but coerce her back to Islam.”
33.Jump up ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (933), Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama, vol. 3, p. 504
34.Jump up ^ P Smith (2003), Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law, UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy, 10, pp. 357-373; N Swazo (2014), The Case Of Hamza Kashgari: Examining Apostasy, Heresy, And Blasphemy Under Sharia, The Review of Faith & International Affairs, 12(4), pp. 16-26
35.Jump up ^ Qadi 'Iyad ibn Musa al-Yahsubi (1145), Kitab Ash-shifa (كتاب الشفاء بتعريف حقوق المصطفى), pp. 373-441 (Translated in English by AA Bewley, OCLC 851141256, (Review Contents in Part 4, Read Excerpts from Part 4, Accessed on: January 10, 2015)
36.Jump up ^ D Jordan (2003), Dark Ages of Islam: Ijtihad, Apostasy, and Human Rights in Contemporary Islamic Jurisprudence, The. Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. Law Journal, Vol. 9, pp. 55-74
37.Jump up ^ Carl Ernst (2005), "Blasphemy: Islamic Concept", Encyclopedia of Religion (Editor: Lindsay Jones), Vol 2, Macmillan Reference, ISBN 0-02-865735-7
38.Jump up ^ Abdullah Saeed and Hassan Saeed (2004), Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam, Ashgate Publishing, ISBN 978-0754630838
39.Jump up ^ Ibn Taymiyyah (a Salafi, related to Hanbali school), al-Sārim al-Maslūl ‘ala Shātim al-Rasūl (Translation: A ready sword against those who insult the Messenger), Published in 1297 AD in Arabic, Reprinted in 1975 and 2003 by Dar-ibn Hazm (Beirut)
40.Jump up ^ P Smith (2003), Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law, UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy, 10, pp. 357-373; F Griffel (2001), Toleration and exclusion: al-Shafi ‘i and al-Ghazali on the treatment of apostates, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 64(3), pp. 339-354
41.Jump up ^ Ayatullah Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei (1992), Minhaj al-Salihin, vol. 2, pp. 43-45; Ali ibn Ahmad al-Amili al-Thani (1602), Sharh al-Luma al-Dimashqiya, vol. 9, pp. 194-195;
Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Tusi (1067), Al-Nihaya, pp. 730-731 and Tadhib al-Ahkam, vol. 10, p. 85;
Ali ibn al-Hussein “Sharif al-Murtada” (1044). Al-Intisar, pp. 480–481;
Ali ibn Babawaih al-Qummi al-Saduq (991), Al-Hidaya fi al-Usul wa al-Furu, pp. 295–297
42.Jump up ^ Ali ibn al-Hussein al-Murtada (1044), Al-Intisar, pp. 480-481
43.Jump up ^ Sahih al-Bukhari, 3:45:687, Sahih al-Bukhari, 5:59:369
44.Jump up ^ Declan O'Sullivan (2001), The Interpretation of Qur'anic Text to Promote or Negate the Death Penalty for Apostates and Blasphemers, Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 3(2), pp. 63-93
45.Jump up ^ Islamic scholar attacks Pakistan's blasphemy laws Guardian 20 January 2010. Retrieved 23 January 2010
46.Jump up ^ Jordan, David A. "Dark Ages of Islam: Ijtihad, Apostasy, and Human Rights in Contemporary Islamic Jurisprudence, The." Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. LJ 9 (2003): 55.
47.Jump up ^ Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Freedom of expression in Islam. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1997.
48.Jump up ^ Peters, R. (2005). Crime and punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
49.Jump up ^ Schirrmacher, C. (2008). "Defection from Islam: A Disturbing Human Rights Dilemma" (PDF). islaminstitut.de.
50.Jump up ^ "Islamic Voice". Islamic Voice. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
51.Jump up ^ "Malaysia: Muslims warned to avoid blasphemous yoga - DIE WELT". DIE WELT. 22 November 2008.
52.Jump up ^ Holike, C. (2011), in Andrea Fleschenberg, Claudia Derich (Eds), THE STATE OF ISLAM–NEGOTIATING DEMOCRACY, MUSLIM WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND MORALITY IN INDONESIA AND MALAYSIA, Women and Politics in Asia: A Springboard for Democracy?, LIT Verlag (Zurich), 15, page 71-80
53.Jump up ^ New York Times, Seeking to clear a path between yoga and islam (April 8 2012)
54.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy Salman Rushdie". Constitutional Rights Foundation. 2009. Retrieved 10 July 2009.
55.Jump up ^ "Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread". Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. 21 November 2012.
56.Jump up ^ Rehman, Javaid. "THE SHARI ‘AH, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND THE RIGHT TO HOLD OPINIONS AND FREE EXPRESSION: AFTER BILOUR’S FATWA." Islam and International Law: Engaging Self-Centrism from a Plurality of Perspectives (2013): 244.
57.Jump up ^ Forte, David F. "Apostasy and Blasphemy in Pakistan." Conn. J. Int'l L. 10 (1994): 27.
58.Jump up ^ Silence. How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide. By Paul Marshall and Nina Shea. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
59.Jump up ^ Michael Totten, Radical Islam's global reaction: the push for blasphemy laws (January/February 2013)
60.Jump up ^ "Islamic states to reopen quest for global blasphemy law". Reuters.
61.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy Laws Exposed - The Consequences of Criminalizing Defamation of Religions" (PDF). humanrightsfirst.org. 2012.
62.Jump up ^ "BLASPHEMY - JewishEncyclopedia.com". jewishencyclopedia.com.
63.Jump up ^ Bad-mouthing: Pakistan’s blasphemy laws legitimise intolerance The Economist (November 29, 2014)
64.Jump up ^ Sources of claims: World of Intolerance Religious Watch. Retrieved 5 October 2011
United Nations will violate Human Rights International Humanist and Ethical Union. Retrieved 5 October 2011
"Muslim scholar says Scrap blasphemy laws". Herald Malaysia Online. 11 August 2009. Retrieved 5 October 2011.
Annual Report of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009 (Pakistan, etc.). Retrieved 5 October 2011
A call upon states to work toward abolishing the juvenile death penalty U.N. January 1999. Retrieved 5 October 2011
Indonesia – Amnesty International Report 2009 Amnesty International. Retrieved 5 October 2011
65.Jump up ^ See Blasphemy law
66.Jump up ^ Kerr, ine (9 July 2009). "Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail". The Irish Independent. Retrieved 17 November 2009.
67.Jump up ^ "ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1991 – SECT 124A 124A Vilification on grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity unlawful". Austlii.edu.au. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
68.Jump up ^ "Victoria Police – Racial and religious vilification". Police.vic.gov.au. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
69.Jump up ^ "European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), ''Report on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult and incitement to religious hatred'', 17–18 October 2008, Doc. No. CDL-AD(2008)026". Merlin.obs.coe.int. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
70.Jump up ^ See Blasphemy law and Hate speech.
71.Jump up ^ U.N. Resolutions: A/RES/60/150
Vote on 16 December 2005 (A/60/PV.64)
72.Jump up ^ An Anti-Blasphemy Measure Laid to Rest Nina Shea, National Review (MARCH 31, 2011)
73.Jump up ^ Recanati, F. (1995) The alleged priority of literal interpretation. Cognitive Science 19: 207–32. Carston, R. (1997) Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed? Linguistische Berichte 8: 103–127.Carston, R. (2000). Explicature and semantics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 1–44. Revised version to appear in Davis & Gillon (forthcoming).Sperber, D. & D. Wilson (1998) The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In Carruthers & Boucher (1998: 184–200).Glucksberg, S. (2001) Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Wilson, D. & D. Sperber (2002) Truthfulness and relevance. Mind 111: 583–632.
Further reading[edit]
Maledicta: The International Journal of Verbal Aggression (ISSN US 0363-3659)
Levy, L. Blasphemy. Chapel Hill, 1993.
Comprehensive academic study comparing global legal approaches to blasphemy in light of the Jyllands-Posten controversy
Dartevelle, P., S Borg, Denis, Ph., Robyn, J. (eds.). Blasphèmes et libertés. Paris: CERF, 1993
Plate, S. Brent Blasphemy: Art that Offends (London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006) [ISBN 1904772536]
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Blasphemy.
The Rational Response Squad: The Blasphemy Challenge
A More4 news film report on how insulting the prophet Mohammed in Pakistan is a capital offence, and defiling the Koran carries life imprisonment.
review of laws relating to blasphemy and sacrilege in various jurisdictions
Wikisource-logo.svg John Webster Melody (1913). "Blasphemy". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
Jewish Encyclopedia – Blasphemy
Wikisource-logo.svg "Blasphemy". Encyclopedia Americana. 1920.
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Blasphemy law by country
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Ten Commandments
Categories: Blasphemy
Religious terminology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
বাংলা
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Føroyskt
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
Ligure
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
اردو
Vèneto
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 12 June 2015, at 21:31.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy
Blasphemy law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Local restrictions
Fines and restrictions
Prison sentences
Death sentences
"An Act against Atheism and Blasphemy" as enacted in 1697 in "His Majesty's PROVINCE of the MASSACHUSETTS-BAY in NEW-ENGLAND" (1759 printing)
Blasphemy law is a law limiting the freedom of speech and expression relating to blasphemy, or irreverence toward holy personages, religious artifacts, customs, or beliefs.
In place of, or in addition to, prohibitions against blasphemy, some countries have laws which give redress to those who feel insulted on account of their religion. These laws forbid hate speech, the vilification of religion, or "religious insult".
In many countries either there are no laws against blasphemy, or long-established laws are no longer enforced. In the United States, for example, a prosecution for blasphemy would violate the Constitution according to the 1952 Supreme Court case Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson. The United Kingdom abolished its laws against blasphemy in England and Wales in 2008 with the passage of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act.[1] The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was Thomas Aikenhead, aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.[2]
Similarly, in practically all of the developed Western world and East Asian developed democracies like Japan and Taiwan, blasphemy laws, when existent, are largely de facto dead letter.
In Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has recommended that countries enact laws that protect the freedom of expression.
As of 2014 in some jurisdictions the death penalty may be applicable to blasphemy.
Contents [hide]
1 Afghanistan
2 Algeria
3 Australia
4 Austria
5 Bangladesh
6 Brazil
7 Canada
8 China
9 Denmark
10 Egypt
11 European initiatives
12 Finland
13 France
14 Germany
15 Greece
16 Iceland
17 India
18 Indonesia
19 Iran
20 Ireland
21 Israel
22 Italy
23 Jordan
24 Kuwait
25 Malaysia
26 Malta
27 Mauritania
28 Netherlands
29 New Zealand
30 Nigeria
31 Norway
32 Pakistan
33 Philippines
34 Poland
35 Qatar
36 Romania
37 Russia
38 Saudi Arabia
39 South Africa
40 Spain
41 Sudan
42 Switzerland
43 Turkey
44 United Arab Emirates
45 United Kingdom
46 United States
47 Yemen
48 See also
49 References
50 External links
Afghanistan[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Afghanistan
An Islamic state, Afghanistan prohibits blasphemy as an offense under Sharia. Blasphemy can be punished by retaliatory penalties up to and including execution by hanging.[3]
Algeria[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Algeria
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
Although ninety-nine percent of Algeria's population is Sunni Muslim, and the Constitution declares that Islam is the state religion, Algeria uses retaliatory legislation rather than Sharia to combat blasphemy against Islam. The penalty for blasphemy can be up to 10 years of imprisonment and a fine.[4]
Australia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Australia
The states, the territories, and the Commonwealth of Australia are not uniform in their treatment of blasphemy. Blasphemy is an offense in some jurisdictions but is not in others. The last attempted prosecution for blasphemy by the Crown occurred in the State of Victoria in 1919.[5]
Austria[edit]
In Austria, a section of the penal code relates to blasphemy:[6]
§ 188 : Vilification of Religious Teachings
Bangladesh[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Bangladesh
Bangladesh forbids blasphemy by a provision in its penal code that prohibits "hurting religious sentiments", and by other laws and policies that attack freedom of speech.[7] In April 2013, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina rejected calls for new laws from radical Islamist groups, notably Hefajat-e Islam, demanding death penalty for people involved in blasphemy. She described Bangladesh as a "secular democracy, where every religion had a right to be practiced freely and fairly", and that "if anyone was found guilty of hurting the sentiments of the followers of any religion or its venerable figures, there was a law to deal with it".[8][9][10]
Brazil[edit]
Art. 208 of the penal code states that "publicly vilipending an act or object of religious worship" is a crime punishable with one month to a year of incarceration, or fine.[11]
Canada[edit]
Main article: Blasphemous libel
See also: Hate speech laws in Canada
China[edit]
China banned a book titled "Xing Fengsu" ("Sexual Customs") which insulted Islam and placed its authors under arrest in 1989 after protests in Lanzhou and Beijing by Chinese Hui Muslims, during which the Chinese police provided protection to the Hui Muslim protestors, and the Chinese government organized public burnings of the book.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] The Chinese government assisted them and gave into their demands because Hui do not have a separatist movement, unlike the Uyghurs,[22] Hui Muslim protestors who violently rioted by vandalizing property during the protests against the book were let off by the Chinese government and went unpunished while Uyghur protestors were imprisoned.[23]
Denmark[edit]
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
In Denmark, Paragraph 140 of the penal code is about blasphemy. The paragraph has not been used since 1938 when a Nazi group was convicted for antisemitic propaganda. The hate speech paragraph (266b) is used more frequently. Abolition of the blasphemy clause has been proposed several times by members of the parliament, but has failed to gain majority.
Egypt[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Egypt
In Egypt, insulting Islam and its prophet can and has resulted in the death penalty. For instance, seven Egyptian Christians were sentenced to death on November 28, 2012, for their role in the "Innocence of Muslims" movie.[24]
European initiatives[edit]
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, France, which has been deliberating on the issue of blasphemy law, the resolution that blasphemy should not be a criminal offence,[25] adopted on 29 June 2007 in the Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion. This Recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the Council of Europe in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In place of blasphemy or in addition to blasphemy in some European countries is the crime of "religious insult", which is a subset of the crime of blasphemy. It is forbidden in Andorra, Cyprus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Switzerland, Turkey and Ukraine.[26]
On 23 October 2008, the Venice Commission, the Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters, issued a report about blasphemy, religious insult, and incitement to religious hatred.[27] The report noted that, in Europe, blasphemy is an offense only in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, and San Marino.[contradiction] In its conclusions, the report stated "it is neither necessary nor desirable to create an offense of religious insult" and "the offense of blasphemy should be abolished".
Finland[edit]
In Finland, section 10 of chapter 17 of the Criminal Code relate to blasphemy. The section is titled "Breach of the sanctity of religion", but the law text explicitly mentions "publicly blaspheming against God".[28][29] Unsuccessful attempts were made to rescind the section in 1914, 1917, 1965, 1970, and 1998.[30]
The writer Hannu Salama was convicted of blasphemy for his 1964 novel Juhannustanssit.[31] In 1969 Harro Koskinen was prosecuted and fined for works including his painting Pig Messiah, a crucified pig; the works were later displayed in museums.[32] Jussi Halla-aho, who later became a Member of the Parliament of Finland, was fined for making connections between pedophilia and Islam in his 2008 blog text.[33]
France[edit]
The definition of “blasphemy” was introduced into French law in the 13th century (after great debate among the French Moralists), based on the definition given by St. Thomas Aquinas: a sin of language, “a failure to declare one's faith”, thus representing an attack on the purity of religion. This justified punishment by law, which became fierce during the reign of Louis IX, who became obsessed in his fight against heretics, Jews and Muslims, with punishment consisting in mutilating the tongue and lips.[34]
Acticles 10 and 11 of the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen) eliminated the notion of blasphemy from French law, but continued to prohibit the use of abusive language or disturbance of the peace. Blasphemy once again became illegal during the Bourbon Restauration (1814), to be revoked again in the 1830s. It was definitively removed from French law by the Act of 29 July 1881 which instated freedom of the press. Nonetheless, “the incitement to commit crimes and offences” is still a violation (Art. 23), as is the vindication of crime against humanity, the incitement of hate or violence based on religion, nationality, ethnic group, race, sexual orientation or handicap (Art. 24), and slander or libel against any religious group, nationality, ethnic group, race, sexual orientation or handicap(Art. 32).
The Alsace-Moselle region is a specific exception, having inherited parts of an old German legal code that bans blasphemy against Christianity and Judaism, but not Islam.[35]
Germany[edit]
In Germany, blasphemy is covered by Article 166 of the Strafgesetzbuch, the German criminal law. If a deed is capable of disturbing the public peace, blasphemy is actionable. The article reads as follows:[36]
§ 166 Defamation of religious denominations, religious societies and World view associations(1) Whoever publicly or by dissemination of writings (§ 11 par. 3) defames, in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace, the substance of the religious or world view conviction of others, shall be fined or imprisoned for up to three years.(2) Whoever publicly or by dissemination of writings (§ 11 par. 3) defames, in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace, a church established in Germany or other religious society or world view association, or their institutions or customs, shall be punished likewise.
In 2006, the application of this article received much media attention when a Manfred van H. (also known as "Mahavo") was prosecuted for blasphemy for distributing rolls of toilet paper with the words "Koran, the Holy Koran" stamped on them.[37][38]
Greece[edit]
Articles 198, 199, and 201 of the Greek Penal Code create offences which involve blasphemy. Article 198 "Malicious Blasphemy" provides:
1. One who publicly and maliciously and by any means blasphemes God shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years.2. Except for cases under paragraph 1, one who by blasphemy publicly manifests a lack of respect for the divinity shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months.[39]
Article 199 "Blasphemy Concerning Religions" states: "One who publicly and maliciously and by any means blasphemes the Greek Orthodox Church or any other religion tolerable in Greece shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years".[39]
Article 201 provides: "One who willfully removes a corpse, parts of a corpse or the ashes of the dead from those who have lawful custody thereof or one who commits an offense with respect to a corpse or acts blasphemously and improperly toward a grave, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years".[39]
Greece has not used its laws about blasphemy to protect any religion other than the Greek Orthodox Church, which is the state church of Greece.[39] In December 2003, Greece prosecuted for blasphemy Gerhard Haderer, an Austrian, along with his Greek publisher and four booksellers. Haderer is the author of an illustrated, humorous book entitled The Life of Jesus. The prosecutor contended that the book’s depiction of Jesus as a hippie was blasphemous. On 13 April 2005, the Court of Appeal of Athens, reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, and acquitted Haderer.[40]
Greece complements its laws against blasphemy with laws against "religious insult". The laws forbid the creation, display or trade in work that "insults public sentiment" or that "offends people's religious sentiments". The right to redress for a religious insult has so far been restricted to Christians.[41][42]
Iceland[edit]
In Iceland, blasphemy is forbidden with a fine or prison sentence up to three months.[43] The constitution also mentions the state religion and religion in general.
India[edit]
Main article: Hate speech laws in India
Since Hinduism, India's dominant religion, being polytheistic and pantheistic, did not have the concept of blasphemy,[44][45] such laws are absent in tradition. In practice, however, blasphemy is classified as hate speech and prosecuted. In 1860, British rule codified Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code which punishes as hate speech insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of any class of citizen with deliberate and malicious intention to outrage their religious feelings. These laws are applied to all religions including Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianity and Islam.[46]
Indonesia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Indonesia
Article 156(a) of Indonesia's Criminal Code forbids anyone from deliberately, in public, expressing feelings of hostility, hatred, or contempt against religions with the purpose of preventing others from adhering to any religion, and forbids anyone from disgracing a religion. The penalty for violating Article 156(a) is a maximum of five years of imprisonment.[47][48]
Iran[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Iran
An Islamic theocracy, Iran derives its law against blasphemy from Sharia. The law against blasphemy complements laws against criticizing the Islamic regime, insulting Islam, and publishing materials that deviate from Islamic standards.[49]
Ireland[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Ireland
In Ireland, blasphemy is prohibited by the constitution and carries a maximum fine of €25,000. A controversial law was passed on 9 July 2009 and went into effect on 1 January 2010.[50]
Israel[edit]
In Israel, blasphemy is covered by Articles 170 and 173 of the penal code.[51][52]
Insult to religion170. If a person destroys, damages or desecrates a place of worship or any object which is held sacred by a group of persons, with the intention of reviling their religion, or in the knowledge that they are liable to deem that act an insult to their religion, then the one is liable to three years imprisonment.Injury to religious sentiment173. If a person does any of the following, then the one is liable to one year imprisonment:(1) One publishes a publication that is liable to crudely offend the religious faith or sentiment of others;(2) One voices in a public place and in the hearing of another person any word or sound that is liable to crudely offend the religious faith or sentiment of others.
The law is traced back to the British High Commission "The Abuse and Vilification (religious invective) Order No. 43 of 1929", enacted in efforts to suppress the 1929 Palestine riots. The order contained the language: "Any person who utters a word or sound in public or within earshot of any other person that may be or is intended to offend his religious sensitivities or faith can expect to be found guilty and eligible for a one-year jail sentence."[53]
Italy[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011)
In Italy, under the article 724 of the penal Code, blasphemy now is considered as an "administrative offense" and punished with a fine. First introduced in 1930, the blasphemy has been decriminalized with the law N°205 of 25 June 1999. Unequivocally, the law punish only the blasphemy against divinities.
Jordan[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Jordan
Jordan's Penal Code prohibits anyone from blaspheming Islam, demeaning Islam or Muslim feelings, or insulting Prophet Mohammed.[54] Violating the prohibitions makes the violator liable for imprisonment (up to three years) and a fine.[55]
Kuwait[edit]
Main article: Legal system of Kuwait
Malaysia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Malaysia
Malaysia prevents insult to religion and to the religious by education, by restrictions upon the broadcasting and publishing media, and by the legal system. Some states in the Malaysian federation operate Sharia courts to protect Islam, and, when Sharia is not applicable, the Malaysian Penal Code provides penalties for offenses against religion.[56]
Malta[edit]
Instead of a law against blasphemy, Malta has laws against the vilification of religion, and against immorality. Enacted in 1933, Article 163 of Malta's Criminal Code[57] prohibits vilification of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Religion, which is Malta's religion. Vilification of Malta's religion makes the vilifier liable to imprisonment for a term from one to six months. By Article 164, vilification of any cult "tolerated by law" makes the vilifier liable to imprisonment for a term from one to three months. Article 338(bb) imposes liability upon anyone who, "even though in a state of intoxication, publicly utters any obscene or indecent words, or makes obscene acts or gestures, or in any other manner not otherwise provided for in this Code, offends against public morality, propriety or decency". Article 342 provides:
In respect of the contravention under article 338(bb), where the act consists in uttering blasphemous words or expressions, the minimum punishment to be awarded shall in no case be less than a fine (amenda) of eleven euro and sixty-five cents (11.65) and the maximum punishment may be imprisonment for a term of three months . . . .
In 2008, criminal procedures were initiated against 621 people for blaspheming in public.[58]
Mauritania[edit]
See : The crime of apostasy is defined in section IV (entitled Act of Indecency toward Islam) of the Mauritanian Penal Code, established under the order of July 9, 1983. Article 306, paragraph 1 of the criminal code indicates, “Every Muslim guilty of the crime of apostasy, either by word or by action of apparent or obvious, will be invited to repent within three days.” [59]
Netherlands[edit]
The Netherlands prohibited blasphemy by a provision in its penal code from the 1930s up until December 2013.[60] Article 147 punished (by up to three months in jail or a fine of the second category (i.e. up to €3,800[61])) anyone who publicly, orally or in writing or depiction, offends religious feelings by scornful blasphemy.[62] Furthermore, article 429bis prohibited displaying blasphemous material at places visible from the public road.[63] The law came into being in the 1930s after the Communist Party called for Christmas to be dropped from the list of state holidays.[64] The last successful conviction under Article 147 took place in the early 1960s when a student newspaper was fined 100 guilders for satirizing the New Testament.[64] The law against blasphemy complements laws against racial discrimination and incitement to violence[citation needed].
In 1966, the Public Prosecution Service prosecuted Gerard Reve under Article 147. In his novel Nader tot U ("Nearer to Thee"), Reve describes the narrator's sexual intercourse with God, who is incarnated in a donkey. The court of first instance convicted Reve. He appealed. In April 1968, an appeal court quashed the conviction.[65][66]
In November 2008, Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin expressed the country’s coalition government's intent to repeal Article 147.[65] He said the government would strengthen the legislation against discrimination to prohibit any insult to any group of people.[67] In May 2009, the government decided to leave the law as it is. The decision followed a high court ruling in which a man who had put up a poster that read "stop the tumour that is Islam" was found not guilty of insulting a group of people on the grounds of their religion.[67] The decision not to abolish the ban on blasphemy was partly motivated to ensure the support of the orthodox Christian SGP for the minority government in the senate. After a general election in 2012, a new coalition government was formed and a majority of parliament has pledged to support a proposal to repeal the blasphemy law.[68]
In November 2012, the parliament decided to overturn the blasphemy laws.[69] It will pass with support from the VVD, but the fundamentalist Christian group SGP are strongly opposed to the measure. According to the SGP, the decision to lift the ban on blasphemy is a “painful loss of a moral anchor and a symptom of a spiritual crisis”. Secular groups have praised the measure.[citation needed]
On February 1, 2014, the law on blasphemy was officially abolished.[70]
New Zealand[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in New Zealand
In New Zealand, Section 123[71] of the Crimes Act 1961 allows for imprisonment up to one year for anyone who publishes any "blasphemous libel". However, these cases are only prosecuted at the discretion of the concurrent New Zealand Attorney-General, who usually cites overriding free speech objections so as not to pursue such a case. To date the only prosecution for blasphemous libel in New Zealand has been the case of John Glover, publisher of The Maoriland Worker (a newspaper), in 1922. Glover was acquitted.
Nigeria[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Nigeria
Nigeria prohibits blasphemy by section 204 of its Criminal Code and by permitting Sharia courts to operate in some states.[72][73] Vigilantism frequently usurps the jurisdiction of the courts.[74]
Norway[edit]
In 2009, the Norwegian Parliament voted to remove the dormant law against blasphemy (§ 142 in the penal code).[75][76] It was, however, removed from the penal code of 2005, which has not yet been taken into use in the Norwegian judicial system (due to technical problems). The penal code of 1902, which is still active, still contains a (dormant) law against blasphemy.[75][76]
The famous writer and social activist Arnulf Øverland was the last to be tried by this law, in 1933,[77] after giving a speech named "Kristendommen – den tiende landeplage" ("Christianity – the tenth plague"), but was acquitted. The last person sentenced for blasphemy in Norway was Arnfred Olsen in 1912, and he had to pay a fine of 10 Norwegian krone.[78]
Pakistan[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Pakistan
The anti-blasphemy laws in Pakistan are quite complicated. Offenders may be vigorously prosecuted. Chapter XV of Pakistan Penal Code deals with "offences relating to religion":[79]
§295. Injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to insult the religion of any class.[79]
§295-A. Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting Its religion or religious beliefs.[79]
§295-B. Defiling, etc., of Holy Qur'an.[79]
§295-C. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet.[79]
§296. Disturbing religious assembly.[79]
§297. Trespassing on burial places, etc.[79]
§298. Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings.[79]
§298-A. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of holy personages.[79]
§298-B. Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc., reserved for certain holy personages or places.[79]
§298-C. Person of Qadiani group, etc., calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith:[79]
There is a death penalty for blasphemy in Pakistan. Those prosecuted are usually minorities such as Ahmadiyya and Christians but it seems that they are also increasingly Muslims.[80] Persons accused of blasphemy as well as police, lawyers, and judges have been subject to harassment, threats, attacks, and murders when blasphemy is the issue.[81]
In November 2008, Pakistan's government appointed Shahbaz Bhatti as Federal Minister for Minorities and gave him cabinet rank. Bhatti had promised that the Asif Ali Zardari government would review Pakistan's blasphemy laws.[82] Pakistan has been an active supporter of the campaign by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to create global laws against blasphemy.[82] Minister Bhatti was shot dead on 2 March 2011 in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. On March 19, 2014, Pakistani English-language newspaper, The Nation, conducted a poll of its readers that showed 68% of Pakistanis believe the blasphemy law should be repealed.[83]
Philippines[edit]
"Crimes against religious worship" are stated under section four of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. Under article 132 and 133 respectively "interruption of religious worship" and "offending the religious feelings" are punishable by law. "Interruption of religious worship" is defined as "preventing or disturbing the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion" and "offending the religious feelings" is defined as "performing acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful" in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony.[84]
Penalties range from imprisonment of four months and a day to six months; crimes that involve violence or threats can carry a penalty of up to six years in jail.
This law effectively makes secularism, illegal in the Philippines.
Poland[edit]
While Poland's penal code makes no reference to any sort of blasphemy law, it states that "Whoever offends religious feelings of other people by publicly insulting an object of religious cult or a place for public holding of religious ceremonies, is subject to a fine, restriction of liberty or loss of liberty for up to 2 years". The article has been used by pro-Church politicians and activists on numerous occasions, whenever they felt their religious feelings had been offended in some way. Opponents of the article maintain that it seriously limits the freedom of speech and effectively prevents any kind of debate on the Church's widespread influence on social, sexual and political life of Poland.
Qatar[edit]
The penalty for committing blasphemy in Qatar is a jail sentence of up to 7 years.[85] Additionally, the law stipulates a 1-year prison sentence or QR1,000 fine for defamation of Islam by producing or promoting defamatory imagery.[86]
Religious criticism on websites is censored in Qatar.[87] The censorship office of the Qatar General Broadcasting and Television Corporation monitors imported foreign broadcasting for sensitive religious content.[88]
Romania[edit]
Romania does not have any blasphemy laws in force. According to Romanian law, "cults, religious associations and religious groups [...] must not infringe upon [...] fundamental human rights and liberties",[89] which, according to the Constitution of Romania, include freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.[90]
Russia[edit]
Currently, Russian lawmakers are considering a bill proposing prison sentences for desecration.[91] The State Duma will investigate "the situation of sacrilegious acts against Church property and propose amendments to the Russian Penal Code" in their 2012 Autumn Session.[91] The Union of Orthodox Citizens and MP of United Russia agreed with the proposal, the latter stating: "We really should make some amendments to the Penal Code in order to cool down these outcasts who have nothing else to do in their lives [other than commit such offenses]."[91][92]
Bill was accepted 11 June 2013.[93][94] Аccording to art.148 of Russian Crimianl Code 1 it is declared a federal crime to conduct "public actions, clearly defying the society and committed with express purpose of insulting religious beliefs". Part 2 of the same article places a stricter punishments for the aforementioned actions, when coupled with desecration of holy symbols and (or) religious texts.
Saudi Arabia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia
Islam is Saudi Arabia's state religion. The country's monarchy follows Sunni Islam.[95] The country's laws are an amalgam of rules from Sharia, royal edicts, and fatawa from the Council of Senior Religious Scholars. Those laws prescribe penalties up to the death penalty for blasphemy.[96]
South Africa[edit]
Blasphemy is a common law offence in South Africa, defined as "unlawfully, intentionally and publicly acting contemptuously towards God."[97][98] Several legal writers have suggested that the illegality of blasphemy has become unconstitutional as a result of the adoption in 1994 of the Bill of Rights, which includes the right to freedom of expression.[99][100] It has also been suggested that it is unconstitutional because the criminal prohibition only applies to blasphemy against Christianity, and therefore discriminates on the basis of religion.[97][99]
Blasphemy prosecutions have been rare since the start of the twentieth century, to the point that writers in the early part of the century suggested that the crime had been abrogated through disuse. However, in 1934 a newspaper editor was convicted of blasphemy for publishing a story in which a nun has a vision of a sexual relationship with Jesus Christ, and the validity of the conviction was affirmed by the Appellate Division.[99] In 1962 Harold Rubin was prosecuted for a painting depicting Christ naked on the cross along with inversions of Biblical sayings, but he was acquitted.[99] In 1968 the editor of Varsity was prosecuted for publishing a report of a symposium on the topic "Is God Dead?", which quoted statements that "We must write God off entirely" and "[God] is beginning to stink".[101] He was convicted, but at sentencing received only a caution and discharge.[102]
The Equality Act of 2000 forbids hate speech, which is defined as "words based on one or more of the prohibited grounds, against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to: (a) be hurtful; (b) be harmful or to incite harm; (c) promote or propagate hatred." The "prohibited grounds" include religion, and thus some blasphemous speech falls within the scope of hate speech. The prohibition of hate speech is, however, not a criminal prohibition, and only civil penalties would result.[103]
Spain[edit]
The article 525 of the penal law in Spain considers "vilification" of religious "feelings", "dogmas", "beliefs" or "rituals". This extension to "dogmas" and "beliefs" makes it very close to a blasphemy law in practice, depending on the interpretation of the judge.
For instance, in 2012 it was used to prosecute a famous artist, Javier Krahe, for a scene (shot 34 years ago, and lasting just 54 seconds) in a documentary about him.[104]
Sudan[edit]
Sunni Islam is the state religion of Sudan. Before South Sudan received independence, about seventy percent[citation needed] of the country's population was Muslim. The next largest group—about twenty-five percent of the population—was animist.[105]
Section 125 of the Sudanese Criminal Act prohibits "insulting religion, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs". The section includes as penalties: imprisonment, a fine, and a maximum of forty lashes. In November 2007, the section gave rise to the Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case. In December 2007, the section was used against two Egyptian booksellers. They were sentenced to six months in prison because they sold a book that the court deemed an insult to Aisha, one of Prophet Mohammed's wives.[106]
In May 2005, the authorities arrested Mohammed Taha Mohammed Ahmed, and charged him with violating section 125. Ahmed was the editor-in-chief of a daily newspaper Al-Wifaq. The paper had published an article about a 500-year-old Islamic manuscript which says the real name of Mohammed’s father was not Abdallah but Abdel Lat, or Slave of Lat, an idol of the pre-Islamic era.[107] A court fined Al-Wifaq eight million Sudanese pounds—the paper was shut down for three months—but acquitted Ahmed. Ahmed was found decapitated in September 2006.[108]
Switzerland[edit]
In Switzerland, Article 261 of the penal code titled "Attack on the freedom of faith and the freedom to worship" (Störung der Glaubens- und Kultusfreiheit) criminalizes:[109]
public and malicious insult or mockery of religious convictions of others
malicious desecration objects of religious veneration
malicious prevention, disruption or public mockery of an act of worship
malicious desecration of a place or object that is intended for a religious ceremony or an act of worship
Turkey[edit]
Article 216 of the Turkish Penal Code ("Provoking people to be rancorous and hostile") criminalizes blasphemy and religious insult, as well as hate speech. The article, which is in the fifth section of the Turkish Penal Code ("Offenses Against Public Peace") is as follows:
Article 216. – Provoking people to be rancorous and hostile(1) Any person who openly provokes a group of people belonging to different social class, religion, race, sect, or coming from another origin, to be rancorous or hostile against another group, is punished with imprisonment from one year to three years in case of such act causes risk from the aspect of public safety.(2) Any person who openly humiliates another person just because he belongs to different social class, religion, race, sect, or comes from another origin, is punished with imprisonment from six months to one year.(3) Any person who openly disrespects the religious belief of a group is punished with imprisonment from six months to one year if such act causes potential risk for public peace.[110]
United Arab Emirates[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in the United Arab Emirates
The United Arab Emirates discourage blasphemy by controlling what is published and distributed, by using Sharia punishments against Muslims, and by using judge-made penalties against non-Muslims.[111][112]
United Kingdom[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in the United Kingdom
Blasphemy laws in the United Kingdom were specific to blasphemy against Christianity. The last attempted prosecution under these laws was in 2007 when the fundamentalist group Christian Voice sought a private prosecution against the BBC over its broadcasting of the show Jerry Springer: The Opera (which includes a scene depicting Jesus, dressed as a baby, professing to be "a bit gay"). The charges were rejected by the City of Westminster magistrates court. Christian Voice applied to have this ruling overturned by the High Court, but the application was rejected. The court found that the common law blasphemy offences specifically did not apply to stage productions (s. 2(4) of the Theatres Act 1968) and broadcasts (s. 6 of the Broadcasting Act 1990).[113][114]
The last successful blasphemy prosecution (also a private prosecution) was Whitehouse v. Lemon in 1977, when Denis Lemon, the editor of Gay News, was found guilty. His newspaper had published James Kirkup's poem "The Love that Dares to Speak its Name", which allegedly vilified Christ and his life. Lemon was fined £500 and given a suspended sentence of nine months imprisonment. It had been "touch and go", said the judge, whether he would actually send Lemon to jail.[115] In 2002, a deliberate and well-publicised public repeat reading of the poem took place on the steps of St Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, but failed to lead to any prosecution.[116]
The last person in Britain to be imprisoned for blasphemy was John William Gott on 9 December 1921. He had three previous convictions for blasphemy when he was prosecuted for publishing two pamphlets which satirised the biblical story of Jesus entering Jerusalem (Matthew 21:2–7), comparing Jesus to a circus clown. He was sentenced to nine months' hard labour.[citation needed]
In 1696, a Scottish court sentenced Thomas Aikenhead to death for blasphemy.[117] The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1843.[118]
On 5 March 2008, an amendment was passed to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales. (Common law is abolished, not repealed.) The Act received royal assent on 8 May 2008,[119][120] and the relevant section came into force on 8 July 2008.[121][122]
The 1989 film Visions of Ecstasy was the only film ever banned in the UK for blasphemy. Following the 2008 repeal of the blasphemy law, the film was eventually classified by the BBFC for release as 18-rated in 2012.[123]
United States[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in the United States
A prosecution for blasphemy in the United States would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution and no blasphemy laws exist at the federal level. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . ."
Because of the First Amendment's protection of free speech and religious exercise from federal interference, and the Supreme Court's extension of those protections against state regulation, the United States and its constituent state governments may not prosecute blasphemous speech or religious insults and may not allow civil actions on those grounds. In Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that New York could not enforce a censorship law against filmmakers whose films contained "sacrilegious" content. The opinion of the Court, by Justice Clark, stated that:
"From the standpoint of freedom of speech and the press, it is enough to point out that the state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them which is sufficient to justify prior restraints upon the expression of those views. It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine, whether they appear in publications, speeches, or motion pictures."[124]
It should be noted, however, that the United States and some individual state jurisdictions provide for stronger criminal penalties for crimes when committed against a person because of that person's religious affiliation. For instance, Section 3A1.1 of the 2009 United States Sentencing Guidelines states that: "If the finder of fact at trial or, in the case of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court at sentencing determines beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally selected any victim or any property as the object of the offense of conviction because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person," the sentencing court is required to increase the standard sentencing range.[125]
Yemen[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Yemen
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2013)
Accusations of blasphemy in Yemen are often aimed at religious minorities, intellectuals and artists, reporters, human rights defenders, and opponents of the ruling party. Vigilantism or abuse by the authorities can kill an accused or force them into exile. The accused in Yemen is subject to Islamic law (Sharia). Sharia, according to some interpretations, prescribes death as the proper punishment for blasphemy.
See also[edit]
Freedom of expression
Freedom of speech
Islam and blasphemy
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Beckford, Martin (10 May 2008). "Blasphemy laws are lifted". The Telegraph.
2.Jump up ^ "Thomas Aikenhead". 5.uua.org. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
3.Jump up ^ "2008 Report on International Religious Freedom – Afghanistan". United States Department of State. 19 September 2008. Retrieved 2 July 2009.
4.Jump up ^ "UPDATE: Algeria: Samia Smets acquitted". Women Living Under Muslim Laws. 30 October 2008. Retrieved 23 July 2009.
5.Jump up ^ Priestly, Brenton (n.d.). "Blasphemy and the Law: A Comparative Study (2006)". Retrieved 6 July 2009.
6.Jump up ^ "(English)Penal Code". Retrieved 14 January 2011. "(English) § 188 Vilification of Religious Teachings: Anyone who publicly disparages a person or thing that is the object of worship of a domestic church or religious society, or a doctrine, [or other] behavior is likely to attract legitimate offense shall be punished... § 189 Disturbance of Religious Practice: (1) Whoever prevents by force or threat of violence, the law permitted such service or individual acts of worship in a church or religious community existing domestic or interfere, shall be punished with imprisonment up (2) Whoever [commits in a Church or religious place] mischief that is likely to attract legitimate offense shall be punished..."[dead link]
7.Jump up ^ "Strict blasphemy laws limit religious debate in Bangladesh". AsiaMedia. 18 May 2006. Retrieved 5 August 2009.
8.Jump up ^ "No blasphemy law needed: B'desh PM", Asia News Net
9.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina rejects blasphemy law", BBC News
10.Jump up ^ "Sheikh Hasina rejects call for blasphemy law", The Hindu
11.Jump up ^ "Art. 208 do Cód. Penal Brasileiro". Jus Brasil. 1940. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
12.Jump up ^ Beijing Review, Volume 32 1989, p. 13.
13.Jump up ^ Gladney 1991, p. 2.
14.Jump up ^ Schein 2000, p. 154.
15.Jump up ^ Gladney 2004, p. 66.
16.Jump up ^ Bulag 2010, p. 104.
17.Jump up ^ Gladney 2005, p. 257.
18.Jump up ^ Gladney 2013, p. 144.
19.Jump up ^ Sautman 2000, p. 79.
20.Jump up ^ Gladney 1996, p. 341.
21.Jump up ^ Lipman 1996, p. 299.
22.Jump up ^ Harold Miles Tanner (2009). China: a history. Hackett Publishing. p. 610. ISBN 0-87220-915-6. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
23.Jump up ^ Gladney 2004, p. 232.
24.Jump up ^ Hoft, Jim. "Seven Egyptian Christians Sentenced to Death For Role in Anti-Mohammad Movie". Retrieved 29 November 2012.
25.Jump up ^ Recommendation 1805 (2007) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
26.Jump up ^ Matthew Vella. "Blasphemy? It’s not criminal – Council of Europe", Malta Today. 8 March 2009
27.Jump up ^ European Commission for Democracy through Law. 'Report on the Relationship between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion: The issue of Regulation and Prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult, and incitement to religious hatred'[dead link]. Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 76th Plenary Session at Venice, Italy, on 17–18 October 2008.
28.Jump up ^ The Criminal Code of Finland (in Finnish), Finlex
29.Jump up ^ An unofficial translation of the Criminal Code of Finland (there is no official translation), Finlex
30.Jump up ^ History of Religion Crime Laws (in Finnish), Uskonnonvapaus.fi
31.Jump up ^ "Hannu Salama – kirjallisuuspalkittu jumalanpilkkaaja". Ylen Elävä arkisto (in Finnish).
32.Jump up ^ "Sikamaalari Harro Koskinen". Ylen Elävä arkisto (in Finnish).
33.Jump up ^ "Halla-aholle tuomio uskonrauhan rikkomisesta". Yle (in Finnish). September 8, 2009.
34.Jump up ^ Olivier Bobineau, « Retour de l'ordre religieux ou signe de bonne santé de notre pluralisme laïc ? » [archive], Le Monde.fr, 8 décembre 2011 (consulté le 15 janvier 2015)
35.Jump up ^ Charlie Hebdo has controversial history, CBC News, Jan 8 2015
36.Jump up ^ §166 of the Strafgesetzbuch, the German criminal law
37.Jump up ^ "Suspended prison for German who insulted Koran". Expatica. 23 February 2006.
38.Jump up ^ Report in the Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger (in German)
39.^ Jump up to: a b c d [1][dead link]
40.Jump up ^ Austrian author acquitted on appeal in blasphemy case – IFEX
41.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy and Sacrilege: European Law and Cases"
42.Jump up ^ [2][dead link]
43.Jump up ^ (in Icelandic). Parliament of Iceland http://www.althingi.is/lagas/133b/1940019.html. Retrieved September 25, 2014. Missing or empty |title= (help)
44.Jump up ^ de Lingen, John; Ramsurrun, Pahlad. An Introduction to The Hindu Faith. Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd. p. 2. ISBN 978-81-207-4086-0.
45.Jump up ^ Murthy, B. S. (2003). Puppets of Faith: theory of communal strife. Bulusu Satyanarayana Murthy. p. 7. ISBN 978-81-901911-1-1.
46.Jump up ^ "Indian Penal Code Section 295A". Vakil No1. Retrieved 21 May 2010.
47.Jump up ^ "Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009" (PDF). Indonesia. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. May 2009. Retrieved 24 June 2009.
48.Jump up ^ Al ‘Afghani, Mohamad Mova (3 December 2007). "Ruling against blasphemy unconstitutional". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
49.Jump up ^ "Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009" (PDF). Retrieved 6 July 2009.
50.Jump up ^ Henry MacDonald, "Irish to vote on repealing blasphemy ban", Melbourne Age, 17 March 2010.
51.Jump up ^ Hebrew Wikisource
52.Jump up ^ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
53.Jump up ^ "Make fun of God, but leave his believers alone", Haaretz, 27 August 2003
54.Jump up ^ Samson, Elizabeth (10 September 2008). "Criminalizing Criticism of Islam". Wall Street Journal Europe. Retrieved 26 June 2009.
55.Jump up ^ Ma'ayeh, Suha (30 May 2008). "Jordan court to rule on cartoon case". The National (United Arab Emirates). Retrieved 30 June 2009.
56.Jump up ^ "Background Note: Malaysia". U.S. State Department. July 2009. Retrieved 31 August 2009.
57.Jump up ^ "Malta's Criminal Code"
58.Jump up ^ Criminal proceedings for blaspheming and littering with cigarette butts – timesofmalta.com
59.Jump up ^ http://talsou.wesign.it/en
60.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy law will be scrapped". From DutchNews.nl. DutchNews.nl. 3 December 2013. Retrieved 5 January 2014.
61.Jump up ^ "Penal code of the Netherlands, article 23" (in Dutch). Retrieved 9 October 2010.
62.Jump up ^ "Europe: Where there's a will, there is a law". Straits Times. AsiaMedia. 8 February 2006. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
63.Jump up ^ "Penal code of the Netherlands, article 429bis" (in Dutch). Retrieved 9 October 2010.
64.^ Jump up to: a b Conger, George (9 November 2008). "Blasphemy law is dropped in Netherlands". Religious Intelligence. Retrieved 28 August 2009.[dead link]
65.^ Jump up to: a b "Blasphemy law ditched by the Dutch". Radio Netherlands Worldwide. 1 November 2008. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
66.Jump up ^ Tamis, Theo (9 April 2006). "Nearer to Thee, Gerard Reve dies". Radio Nederland Wereldomroep. Retrieved 28 August 2009.[dead link]
67.^ Jump up to: a b "Cabinet drops repeal of blasphemy law". DutchNews.nl. 28 May 2009. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
68.Jump up ^ "Liberal VVD ensure majority support for scrapping blasphemy laws". DutchNews.nl. 28 November 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.
69.Jump up ^ Bezhan, Frud (29 November 2012). "Dutch Parliament To Revoke Blasphemy Law". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
70.Jump up ^ Wet van 23 januari 2014 tot wijziging van het Wetboek van Strafrecht in verband met het laten vervallen van het verbod op godslastering, Stb. 2014, 39. (Law of January 23, 2014 to amend the Criminal Code in connection with the abolishment of the ban on blasphemy)
71.Jump up ^ Crimes Act 1961 – Section 123
72.Jump up ^ "Criminal Code Act". Chapter 77 (Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990). Nigeria. Retrieved 2 August 2009.
73.Jump up ^ "Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999". Nigeria. Retrieved 2 August 2009.
74.Jump up ^ "2008 Human Rights Report: Introduction". U.S. State Department. 25 February 2008. Retrieved 2 August 2009.
75.^ Jump up to: a b Gran, Even (27 August 2012). "Norge har fortsatt en blasfemiparagraf". fritanke.no (in Norwegian). Human-Etisk Forbund. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
76.^ Jump up to: a b Hultgren, Gunnar (22 April 2013). "Åtte år etter at Stortinget vedtok ny lov, er loven fortsatt ikke tatt i bruk". dagbladet.no (in Norwegian). Dagbladet. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
77.Jump up ^ Blasfemiparagrafen (Norwegian) Human.no, retrieved 15 February 2015
78.Jump up ^ Andre krenkelser (Norwegian) Nored.no, retrieved 2 June 2013
79.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k Pakistan Penal Code Chap. XV "Of Offences Relating to Religion" pp. 79–81
80.Jump up ^ Ahmed, Akbar S. (19 May 2002). "Pakistan's Blasphemy Law: Words Fail Me". The Washington Post. Retrieved 28 June 2009.[dead link]
81.Jump up ^ United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (8 October 2008). "Asma Jahangir". United Nations. Retrieved 27 June 2009.
82.^ Jump up to: a b "Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009" (PDF). Pakistan. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. May 2009. Retrieved 24 June 2009.
83.Jump up ^ http://www.nation.com.pk/E-Paper/lahore/2014-03-19/page-7
84.Jump up ^ http://www.dpwh.gov.ph/about_us/reforms/graft_n_corruption/pdf/Revised%20Penal%20Code1.pdf
85.Jump up ^ "Religious law, prison for “blasphemy”, severe sexual inequalilty: Qatar’s human rights review". International Humanist and Ethical Union. 22 September 2014. Retrieved 27 January 2015.
86.Jump up ^ "2012 International Religious Freedom Report on Qatar" (PDF). The United States Federal Government. Retrieved 27 January 2015.
87.Jump up ^ Blanchard, Christoper (2014). Qatar: Background and U.S. Relations. Congressional Research Service. p. 17.
88.Jump up ^ Figenschou, Tine Ustad (2013). Al Jazeera and the Global Media Landscape: The South is Talking Back. Routledge. p. 38. ISBN 978-0415814430.
89.Jump up ^ "Law no. 489/2006 on religious freedom and the general status of cults". Retrieved January 26, 2013.
90.Jump up ^ "Constitution of Romania, Chapter II". Retrieved January 26, 2013.
91.^ Jump up to: a b c "‘Jail for sacrilege’: Vandalism by Pussy Riot supporters angers MPs". Russia Today. 22 August 2012. Retrieved 22 August 2012.
92.Jump up ^ "Les miliciens orthodoxes déclarent ouverte la chasse aux hérétiques". Le Courrier de Russie. 22 August 2012. Retrieved 22 August 2012.
93.Jump up ^ Duma approves criminalization of insulting religious feelings // RT, 11 June 2013
94.Jump up ^ Russian Lawmakers Back Jail Terms for Insulting Religion // RIA Novosti, 11/06/2013
95.Jump up ^ Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009.
96.Jump up ^ Latest International Human Rights News and Information | Amnesty International USA
97.^ Jump up to: a b Milton, John (1996). "Chapter 17: Blasphemy". South African Criminal Law and Procedure: Common-law Crimes (3rd ed.). Cape Town: Juta. pp. 293–300. ISBN 9780702137730.
98.Jump up ^ Burchell, Jonathan (2005). "Chapter 74: Blasphemy". Principles of Criminal Law (3rd ed.). Cape Town: Juta. pp. 880–883. ISBN 9780702165573.
99.^ Jump up to: a b c d Smith, Nicholas (1999). "The crime of blasphemy and the protection of fundamental human rights". South African Law Journal 116 (1): 162–173.
100.Jump up ^ de Vos, Pierre (2 November 2012). "On Woolworths and freedom of conscience". Constitutionally Speaking. Retrieved 4 September 2012.
101.Jump up ^ Uys, Stanley (20 January 1968). "'Is God Dead?': Court Case Centers On Issue". St. Petersburg Times. Retrieved 4 September 2012.
102.Jump up ^ Merrett, Christopher Edmond (1994). A Culture of Censorship: Secrecy and Intellectual Repression in South Africa. Cape Town: David Philip. p. 67. ISBN 0864862598.
103.Jump up ^ "Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000" (PDF). Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
104.Jump up ^ Juicio oral contra Javier Krahe por su corto 'Cómo cocinar a un Cristo' – Público.es
105.Jump up ^ Rone, Jemera (25 September 2007). "Religious Persecution in Sudan". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 28 July 2009.
106.Jump up ^ "Sudan jails two Egyptians for blasphemy". Sudan Tribune. 18 December 2007. Retrieved 28 July 2009.
107.Jump up ^ "Alarm about trial of journalist on blasphemy charge". Reporters Without Borders. 12 May 2005. Retrieved 29 July 2009.[dead link]
108.Jump up ^ "Kidnapped Sudanese Editor Found Slain / Journalist beheaded in Khartoum". One-click News. 6 September 2006. Retrieved 28 July 2009.
109.Jump up ^ Article 261 of the penal code, Switzerland
110.Jump up ^ http://legislationline.org/documents/action/popup/id/6872/preview
111.Jump up ^ "United Arab Emirates". U.S. Department of State. 31 January 1994. Retrieved 20 August 2009.[dead link]
112.Jump up ^ "United Arab Emirates". International Religious Freedom Report 2008. U.S. Department of State. n.d. Retrieved 20 August 2009.
113.Jump up ^ "Springer opera court fight fails". BBC News. 5 December 2007. Retrieved 5 December 2007.
114.Jump up ^ Green, R (on the application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates' Court [2007] EWHC 2785 (Admin) (5 December 2007)
115.Jump up ^ Brett Humphreys: The Law That Dared to Lay the Blame
116.Jump up ^ Erotic poem challenges blasphemy law
117.Jump up ^ "McLaurin's Arguments and Definitions". The Scots Magazine. 1 July 1774. Retrieved 10 January 2015 – via British Newspaper Archive. (subscription required (help)).
118.Jump up ^ Hugh Barclay: A Digest of the Law of Scotland: With Special Reference to the Office, T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1855, p.86
119.Jump up ^ Ruth Geller. "Goodbye to Blasphemy in Britain". Institute for Humanist Studies. Archived from the original on 7 June 2008. Retrieved 6 June 2008.
120.Jump up ^ Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, see section 79 and Part 5 of Schedule 28.
121.Jump up ^ JURIST – Paper Chase: UK House of Lords votes to abolish criminal blasphemy
122.Jump up ^ Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, section 153: Commencement
123.Jump up ^ "Visions Of Ecstasy gets UK rating after 23 year ban". BBC News. 31 January 2012.
124.Jump up ^ Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495 (1952)
125.Jump up ^ United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual § 3A1.1 (2009)[dead link]
External links[edit]
Landmarks in blasphemy
Thomas Hammarberg, CoE Commissioner for Human Rights: Do not criminalize critical remarks against religions, 2007
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Blasphemy law by country
Afghanistan ·
Algeria ·
Australia ·
Bangladesh ·
Egypt ·
Finland ·
Germany ·
Greece ·
Indonesia ·
Iran ·
Ireland ·
Israel ·
Jordan ·
Kuwait ·
Malaysia ·
Netherlands ·
New Zealand ·
Nigeria ·
Norway ·
Pakistan ·
Saudi Arabia ·
South Africa ·
Sudan ·
Switzerland ·
United Arab Emirates ·
United Kingdom ·
United States ·
Yemen
Blasphemy ·
Blasphemy and the United Nations
Categories: Blasphemy law by country
Crimes in religion
Blasphemy law
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Hrvatski
Italiano
Русский
Edit links
This page was last modified on 28 May 2015, at 07:09.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
Blasphemy law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Local restrictions
Fines and restrictions
Prison sentences
Death sentences
"An Act against Atheism and Blasphemy" as enacted in 1697 in "His Majesty's PROVINCE of the MASSACHUSETTS-BAY in NEW-ENGLAND" (1759 printing)
Blasphemy law is a law limiting the freedom of speech and expression relating to blasphemy, or irreverence toward holy personages, religious artifacts, customs, or beliefs.
In place of, or in addition to, prohibitions against blasphemy, some countries have laws which give redress to those who feel insulted on account of their religion. These laws forbid hate speech, the vilification of religion, or "religious insult".
In many countries either there are no laws against blasphemy, or long-established laws are no longer enforced. In the United States, for example, a prosecution for blasphemy would violate the Constitution according to the 1952 Supreme Court case Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson. The United Kingdom abolished its laws against blasphemy in England and Wales in 2008 with the passage of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act.[1] The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was Thomas Aikenhead, aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.[2]
Similarly, in practically all of the developed Western world and East Asian developed democracies like Japan and Taiwan, blasphemy laws, when existent, are largely de facto dead letter.
In Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has recommended that countries enact laws that protect the freedom of expression.
As of 2014 in some jurisdictions the death penalty may be applicable to blasphemy.
Contents [hide]
1 Afghanistan
2 Algeria
3 Australia
4 Austria
5 Bangladesh
6 Brazil
7 Canada
8 China
9 Denmark
10 Egypt
11 European initiatives
12 Finland
13 France
14 Germany
15 Greece
16 Iceland
17 India
18 Indonesia
19 Iran
20 Ireland
21 Israel
22 Italy
23 Jordan
24 Kuwait
25 Malaysia
26 Malta
27 Mauritania
28 Netherlands
29 New Zealand
30 Nigeria
31 Norway
32 Pakistan
33 Philippines
34 Poland
35 Qatar
36 Romania
37 Russia
38 Saudi Arabia
39 South Africa
40 Spain
41 Sudan
42 Switzerland
43 Turkey
44 United Arab Emirates
45 United Kingdom
46 United States
47 Yemen
48 See also
49 References
50 External links
Afghanistan[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Afghanistan
An Islamic state, Afghanistan prohibits blasphemy as an offense under Sharia. Blasphemy can be punished by retaliatory penalties up to and including execution by hanging.[3]
Algeria[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Algeria
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
Although ninety-nine percent of Algeria's population is Sunni Muslim, and the Constitution declares that Islam is the state religion, Algeria uses retaliatory legislation rather than Sharia to combat blasphemy against Islam. The penalty for blasphemy can be up to 10 years of imprisonment and a fine.[4]
Australia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Australia
The states, the territories, and the Commonwealth of Australia are not uniform in their treatment of blasphemy. Blasphemy is an offense in some jurisdictions but is not in others. The last attempted prosecution for blasphemy by the Crown occurred in the State of Victoria in 1919.[5]
Austria[edit]
In Austria, a section of the penal code relates to blasphemy:[6]
§ 188 : Vilification of Religious Teachings
Bangladesh[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Bangladesh
Bangladesh forbids blasphemy by a provision in its penal code that prohibits "hurting religious sentiments", and by other laws and policies that attack freedom of speech.[7] In April 2013, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina rejected calls for new laws from radical Islamist groups, notably Hefajat-e Islam, demanding death penalty for people involved in blasphemy. She described Bangladesh as a "secular democracy, where every religion had a right to be practiced freely and fairly", and that "if anyone was found guilty of hurting the sentiments of the followers of any religion or its venerable figures, there was a law to deal with it".[8][9][10]
Brazil[edit]
Art. 208 of the penal code states that "publicly vilipending an act or object of religious worship" is a crime punishable with one month to a year of incarceration, or fine.[11]
Canada[edit]
Main article: Blasphemous libel
See also: Hate speech laws in Canada
China[edit]
China banned a book titled "Xing Fengsu" ("Sexual Customs") which insulted Islam and placed its authors under arrest in 1989 after protests in Lanzhou and Beijing by Chinese Hui Muslims, during which the Chinese police provided protection to the Hui Muslim protestors, and the Chinese government organized public burnings of the book.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] The Chinese government assisted them and gave into their demands because Hui do not have a separatist movement, unlike the Uyghurs,[22] Hui Muslim protestors who violently rioted by vandalizing property during the protests against the book were let off by the Chinese government and went unpunished while Uyghur protestors were imprisoned.[23]
Denmark[edit]
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
In Denmark, Paragraph 140 of the penal code is about blasphemy. The paragraph has not been used since 1938 when a Nazi group was convicted for antisemitic propaganda. The hate speech paragraph (266b) is used more frequently. Abolition of the blasphemy clause has been proposed several times by members of the parliament, but has failed to gain majority.
Egypt[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Egypt
In Egypt, insulting Islam and its prophet can and has resulted in the death penalty. For instance, seven Egyptian Christians were sentenced to death on November 28, 2012, for their role in the "Innocence of Muslims" movie.[24]
European initiatives[edit]
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, France, which has been deliberating on the issue of blasphemy law, the resolution that blasphemy should not be a criminal offence,[25] adopted on 29 June 2007 in the Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion. This Recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the Council of Europe in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In place of blasphemy or in addition to blasphemy in some European countries is the crime of "religious insult", which is a subset of the crime of blasphemy. It is forbidden in Andorra, Cyprus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Switzerland, Turkey and Ukraine.[26]
On 23 October 2008, the Venice Commission, the Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters, issued a report about blasphemy, religious insult, and incitement to religious hatred.[27] The report noted that, in Europe, blasphemy is an offense only in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, and San Marino.[contradiction] In its conclusions, the report stated "it is neither necessary nor desirable to create an offense of religious insult" and "the offense of blasphemy should be abolished".
Finland[edit]
In Finland, section 10 of chapter 17 of the Criminal Code relate to blasphemy. The section is titled "Breach of the sanctity of religion", but the law text explicitly mentions "publicly blaspheming against God".[28][29] Unsuccessful attempts were made to rescind the section in 1914, 1917, 1965, 1970, and 1998.[30]
The writer Hannu Salama was convicted of blasphemy for his 1964 novel Juhannustanssit.[31] In 1969 Harro Koskinen was prosecuted and fined for works including his painting Pig Messiah, a crucified pig; the works were later displayed in museums.[32] Jussi Halla-aho, who later became a Member of the Parliament of Finland, was fined for making connections between pedophilia and Islam in his 2008 blog text.[33]
France[edit]
The definition of “blasphemy” was introduced into French law in the 13th century (after great debate among the French Moralists), based on the definition given by St. Thomas Aquinas: a sin of language, “a failure to declare one's faith”, thus representing an attack on the purity of religion. This justified punishment by law, which became fierce during the reign of Louis IX, who became obsessed in his fight against heretics, Jews and Muslims, with punishment consisting in mutilating the tongue and lips.[34]
Acticles 10 and 11 of the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen) eliminated the notion of blasphemy from French law, but continued to prohibit the use of abusive language or disturbance of the peace. Blasphemy once again became illegal during the Bourbon Restauration (1814), to be revoked again in the 1830s. It was definitively removed from French law by the Act of 29 July 1881 which instated freedom of the press. Nonetheless, “the incitement to commit crimes and offences” is still a violation (Art. 23), as is the vindication of crime against humanity, the incitement of hate or violence based on religion, nationality, ethnic group, race, sexual orientation or handicap (Art. 24), and slander or libel against any religious group, nationality, ethnic group, race, sexual orientation or handicap(Art. 32).
The Alsace-Moselle region is a specific exception, having inherited parts of an old German legal code that bans blasphemy against Christianity and Judaism, but not Islam.[35]
Germany[edit]
In Germany, blasphemy is covered by Article 166 of the Strafgesetzbuch, the German criminal law. If a deed is capable of disturbing the public peace, blasphemy is actionable. The article reads as follows:[36]
§ 166 Defamation of religious denominations, religious societies and World view associations(1) Whoever publicly or by dissemination of writings (§ 11 par. 3) defames, in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace, the substance of the religious or world view conviction of others, shall be fined or imprisoned for up to three years.(2) Whoever publicly or by dissemination of writings (§ 11 par. 3) defames, in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace, a church established in Germany or other religious society or world view association, or their institutions or customs, shall be punished likewise.
In 2006, the application of this article received much media attention when a Manfred van H. (also known as "Mahavo") was prosecuted for blasphemy for distributing rolls of toilet paper with the words "Koran, the Holy Koran" stamped on them.[37][38]
Greece[edit]
Articles 198, 199, and 201 of the Greek Penal Code create offences which involve blasphemy. Article 198 "Malicious Blasphemy" provides:
1. One who publicly and maliciously and by any means blasphemes God shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years.2. Except for cases under paragraph 1, one who by blasphemy publicly manifests a lack of respect for the divinity shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months.[39]
Article 199 "Blasphemy Concerning Religions" states: "One who publicly and maliciously and by any means blasphemes the Greek Orthodox Church or any other religion tolerable in Greece shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years".[39]
Article 201 provides: "One who willfully removes a corpse, parts of a corpse or the ashes of the dead from those who have lawful custody thereof or one who commits an offense with respect to a corpse or acts blasphemously and improperly toward a grave, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years".[39]
Greece has not used its laws about blasphemy to protect any religion other than the Greek Orthodox Church, which is the state church of Greece.[39] In December 2003, Greece prosecuted for blasphemy Gerhard Haderer, an Austrian, along with his Greek publisher and four booksellers. Haderer is the author of an illustrated, humorous book entitled The Life of Jesus. The prosecutor contended that the book’s depiction of Jesus as a hippie was blasphemous. On 13 April 2005, the Court of Appeal of Athens, reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, and acquitted Haderer.[40]
Greece complements its laws against blasphemy with laws against "religious insult". The laws forbid the creation, display or trade in work that "insults public sentiment" or that "offends people's religious sentiments". The right to redress for a religious insult has so far been restricted to Christians.[41][42]
Iceland[edit]
In Iceland, blasphemy is forbidden with a fine or prison sentence up to three months.[43] The constitution also mentions the state religion and religion in general.
India[edit]
Main article: Hate speech laws in India
Since Hinduism, India's dominant religion, being polytheistic and pantheistic, did not have the concept of blasphemy,[44][45] such laws are absent in tradition. In practice, however, blasphemy is classified as hate speech and prosecuted. In 1860, British rule codified Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code which punishes as hate speech insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of any class of citizen with deliberate and malicious intention to outrage their religious feelings. These laws are applied to all religions including Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianity and Islam.[46]
Indonesia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Indonesia
Article 156(a) of Indonesia's Criminal Code forbids anyone from deliberately, in public, expressing feelings of hostility, hatred, or contempt against religions with the purpose of preventing others from adhering to any religion, and forbids anyone from disgracing a religion. The penalty for violating Article 156(a) is a maximum of five years of imprisonment.[47][48]
Iran[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Iran
An Islamic theocracy, Iran derives its law against blasphemy from Sharia. The law against blasphemy complements laws against criticizing the Islamic regime, insulting Islam, and publishing materials that deviate from Islamic standards.[49]
Ireland[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Ireland
In Ireland, blasphemy is prohibited by the constitution and carries a maximum fine of €25,000. A controversial law was passed on 9 July 2009 and went into effect on 1 January 2010.[50]
Israel[edit]
In Israel, blasphemy is covered by Articles 170 and 173 of the penal code.[51][52]
Insult to religion170. If a person destroys, damages or desecrates a place of worship or any object which is held sacred by a group of persons, with the intention of reviling their religion, or in the knowledge that they are liable to deem that act an insult to their religion, then the one is liable to three years imprisonment.Injury to religious sentiment173. If a person does any of the following, then the one is liable to one year imprisonment:(1) One publishes a publication that is liable to crudely offend the religious faith or sentiment of others;(2) One voices in a public place and in the hearing of another person any word or sound that is liable to crudely offend the religious faith or sentiment of others.
The law is traced back to the British High Commission "The Abuse and Vilification (religious invective) Order No. 43 of 1929", enacted in efforts to suppress the 1929 Palestine riots. The order contained the language: "Any person who utters a word or sound in public or within earshot of any other person that may be or is intended to offend his religious sensitivities or faith can expect to be found guilty and eligible for a one-year jail sentence."[53]
Italy[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011)
In Italy, under the article 724 of the penal Code, blasphemy now is considered as an "administrative offense" and punished with a fine. First introduced in 1930, the blasphemy has been decriminalized with the law N°205 of 25 June 1999. Unequivocally, the law punish only the blasphemy against divinities.
Jordan[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Jordan
Jordan's Penal Code prohibits anyone from blaspheming Islam, demeaning Islam or Muslim feelings, or insulting Prophet Mohammed.[54] Violating the prohibitions makes the violator liable for imprisonment (up to three years) and a fine.[55]
Kuwait[edit]
Main article: Legal system of Kuwait
Malaysia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Malaysia
Malaysia prevents insult to religion and to the religious by education, by restrictions upon the broadcasting and publishing media, and by the legal system. Some states in the Malaysian federation operate Sharia courts to protect Islam, and, when Sharia is not applicable, the Malaysian Penal Code provides penalties for offenses against religion.[56]
Malta[edit]
Instead of a law against blasphemy, Malta has laws against the vilification of religion, and against immorality. Enacted in 1933, Article 163 of Malta's Criminal Code[57] prohibits vilification of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Religion, which is Malta's religion. Vilification of Malta's religion makes the vilifier liable to imprisonment for a term from one to six months. By Article 164, vilification of any cult "tolerated by law" makes the vilifier liable to imprisonment for a term from one to three months. Article 338(bb) imposes liability upon anyone who, "even though in a state of intoxication, publicly utters any obscene or indecent words, or makes obscene acts or gestures, or in any other manner not otherwise provided for in this Code, offends against public morality, propriety or decency". Article 342 provides:
In respect of the contravention under article 338(bb), where the act consists in uttering blasphemous words or expressions, the minimum punishment to be awarded shall in no case be less than a fine (amenda) of eleven euro and sixty-five cents (11.65) and the maximum punishment may be imprisonment for a term of three months . . . .
In 2008, criminal procedures were initiated against 621 people for blaspheming in public.[58]
Mauritania[edit]
See : The crime of apostasy is defined in section IV (entitled Act of Indecency toward Islam) of the Mauritanian Penal Code, established under the order of July 9, 1983. Article 306, paragraph 1 of the criminal code indicates, “Every Muslim guilty of the crime of apostasy, either by word or by action of apparent or obvious, will be invited to repent within three days.” [59]
Netherlands[edit]
The Netherlands prohibited blasphemy by a provision in its penal code from the 1930s up until December 2013.[60] Article 147 punished (by up to three months in jail or a fine of the second category (i.e. up to €3,800[61])) anyone who publicly, orally or in writing or depiction, offends religious feelings by scornful blasphemy.[62] Furthermore, article 429bis prohibited displaying blasphemous material at places visible from the public road.[63] The law came into being in the 1930s after the Communist Party called for Christmas to be dropped from the list of state holidays.[64] The last successful conviction under Article 147 took place in the early 1960s when a student newspaper was fined 100 guilders for satirizing the New Testament.[64] The law against blasphemy complements laws against racial discrimination and incitement to violence[citation needed].
In 1966, the Public Prosecution Service prosecuted Gerard Reve under Article 147. In his novel Nader tot U ("Nearer to Thee"), Reve describes the narrator's sexual intercourse with God, who is incarnated in a donkey. The court of first instance convicted Reve. He appealed. In April 1968, an appeal court quashed the conviction.[65][66]
In November 2008, Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin expressed the country’s coalition government's intent to repeal Article 147.[65] He said the government would strengthen the legislation against discrimination to prohibit any insult to any group of people.[67] In May 2009, the government decided to leave the law as it is. The decision followed a high court ruling in which a man who had put up a poster that read "stop the tumour that is Islam" was found not guilty of insulting a group of people on the grounds of their religion.[67] The decision not to abolish the ban on blasphemy was partly motivated to ensure the support of the orthodox Christian SGP for the minority government in the senate. After a general election in 2012, a new coalition government was formed and a majority of parliament has pledged to support a proposal to repeal the blasphemy law.[68]
In November 2012, the parliament decided to overturn the blasphemy laws.[69] It will pass with support from the VVD, but the fundamentalist Christian group SGP are strongly opposed to the measure. According to the SGP, the decision to lift the ban on blasphemy is a “painful loss of a moral anchor and a symptom of a spiritual crisis”. Secular groups have praised the measure.[citation needed]
On February 1, 2014, the law on blasphemy was officially abolished.[70]
New Zealand[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in New Zealand
In New Zealand, Section 123[71] of the Crimes Act 1961 allows for imprisonment up to one year for anyone who publishes any "blasphemous libel". However, these cases are only prosecuted at the discretion of the concurrent New Zealand Attorney-General, who usually cites overriding free speech objections so as not to pursue such a case. To date the only prosecution for blasphemous libel in New Zealand has been the case of John Glover, publisher of The Maoriland Worker (a newspaper), in 1922. Glover was acquitted.
Nigeria[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Nigeria
Nigeria prohibits blasphemy by section 204 of its Criminal Code and by permitting Sharia courts to operate in some states.[72][73] Vigilantism frequently usurps the jurisdiction of the courts.[74]
Norway[edit]
In 2009, the Norwegian Parliament voted to remove the dormant law against blasphemy (§ 142 in the penal code).[75][76] It was, however, removed from the penal code of 2005, which has not yet been taken into use in the Norwegian judicial system (due to technical problems). The penal code of 1902, which is still active, still contains a (dormant) law against blasphemy.[75][76]
The famous writer and social activist Arnulf Øverland was the last to be tried by this law, in 1933,[77] after giving a speech named "Kristendommen – den tiende landeplage" ("Christianity – the tenth plague"), but was acquitted. The last person sentenced for blasphemy in Norway was Arnfred Olsen in 1912, and he had to pay a fine of 10 Norwegian krone.[78]
Pakistan[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Pakistan
The anti-blasphemy laws in Pakistan are quite complicated. Offenders may be vigorously prosecuted. Chapter XV of Pakistan Penal Code deals with "offences relating to religion":[79]
§295. Injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to insult the religion of any class.[79]
§295-A. Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting Its religion or religious beliefs.[79]
§295-B. Defiling, etc., of Holy Qur'an.[79]
§295-C. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet.[79]
§296. Disturbing religious assembly.[79]
§297. Trespassing on burial places, etc.[79]
§298. Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings.[79]
§298-A. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of holy personages.[79]
§298-B. Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc., reserved for certain holy personages or places.[79]
§298-C. Person of Qadiani group, etc., calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith:[79]
There is a death penalty for blasphemy in Pakistan. Those prosecuted are usually minorities such as Ahmadiyya and Christians but it seems that they are also increasingly Muslims.[80] Persons accused of blasphemy as well as police, lawyers, and judges have been subject to harassment, threats, attacks, and murders when blasphemy is the issue.[81]
In November 2008, Pakistan's government appointed Shahbaz Bhatti as Federal Minister for Minorities and gave him cabinet rank. Bhatti had promised that the Asif Ali Zardari government would review Pakistan's blasphemy laws.[82] Pakistan has been an active supporter of the campaign by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to create global laws against blasphemy.[82] Minister Bhatti was shot dead on 2 March 2011 in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. On March 19, 2014, Pakistani English-language newspaper, The Nation, conducted a poll of its readers that showed 68% of Pakistanis believe the blasphemy law should be repealed.[83]
Philippines[edit]
"Crimes against religious worship" are stated under section four of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. Under article 132 and 133 respectively "interruption of religious worship" and "offending the religious feelings" are punishable by law. "Interruption of religious worship" is defined as "preventing or disturbing the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion" and "offending the religious feelings" is defined as "performing acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful" in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony.[84]
Penalties range from imprisonment of four months and a day to six months; crimes that involve violence or threats can carry a penalty of up to six years in jail.
This law effectively makes secularism, illegal in the Philippines.
Poland[edit]
While Poland's penal code makes no reference to any sort of blasphemy law, it states that "Whoever offends religious feelings of other people by publicly insulting an object of religious cult or a place for public holding of religious ceremonies, is subject to a fine, restriction of liberty or loss of liberty for up to 2 years". The article has been used by pro-Church politicians and activists on numerous occasions, whenever they felt their religious feelings had been offended in some way. Opponents of the article maintain that it seriously limits the freedom of speech and effectively prevents any kind of debate on the Church's widespread influence on social, sexual and political life of Poland.
Qatar[edit]
The penalty for committing blasphemy in Qatar is a jail sentence of up to 7 years.[85] Additionally, the law stipulates a 1-year prison sentence or QR1,000 fine for defamation of Islam by producing or promoting defamatory imagery.[86]
Religious criticism on websites is censored in Qatar.[87] The censorship office of the Qatar General Broadcasting and Television Corporation monitors imported foreign broadcasting for sensitive religious content.[88]
Romania[edit]
Romania does not have any blasphemy laws in force. According to Romanian law, "cults, religious associations and religious groups [...] must not infringe upon [...] fundamental human rights and liberties",[89] which, according to the Constitution of Romania, include freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.[90]
Russia[edit]
Currently, Russian lawmakers are considering a bill proposing prison sentences for desecration.[91] The State Duma will investigate "the situation of sacrilegious acts against Church property and propose amendments to the Russian Penal Code" in their 2012 Autumn Session.[91] The Union of Orthodox Citizens and MP of United Russia agreed with the proposal, the latter stating: "We really should make some amendments to the Penal Code in order to cool down these outcasts who have nothing else to do in their lives [other than commit such offenses]."[91][92]
Bill was accepted 11 June 2013.[93][94] Аccording to art.148 of Russian Crimianl Code 1 it is declared a federal crime to conduct "public actions, clearly defying the society and committed with express purpose of insulting religious beliefs". Part 2 of the same article places a stricter punishments for the aforementioned actions, when coupled with desecration of holy symbols and (or) religious texts.
Saudi Arabia[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia
Islam is Saudi Arabia's state religion. The country's monarchy follows Sunni Islam.[95] The country's laws are an amalgam of rules from Sharia, royal edicts, and fatawa from the Council of Senior Religious Scholars. Those laws prescribe penalties up to the death penalty for blasphemy.[96]
South Africa[edit]
Blasphemy is a common law offence in South Africa, defined as "unlawfully, intentionally and publicly acting contemptuously towards God."[97][98] Several legal writers have suggested that the illegality of blasphemy has become unconstitutional as a result of the adoption in 1994 of the Bill of Rights, which includes the right to freedom of expression.[99][100] It has also been suggested that it is unconstitutional because the criminal prohibition only applies to blasphemy against Christianity, and therefore discriminates on the basis of religion.[97][99]
Blasphemy prosecutions have been rare since the start of the twentieth century, to the point that writers in the early part of the century suggested that the crime had been abrogated through disuse. However, in 1934 a newspaper editor was convicted of blasphemy for publishing a story in which a nun has a vision of a sexual relationship with Jesus Christ, and the validity of the conviction was affirmed by the Appellate Division.[99] In 1962 Harold Rubin was prosecuted for a painting depicting Christ naked on the cross along with inversions of Biblical sayings, but he was acquitted.[99] In 1968 the editor of Varsity was prosecuted for publishing a report of a symposium on the topic "Is God Dead?", which quoted statements that "We must write God off entirely" and "[God] is beginning to stink".[101] He was convicted, but at sentencing received only a caution and discharge.[102]
The Equality Act of 2000 forbids hate speech, which is defined as "words based on one or more of the prohibited grounds, against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to: (a) be hurtful; (b) be harmful or to incite harm; (c) promote or propagate hatred." The "prohibited grounds" include religion, and thus some blasphemous speech falls within the scope of hate speech. The prohibition of hate speech is, however, not a criminal prohibition, and only civil penalties would result.[103]
Spain[edit]
The article 525 of the penal law in Spain considers "vilification" of religious "feelings", "dogmas", "beliefs" or "rituals". This extension to "dogmas" and "beliefs" makes it very close to a blasphemy law in practice, depending on the interpretation of the judge.
For instance, in 2012 it was used to prosecute a famous artist, Javier Krahe, for a scene (shot 34 years ago, and lasting just 54 seconds) in a documentary about him.[104]
Sudan[edit]
Sunni Islam is the state religion of Sudan. Before South Sudan received independence, about seventy percent[citation needed] of the country's population was Muslim. The next largest group—about twenty-five percent of the population—was animist.[105]
Section 125 of the Sudanese Criminal Act prohibits "insulting religion, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs". The section includes as penalties: imprisonment, a fine, and a maximum of forty lashes. In November 2007, the section gave rise to the Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case. In December 2007, the section was used against two Egyptian booksellers. They were sentenced to six months in prison because they sold a book that the court deemed an insult to Aisha, one of Prophet Mohammed's wives.[106]
In May 2005, the authorities arrested Mohammed Taha Mohammed Ahmed, and charged him with violating section 125. Ahmed was the editor-in-chief of a daily newspaper Al-Wifaq. The paper had published an article about a 500-year-old Islamic manuscript which says the real name of Mohammed’s father was not Abdallah but Abdel Lat, or Slave of Lat, an idol of the pre-Islamic era.[107] A court fined Al-Wifaq eight million Sudanese pounds—the paper was shut down for three months—but acquitted Ahmed. Ahmed was found decapitated in September 2006.[108]
Switzerland[edit]
In Switzerland, Article 261 of the penal code titled "Attack on the freedom of faith and the freedom to worship" (Störung der Glaubens- und Kultusfreiheit) criminalizes:[109]
public and malicious insult or mockery of religious convictions of others
malicious desecration objects of religious veneration
malicious prevention, disruption or public mockery of an act of worship
malicious desecration of a place or object that is intended for a religious ceremony or an act of worship
Turkey[edit]
Article 216 of the Turkish Penal Code ("Provoking people to be rancorous and hostile") criminalizes blasphemy and religious insult, as well as hate speech. The article, which is in the fifth section of the Turkish Penal Code ("Offenses Against Public Peace") is as follows:
Article 216. – Provoking people to be rancorous and hostile(1) Any person who openly provokes a group of people belonging to different social class, religion, race, sect, or coming from another origin, to be rancorous or hostile against another group, is punished with imprisonment from one year to three years in case of such act causes risk from the aspect of public safety.(2) Any person who openly humiliates another person just because he belongs to different social class, religion, race, sect, or comes from another origin, is punished with imprisonment from six months to one year.(3) Any person who openly disrespects the religious belief of a group is punished with imprisonment from six months to one year if such act causes potential risk for public peace.[110]
United Arab Emirates[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in the United Arab Emirates
The United Arab Emirates discourage blasphemy by controlling what is published and distributed, by using Sharia punishments against Muslims, and by using judge-made penalties against non-Muslims.[111][112]
United Kingdom[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in the United Kingdom
Blasphemy laws in the United Kingdom were specific to blasphemy against Christianity. The last attempted prosecution under these laws was in 2007 when the fundamentalist group Christian Voice sought a private prosecution against the BBC over its broadcasting of the show Jerry Springer: The Opera (which includes a scene depicting Jesus, dressed as a baby, professing to be "a bit gay"). The charges were rejected by the City of Westminster magistrates court. Christian Voice applied to have this ruling overturned by the High Court, but the application was rejected. The court found that the common law blasphemy offences specifically did not apply to stage productions (s. 2(4) of the Theatres Act 1968) and broadcasts (s. 6 of the Broadcasting Act 1990).[113][114]
The last successful blasphemy prosecution (also a private prosecution) was Whitehouse v. Lemon in 1977, when Denis Lemon, the editor of Gay News, was found guilty. His newspaper had published James Kirkup's poem "The Love that Dares to Speak its Name", which allegedly vilified Christ and his life. Lemon was fined £500 and given a suspended sentence of nine months imprisonment. It had been "touch and go", said the judge, whether he would actually send Lemon to jail.[115] In 2002, a deliberate and well-publicised public repeat reading of the poem took place on the steps of St Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, but failed to lead to any prosecution.[116]
The last person in Britain to be imprisoned for blasphemy was John William Gott on 9 December 1921. He had three previous convictions for blasphemy when he was prosecuted for publishing two pamphlets which satirised the biblical story of Jesus entering Jerusalem (Matthew 21:2–7), comparing Jesus to a circus clown. He was sentenced to nine months' hard labour.[citation needed]
In 1696, a Scottish court sentenced Thomas Aikenhead to death for blasphemy.[117] The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1843.[118]
On 5 March 2008, an amendment was passed to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales. (Common law is abolished, not repealed.) The Act received royal assent on 8 May 2008,[119][120] and the relevant section came into force on 8 July 2008.[121][122]
The 1989 film Visions of Ecstasy was the only film ever banned in the UK for blasphemy. Following the 2008 repeal of the blasphemy law, the film was eventually classified by the BBFC for release as 18-rated in 2012.[123]
United States[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in the United States
A prosecution for blasphemy in the United States would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution and no blasphemy laws exist at the federal level. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . ."
Because of the First Amendment's protection of free speech and religious exercise from federal interference, and the Supreme Court's extension of those protections against state regulation, the United States and its constituent state governments may not prosecute blasphemous speech or religious insults and may not allow civil actions on those grounds. In Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that New York could not enforce a censorship law against filmmakers whose films contained "sacrilegious" content. The opinion of the Court, by Justice Clark, stated that:
"From the standpoint of freedom of speech and the press, it is enough to point out that the state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them which is sufficient to justify prior restraints upon the expression of those views. It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine, whether they appear in publications, speeches, or motion pictures."[124]
It should be noted, however, that the United States and some individual state jurisdictions provide for stronger criminal penalties for crimes when committed against a person because of that person's religious affiliation. For instance, Section 3A1.1 of the 2009 United States Sentencing Guidelines states that: "If the finder of fact at trial or, in the case of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court at sentencing determines beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally selected any victim or any property as the object of the offense of conviction because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person," the sentencing court is required to increase the standard sentencing range.[125]
Yemen[edit]
Main article: Blasphemy law in Yemen
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2013)
Accusations of blasphemy in Yemen are often aimed at religious minorities, intellectuals and artists, reporters, human rights defenders, and opponents of the ruling party. Vigilantism or abuse by the authorities can kill an accused or force them into exile. The accused in Yemen is subject to Islamic law (Sharia). Sharia, according to some interpretations, prescribes death as the proper punishment for blasphemy.
See also[edit]
Freedom of expression
Freedom of speech
Islam and blasphemy
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Beckford, Martin (10 May 2008). "Blasphemy laws are lifted". The Telegraph.
2.Jump up ^ "Thomas Aikenhead". 5.uua.org. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
3.Jump up ^ "2008 Report on International Religious Freedom – Afghanistan". United States Department of State. 19 September 2008. Retrieved 2 July 2009.
4.Jump up ^ "UPDATE: Algeria: Samia Smets acquitted". Women Living Under Muslim Laws. 30 October 2008. Retrieved 23 July 2009.
5.Jump up ^ Priestly, Brenton (n.d.). "Blasphemy and the Law: A Comparative Study (2006)". Retrieved 6 July 2009.
6.Jump up ^ "(English)Penal Code". Retrieved 14 January 2011. "(English) § 188 Vilification of Religious Teachings: Anyone who publicly disparages a person or thing that is the object of worship of a domestic church or religious society, or a doctrine, [or other] behavior is likely to attract legitimate offense shall be punished... § 189 Disturbance of Religious Practice: (1) Whoever prevents by force or threat of violence, the law permitted such service or individual acts of worship in a church or religious community existing domestic or interfere, shall be punished with imprisonment up (2) Whoever [commits in a Church or religious place] mischief that is likely to attract legitimate offense shall be punished..."[dead link]
7.Jump up ^ "Strict blasphemy laws limit religious debate in Bangladesh". AsiaMedia. 18 May 2006. Retrieved 5 August 2009.
8.Jump up ^ "No blasphemy law needed: B'desh PM", Asia News Net
9.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina rejects blasphemy law", BBC News
10.Jump up ^ "Sheikh Hasina rejects call for blasphemy law", The Hindu
11.Jump up ^ "Art. 208 do Cód. Penal Brasileiro". Jus Brasil. 1940. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
12.Jump up ^ Beijing Review, Volume 32 1989, p. 13.
13.Jump up ^ Gladney 1991, p. 2.
14.Jump up ^ Schein 2000, p. 154.
15.Jump up ^ Gladney 2004, p. 66.
16.Jump up ^ Bulag 2010, p. 104.
17.Jump up ^ Gladney 2005, p. 257.
18.Jump up ^ Gladney 2013, p. 144.
19.Jump up ^ Sautman 2000, p. 79.
20.Jump up ^ Gladney 1996, p. 341.
21.Jump up ^ Lipman 1996, p. 299.
22.Jump up ^ Harold Miles Tanner (2009). China: a history. Hackett Publishing. p. 610. ISBN 0-87220-915-6. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
23.Jump up ^ Gladney 2004, p. 232.
24.Jump up ^ Hoft, Jim. "Seven Egyptian Christians Sentenced to Death For Role in Anti-Mohammad Movie". Retrieved 29 November 2012.
25.Jump up ^ Recommendation 1805 (2007) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
26.Jump up ^ Matthew Vella. "Blasphemy? It’s not criminal – Council of Europe", Malta Today. 8 March 2009
27.Jump up ^ European Commission for Democracy through Law. 'Report on the Relationship between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion: The issue of Regulation and Prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult, and incitement to religious hatred'[dead link]. Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 76th Plenary Session at Venice, Italy, on 17–18 October 2008.
28.Jump up ^ The Criminal Code of Finland (in Finnish), Finlex
29.Jump up ^ An unofficial translation of the Criminal Code of Finland (there is no official translation), Finlex
30.Jump up ^ History of Religion Crime Laws (in Finnish), Uskonnonvapaus.fi
31.Jump up ^ "Hannu Salama – kirjallisuuspalkittu jumalanpilkkaaja". Ylen Elävä arkisto (in Finnish).
32.Jump up ^ "Sikamaalari Harro Koskinen". Ylen Elävä arkisto (in Finnish).
33.Jump up ^ "Halla-aholle tuomio uskonrauhan rikkomisesta". Yle (in Finnish). September 8, 2009.
34.Jump up ^ Olivier Bobineau, « Retour de l'ordre religieux ou signe de bonne santé de notre pluralisme laïc ? » [archive], Le Monde.fr, 8 décembre 2011 (consulté le 15 janvier 2015)
35.Jump up ^ Charlie Hebdo has controversial history, CBC News, Jan 8 2015
36.Jump up ^ §166 of the Strafgesetzbuch, the German criminal law
37.Jump up ^ "Suspended prison for German who insulted Koran". Expatica. 23 February 2006.
38.Jump up ^ Report in the Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger (in German)
39.^ Jump up to: a b c d [1][dead link]
40.Jump up ^ Austrian author acquitted on appeal in blasphemy case – IFEX
41.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy and Sacrilege: European Law and Cases"
42.Jump up ^ [2][dead link]
43.Jump up ^ (in Icelandic). Parliament of Iceland http://www.althingi.is/lagas/133b/1940019.html. Retrieved September 25, 2014. Missing or empty |title= (help)
44.Jump up ^ de Lingen, John; Ramsurrun, Pahlad. An Introduction to The Hindu Faith. Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd. p. 2. ISBN 978-81-207-4086-0.
45.Jump up ^ Murthy, B. S. (2003). Puppets of Faith: theory of communal strife. Bulusu Satyanarayana Murthy. p. 7. ISBN 978-81-901911-1-1.
46.Jump up ^ "Indian Penal Code Section 295A". Vakil No1. Retrieved 21 May 2010.
47.Jump up ^ "Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009" (PDF). Indonesia. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. May 2009. Retrieved 24 June 2009.
48.Jump up ^ Al ‘Afghani, Mohamad Mova (3 December 2007). "Ruling against blasphemy unconstitutional". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
49.Jump up ^ "Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009" (PDF). Retrieved 6 July 2009.
50.Jump up ^ Henry MacDonald, "Irish to vote on repealing blasphemy ban", Melbourne Age, 17 March 2010.
51.Jump up ^ Hebrew Wikisource
52.Jump up ^ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
53.Jump up ^ "Make fun of God, but leave his believers alone", Haaretz, 27 August 2003
54.Jump up ^ Samson, Elizabeth (10 September 2008). "Criminalizing Criticism of Islam". Wall Street Journal Europe. Retrieved 26 June 2009.
55.Jump up ^ Ma'ayeh, Suha (30 May 2008). "Jordan court to rule on cartoon case". The National (United Arab Emirates). Retrieved 30 June 2009.
56.Jump up ^ "Background Note: Malaysia". U.S. State Department. July 2009. Retrieved 31 August 2009.
57.Jump up ^ "Malta's Criminal Code"
58.Jump up ^ Criminal proceedings for blaspheming and littering with cigarette butts – timesofmalta.com
59.Jump up ^ http://talsou.wesign.it/en
60.Jump up ^ "Blasphemy law will be scrapped". From DutchNews.nl. DutchNews.nl. 3 December 2013. Retrieved 5 January 2014.
61.Jump up ^ "Penal code of the Netherlands, article 23" (in Dutch). Retrieved 9 October 2010.
62.Jump up ^ "Europe: Where there's a will, there is a law". Straits Times. AsiaMedia. 8 February 2006. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
63.Jump up ^ "Penal code of the Netherlands, article 429bis" (in Dutch). Retrieved 9 October 2010.
64.^ Jump up to: a b Conger, George (9 November 2008). "Blasphemy law is dropped in Netherlands". Religious Intelligence. Retrieved 28 August 2009.[dead link]
65.^ Jump up to: a b "Blasphemy law ditched by the Dutch". Radio Netherlands Worldwide. 1 November 2008. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
66.Jump up ^ Tamis, Theo (9 April 2006). "Nearer to Thee, Gerard Reve dies". Radio Nederland Wereldomroep. Retrieved 28 August 2009.[dead link]
67.^ Jump up to: a b "Cabinet drops repeal of blasphemy law". DutchNews.nl. 28 May 2009. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
68.Jump up ^ "Liberal VVD ensure majority support for scrapping blasphemy laws". DutchNews.nl. 28 November 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.
69.Jump up ^ Bezhan, Frud (29 November 2012). "Dutch Parliament To Revoke Blasphemy Law". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
70.Jump up ^ Wet van 23 januari 2014 tot wijziging van het Wetboek van Strafrecht in verband met het laten vervallen van het verbod op godslastering, Stb. 2014, 39. (Law of January 23, 2014 to amend the Criminal Code in connection with the abolishment of the ban on blasphemy)
71.Jump up ^ Crimes Act 1961 – Section 123
72.Jump up ^ "Criminal Code Act". Chapter 77 (Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990). Nigeria. Retrieved 2 August 2009.
73.Jump up ^ "Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999". Nigeria. Retrieved 2 August 2009.
74.Jump up ^ "2008 Human Rights Report: Introduction". U.S. State Department. 25 February 2008. Retrieved 2 August 2009.
75.^ Jump up to: a b Gran, Even (27 August 2012). "Norge har fortsatt en blasfemiparagraf". fritanke.no (in Norwegian). Human-Etisk Forbund. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
76.^ Jump up to: a b Hultgren, Gunnar (22 April 2013). "Åtte år etter at Stortinget vedtok ny lov, er loven fortsatt ikke tatt i bruk". dagbladet.no (in Norwegian). Dagbladet. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
77.Jump up ^ Blasfemiparagrafen (Norwegian) Human.no, retrieved 15 February 2015
78.Jump up ^ Andre krenkelser (Norwegian) Nored.no, retrieved 2 June 2013
79.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k Pakistan Penal Code Chap. XV "Of Offences Relating to Religion" pp. 79–81
80.Jump up ^ Ahmed, Akbar S. (19 May 2002). "Pakistan's Blasphemy Law: Words Fail Me". The Washington Post. Retrieved 28 June 2009.[dead link]
81.Jump up ^ United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (8 October 2008). "Asma Jahangir". United Nations. Retrieved 27 June 2009.
82.^ Jump up to: a b "Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009" (PDF). Pakistan. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. May 2009. Retrieved 24 June 2009.
83.Jump up ^ http://www.nation.com.pk/E-Paper/lahore/2014-03-19/page-7
84.Jump up ^ http://www.dpwh.gov.ph/about_us/reforms/graft_n_corruption/pdf/Revised%20Penal%20Code1.pdf
85.Jump up ^ "Religious law, prison for “blasphemy”, severe sexual inequalilty: Qatar’s human rights review". International Humanist and Ethical Union. 22 September 2014. Retrieved 27 January 2015.
86.Jump up ^ "2012 International Religious Freedom Report on Qatar" (PDF). The United States Federal Government. Retrieved 27 January 2015.
87.Jump up ^ Blanchard, Christoper (2014). Qatar: Background and U.S. Relations. Congressional Research Service. p. 17.
88.Jump up ^ Figenschou, Tine Ustad (2013). Al Jazeera and the Global Media Landscape: The South is Talking Back. Routledge. p. 38. ISBN 978-0415814430.
89.Jump up ^ "Law no. 489/2006 on religious freedom and the general status of cults". Retrieved January 26, 2013.
90.Jump up ^ "Constitution of Romania, Chapter II". Retrieved January 26, 2013.
91.^ Jump up to: a b c "‘Jail for sacrilege’: Vandalism by Pussy Riot supporters angers MPs". Russia Today. 22 August 2012. Retrieved 22 August 2012.
92.Jump up ^ "Les miliciens orthodoxes déclarent ouverte la chasse aux hérétiques". Le Courrier de Russie. 22 August 2012. Retrieved 22 August 2012.
93.Jump up ^ Duma approves criminalization of insulting religious feelings // RT, 11 June 2013
94.Jump up ^ Russian Lawmakers Back Jail Terms for Insulting Religion // RIA Novosti, 11/06/2013
95.Jump up ^ Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009.
96.Jump up ^ Latest International Human Rights News and Information | Amnesty International USA
97.^ Jump up to: a b Milton, John (1996). "Chapter 17: Blasphemy". South African Criminal Law and Procedure: Common-law Crimes (3rd ed.). Cape Town: Juta. pp. 293–300. ISBN 9780702137730.
98.Jump up ^ Burchell, Jonathan (2005). "Chapter 74: Blasphemy". Principles of Criminal Law (3rd ed.). Cape Town: Juta. pp. 880–883. ISBN 9780702165573.
99.^ Jump up to: a b c d Smith, Nicholas (1999). "The crime of blasphemy and the protection of fundamental human rights". South African Law Journal 116 (1): 162–173.
100.Jump up ^ de Vos, Pierre (2 November 2012). "On Woolworths and freedom of conscience". Constitutionally Speaking. Retrieved 4 September 2012.
101.Jump up ^ Uys, Stanley (20 January 1968). "'Is God Dead?': Court Case Centers On Issue". St. Petersburg Times. Retrieved 4 September 2012.
102.Jump up ^ Merrett, Christopher Edmond (1994). A Culture of Censorship: Secrecy and Intellectual Repression in South Africa. Cape Town: David Philip. p. 67. ISBN 0864862598.
103.Jump up ^ "Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000" (PDF). Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
104.Jump up ^ Juicio oral contra Javier Krahe por su corto 'Cómo cocinar a un Cristo' – Público.es
105.Jump up ^ Rone, Jemera (25 September 2007). "Religious Persecution in Sudan". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 28 July 2009.
106.Jump up ^ "Sudan jails two Egyptians for blasphemy". Sudan Tribune. 18 December 2007. Retrieved 28 July 2009.
107.Jump up ^ "Alarm about trial of journalist on blasphemy charge". Reporters Without Borders. 12 May 2005. Retrieved 29 July 2009.[dead link]
108.Jump up ^ "Kidnapped Sudanese Editor Found Slain / Journalist beheaded in Khartoum". One-click News. 6 September 2006. Retrieved 28 July 2009.
109.Jump up ^ Article 261 of the penal code, Switzerland
110.Jump up ^ http://legislationline.org/documents/action/popup/id/6872/preview
111.Jump up ^ "United Arab Emirates". U.S. Department of State. 31 January 1994. Retrieved 20 August 2009.[dead link]
112.Jump up ^ "United Arab Emirates". International Religious Freedom Report 2008. U.S. Department of State. n.d. Retrieved 20 August 2009.
113.Jump up ^ "Springer opera court fight fails". BBC News. 5 December 2007. Retrieved 5 December 2007.
114.Jump up ^ Green, R (on the application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates' Court [2007] EWHC 2785 (Admin) (5 December 2007)
115.Jump up ^ Brett Humphreys: The Law That Dared to Lay the Blame
116.Jump up ^ Erotic poem challenges blasphemy law
117.Jump up ^ "McLaurin's Arguments and Definitions". The Scots Magazine. 1 July 1774. Retrieved 10 January 2015 – via British Newspaper Archive. (subscription required (help)).
118.Jump up ^ Hugh Barclay: A Digest of the Law of Scotland: With Special Reference to the Office, T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1855, p.86
119.Jump up ^ Ruth Geller. "Goodbye to Blasphemy in Britain". Institute for Humanist Studies. Archived from the original on 7 June 2008. Retrieved 6 June 2008.
120.Jump up ^ Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, see section 79 and Part 5 of Schedule 28.
121.Jump up ^ JURIST – Paper Chase: UK House of Lords votes to abolish criminal blasphemy
122.Jump up ^ Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, section 153: Commencement
123.Jump up ^ "Visions Of Ecstasy gets UK rating after 23 year ban". BBC News. 31 January 2012.
124.Jump up ^ Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495 (1952)
125.Jump up ^ United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual § 3A1.1 (2009)[dead link]
External links[edit]
Landmarks in blasphemy
Thomas Hammarberg, CoE Commissioner for Human Rights: Do not criminalize critical remarks against religions, 2007
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Blasphemy law by country
Afghanistan ·
Algeria ·
Australia ·
Bangladesh ·
Egypt ·
Finland ·
Germany ·
Greece ·
Indonesia ·
Iran ·
Ireland ·
Israel ·
Jordan ·
Kuwait ·
Malaysia ·
Netherlands ·
New Zealand ·
Nigeria ·
Norway ·
Pakistan ·
Saudi Arabia ·
South Africa ·
Sudan ·
Switzerland ·
United Arab Emirates ·
United Kingdom ·
United States ·
Yemen
Blasphemy ·
Blasphemy and the United Nations
Categories: Blasphemy law by country
Crimes in religion
Blasphemy law
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Hrvatski
Italiano
Русский
Edit links
This page was last modified on 28 May 2015, at 07:09.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
Defamation of religion and the United Nations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Blasphemy and the United Nations)
Jump to: navigation, search
Defamation of religion is an issue that has been repeatedly addressed by some member states of the United Nations (UN) since 1999. Several non-binding resolutions have been voted on and accepted by the UN condemning "defamation of religion". The motions, sponsored on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference,[1] aim to prohibit expression that would "fuel discrimination, extremism and misperception leading to polarization and fragmentation with dangerous unintended and unforeseen consequences". Religious groups, human rights activists, free-speech activists, and several countries in the West have condemned the resolutions arguing it amounts to an international blasphemy law.[2] Critics of the resolutions including human rights groups argue that they are used to politically strengthen domestic anti-blasphemy and religious defamation laws, which are used to imprison journalists, students and other peaceful political dissidents.[3][4]
Since 2001 there has been a clear split, with the Islamic bloc and much of the developing world supporting the resolutions, and mostly Western democracies opposing. Support has been waning in recent years, due to increased opposition from the West, along with lobbying by religious, free-speech, and human rights advocacy groups. Some countries in Africa, the Pacific, and Latin America have begun switching from supporting to abstaining, or from abstaining to opposing.[1] The most recent "defamation of religions" resolution in 2010, which also condemned "the ban on the construction of minarets of mosques"[5] four months after a Swiss referendum introduced such a ban, passed with only 20 supporting, 17 opposing, and 8 abstaining.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 United Nations resolutions 1.1 1999
1.2 2000 to 2005
1.3 2006
1.4 2007
1.5 2008
1.6 2009
1.7 2010
1.8 2011
2 References
United Nations resolutions[edit]
Defamation of religion resolutions have been the subject of debate by the UN since 1999.
1999[edit]
In April 1999, at the urging of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Pakistan brought before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights a resolution entitled "Defamation of Islam".[7] The purpose of the resolution was to have the Commission stand up against what the OIC claimed was a campaign to defame Islam.[7] Some members of the Commission proposed that the resolution be changed to embrace all religions. The Commission accepted the proposal, and changed the title of the resolution to "Defamation of Religions". The resolution urged "all States, within their national legal framework, in conformity with international human rights instruments to take all appropriate measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by religious intolerance, including attacks on religious places, and to encourage understanding, tolerance and respect in matters relating to freedom of religion or belief". The Commission adopted the resolution without a vote.[7]
2000 to 2005[edit]
In 2000, the CHR adopted a similar resolution without a vote.[7][8] In 2001, a vote on a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions as a means to promote human rights, social harmony and religious and cultural diversity" received 28 votes in favour, 15 against, and 9 abstentions.[7][9] In 2002, a vote on a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religion" received 30 votes in favour, 15 against, and 8 abstentions.[10] In 2003, 2004, and 2005, by similar votes, the CHR approved resolutions entitled "Combating defamation of religions".[7]
In 2005, Yemen introduced a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions" in the General Assembly (60th Session).[11] 101 states voted in favour of the resolution, 53 voted against, and 20 abstained.[12]
2006[edit]
In March 2006, the HRC became the UNHRC. The UNHRC approved a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions", and submitted it to the General Assembly.[13] In the General Assembly, 111 member states voted in favour of the resolution, 54 voted against, and 18 abstained. Russia and China, permanent members of the UN Security Councils, voted for the Resolution.[14]
2007[edit]
On 30 March 2007, the UNHRC adopted a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions". The resolution called upon the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report on the activities of her office with regard to combating defamation of religions.[15]
On 30 March 2007, the UNHRC adopted a resolution entitled "Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief". The resolution called upon the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief to report on this issue for the Human Rights Council at its sixth session.[16]
In August 2007, the Special Rapporteur, Doudou Diène, reported to the General Assembly "on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on the enjoyment of all rights". Among other recommendations, the Special Rapporteur recommended that the Member States promote dialogue between cultures, civilizations, and religions taking into consideration:
(a) The need to provide equal treatment to the combat of all forms of defamation of religions, thus avoiding hierarchization of forms of discrimination, even though their intensity may vary according to history, geography and culture;
(b) The historical and cultural depth of all forms of defamation of religions, and therefore the need to complement legal strategies with an intellectual and ethical strategy relating to the processes, mechanisms and representations which constitute those manifestations over time;
...
(e) The need to pay particular attention and vigilance to maintain a careful balance between secularism and the respect of freedom of religion. A growing anti-religious culture and rhetoric is a central source of defamation of all religions and discrimination against their believers and practitioners. In this context governments should pay a particular attention to guaranteeing and protecting the places of worship and culture of all religions.[17]
On 4 September 2007, the High Commissioner for Human Rights reported to the UNHRC that "Enhanced cooperation and stronger political will by Member States are essential for combating defamation of religions".[18]
On 18 December 2007, the General Assembly voted on another resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions".[19] 108 states voted in favour of the resolution; 51 voted against it; and 25 abstained.[20] The resolution required the Secretary General to report to the sixty-third session of the General Assembly on the implementation of the resolution, and to have regard for "the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world".
2008[edit]
On 27 March 2008, the UNHRC passed another resolution about the defamation of religion. The resolution :
10. Emphasizes that respect of religions and their protection from contempt is an essential element conducive for the exercise by all of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
11. Urges all States to ensure that all public officials, including members of law enforcement bodies, the military, civil servants and educators, in the course of their official duties, respect all religions and beliefs and do not discriminate against persons on the grounds of their religion or belief, and that all necessary and appropriate education or training is provided;
12. Emphasizes that, as stipulated in international human rights law, everyone has the right to freedom of expression, and that the exercise of this right carries with it special duties and responsibilities, and may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but only those provided by law and necessary for the respect of the rights or reputations of others, or for the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals;
13. Reaffirms that general comment No. 15 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in which the Committee stipulates that the prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred is compatible with the freedom of opinion and expression, is equally applicable to the question of incitement to religious hatred;
14. Deplores the use of printed, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and of any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam or any religion;
15. Invites the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to continue to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions, and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia, on the enjoyment of all rights to the Council at its ninth session;
16. Requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report on the implementation of the present resolution and to submit a study compiling relevant existing legislations and jurisprudence concerning defamation of and contempt for religions to the Council at its ninth session.
21 members were in favour of the resolution; 10 were opposed; 14 abstained.[21]
The High Commissioner presented her report about defamation of, and contempt for, religions on 5 September 2008.[22] She proposed the holding of a consultation with experts from 2 to 3 October 2008 in Geneva about the permissible limitations to freedom of expression in accordance with international human rights law. In another report, dated 12 September 2008, the High Commissioner noted that different countries have different notions of what "defamation of religion" means.[23]
Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, addressed the UNHRC on 19 September 2008. He delivered the report[24] prepared by Doudou Diène. The report called on Member States to shift the present discussion in international fora from the idea of "defamation of religions" to the legal concept: "incitement to national, racial or religious hatred," which is grounded on international legal instruments.
On 24 November 2008, during the Sixty-third Session, the General Assembly's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions".[25] The resolution requests "the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session". 85 states voted in favour of the resolution; 50 states voted against the resolution; 42 states abstained.[26]
2009[edit]
In February 2009, Zamir Akram, permanent representative of Pakistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in a meeting of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, commented on the "defamation of religion". He said "there was an impression that Pakistan was trying to put in place an international anti-defamation provision in the context of the Durban Review Conference". Akram said the impression "was totally incorrect". Akram's delegation said:
. . . defamation of religions could and had led to violence . . . . The end result was the creation of a kind of Islamophobia in which Muslims were typecast as terrorists. That did not mean that they opposed freedom of expression; it merely meant that there was a level at which such expression led to incitement. An example was the propaganda campaign that had been led by the Nazis in the Second World War against the Jews which had led to the Holocaust."[27]
In advance of 26 March 2009, more than 200 civil society organizations from 46 countries, including Muslim, Christian, Jewish, secular, Humanist and atheist groups, urged the UNHRC by a joint petition to reject any resolution against the defamation of religion.[28]
On 26 March 2009, the UNHRC passed a resolution, proposed by Pakistan, which condemned the "defamation of religion" as a human rights violation by a vote of 23-11, with 13 abstentions.[29] The resolution:
17. Expresses its appreciation to the High Commissioner for holding a seminar on freedom of expression and advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, in October 2008, and requests her to continue to build on this initiative, with a view to contributing concretely to the prevention and elimination of all such forms of incitement and the consequences of negative stereotyping of religions or beliefs, and their adherents, on the human rights of those individuals and their communities;
18. Requests the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions, and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia, on the enjoyment of all rights by their followers, to the Council at its twelfth session;
19. Requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report to the Council at its twelfth session on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world.
Supporters of the resolution argued that the resolution is necessary to prevent the defamation of Islam while opponents argued that such a resolution was an attempt to bring to the international body the anti-defamation laws prevalent in some Muslim countries.[30][31]
On 1 July 2009, Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, submitted to the UNHRC the report requested by it on 26 March 2009. The report "reiterates the recommendation of his predecessor to encourage a shift away from the sociological concept of the defamation of religions towards the legal norm of non-incitement to national, racial or religious hatred".[32]
On 31 July 2009, the Secretary General submitted to the General Assembly the report that it requested in November 2008. The Secretary General noted, "The Special Rapporteurs called for anchoring the debate in the existing international legal framework provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — more specifically its articles 19 and 20." The Secretary General concluded, "In order to tackle the root causes of intolerance, a much broader set of policy measures needs to be addressed covering the areas of intercultural dialogue as well as education for tolerance and diversity."[33]
On 30 September 2009, at the UNHRC's twelfth session, the United States and Egypt introduced a resolution which condemned inter alia "racial and religious stereotyping".[34] The European Union's representative, Jean-Baptiste Mattei (France), said the European Union "rejected and would continue to reject the concept of defamation of religions". He said, "Human rights laws did not and should not protect belief systems." The OIC's representative on the UNHRC, Zamir Akram (Pakistan), said, "Negative stereotyping or defamation of religions was a modern expression of religious hatred and xenophobia." Carlos Portales (Chile) observed, "The concept of the defamation of religion took them in an area that could lead to the actual prohibition of opinions."[35][36][37] The UNHRC adopted the resolution without a vote.[35]
In Geneva, from 19 to 30 October 2009, the Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards[38] met to update the measures for combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance that the Durban I conference had formulated.[39] The committee achieved little because of conflict over a variety of issues including "defamation of religion". The United States said that defamation of religion is “a fundamentally flawed concept”. Sweden, for the European Union, argued that international human rights law protects individuals, not institutions or religions. France insisted that the UN must not afford legal protection to systems of belief. Syria criticized the "typical and expected Western silence" on "acts of religious discrimination". Syria said "in real terms defamation means targeting Muslims".[40]
Zamir Akram (Pakistan) wrote to the Ad Hoc Committee on 29 October 2009 to explain why the OIC would not abandon the idea of defamation of religion. Akram's letter states:
The OIC is concerned by the instrumentalization of religions through distortion or ridicule aimed at demeaning and provoking their followers to violence as well as at promoting contempt towards religious communities in order to de-humanize their constituent members with purpose of justifying advocacy of racial and religious hatred and violence against these individuals.[41]
The letter says defamation of religion has been "wrongly linked with malafide intentions to its perceived clash with" the freedom of opinion and expression. The letter declares:
All religions are sacred and merit equal respect and protection. Double standards, including institutional preferential treatment for one religion or group of people must be avoided. The OIC demands similar sanctity for all religions, their religious personalities, symbols and followers. Tolerance and understanding cannot merely be addressed through open debate and inter-cultural dialogue as defamation trends are spreading to the grass root levels. These growing tendencies need to be checked by introducing a single universal international human rights framework.
In New York, on 29 October 2009, the UN's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a draft resolution[42] entitled "Combating defamation of religions" by a vote which had 81 for, 55 against, and 43 abstaining.[43]
On 18 December 2009, the General Assembly approved a resolution deploring the defamation of religions by a vote of 80 nations in favour and 61 against with 42 abstentions.[44]
2010[edit]
In March 2010, Pakistan again brought forward a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions" on behalf of the OIC.[6]
The resolution received much criticism. French ambassador Jean-Baptiste Mattei, speaking on behalf of the European Union, argued that the "concept of defamation should not fall under the remit of human rights because it conflicted with the right to freedom of expression".[6] Eileen Donahoe, the US ambassador, also rejected the resolution. She said, "We cannot agree that prohibiting speech is the way to promote tolerance, because we continue to see the 'defamation of religions' concept used to justify censorship, criminalisation, and in some cases violent assaults and deaths of political, racial, and religious minorities around the world."[6]
The UNHRC passed the resolution on 25 March 2010 with 20 members voting in favour; 17 members voting against; 8 abstaining; and 2 absent.[45]
2011[edit]
In March, 2011, the UN Human Rights Council has shifted from protecting beliefs to protection of believers in its resolution.[46]
In July, 2011, the UN Human Rights Committee released a 52-paragraph statement, General Comment 34, concerning freedoms of opinion and expression. According to paragraph 48, "Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favor of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith."[47][48]
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Waning Support for Defamation of Religion Resolution Undermines Defense of Islam, OIC Chief Says
2.Jump up ^ Dacey, Austin (12 June 2012). "Calvin’s Geneva? The New International Discourse of Blasphemy". The Revealer. Retrieved 25 Sep 2012.
3.Jump up ^ No to an international blasphemy law
4.Jump up ^ UN anti-blasphemy measures have sinister goals, observers say
5.Jump up ^ "Combating defamation of religions" (PDF). UN. 15 April 2010. Retrieved 18 April 2015.
6.^ Jump up to: a b c d Neo, Hui Min (25 March 2010). "UN rights body narrowly passes Islamophobia resolution". Canada.com. Retrieved 27 March 2010.
7.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f "Combating Defamation of Religions" (PDF). Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. February 2009.
8.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/CHR/resolutions/E-CN_4-RES-2000-84.doc
9.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/CHR/resolutions/E-CN_4-RES-2001-4.doc
10.Jump up ^ http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/AllSymbols/AFE565E9560973C9C1256C93004A41E0/$File/G0215272.pdf?OpenElement
11.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/60/150&Lang=E A/RES/60/150
12.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/60/PV.64&Lang=E Vote on 16 December 2005 (A/60/PV.64)
13.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/61/164&Lang=E A/RES/61/164
14.Jump up ^ Vote on 19 December 2006
15.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A-HRC-RES-4-9.doc
16.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A-HRC-RES-4-10.doc
17.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/6/6&Lang=E Report by Doudou Diène U. N. doc. A/HRC/6/6 (21 August 2007)
18.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/6/4&Lang=E
19.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/62/154&Lang=E A/RES/62/154
20.Jump up ^ Vote on 18 December 2007
21.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A_HRC_RES_7_19.pdf
22.Jump up ^ High Commissioner's report 5 September 2008(A/HRC/9/25).
23.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/9/7&Lang=E
24.Jump up ^ Report by Doudou Diène
25.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=A/C.3/63/L.22/Rev.1&Lang=E
26.Jump up ^ Third Committee vote on defamation of religions Item 64(b) 24 November 2008.
27.Jump up ^ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination -- Report of Pakistan, Press Release, 20 February 2009.
28.Jump up ^ International Humanist and Ethical Union. "Human Rights Council Resolution "Combating Defamation of Religion" | International Humanist and Ethical Union". Iheu.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
29.Jump up ^ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/10session/A.HRC.10.L.11.pdf
30.Jump up ^ "U.N. rights council passes religious defamation resolution". Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA). 26 March 2009. Retrieved 26 March 2009.
31.Jump up ^ MacInnis, Laura (26 March 2009). "UNHRC Resolution 26 March 2009". Reuters. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
32.Jump up ^ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-38_E.pdf
33.Jump up ^ A/64/209.
34.Jump up ^ http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/documents/Oct2009-UNHRC/A_HRC_12_L.14_Rev.1-English.pdf
35.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/6A69FF0F95283CE7C12576430046793B?opendocument
36.Jump up ^ "UNHRC: Egypt-U.S. Resolution Concerns Rights Activists Supporting Freedom to Challenge Religious Views :: Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.)". Realcourage.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
37.Jump up ^ Bayefsky, Anne (5 October 2009). "You Can't Say That". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 5 November 2009.
38.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
39.Jump up ^ ""Defamation of Religion" archive at View from Geneva". Blog.unwatch.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
40.Jump up ^ "Durban Ad Hoc Committee: Day 4 Afternoon at View from Geneva". Blog.unwatch.org. 23 October 2009. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
41.Jump up ^ "OIC DOCUMENT TO AD HOC COMMITTEE 29 OCTOBER 2009.PDF" (PDF).
42.Jump up ^ http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/A_C.3_64_L.27.pdf
43.Jump up ^ http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/8139_defamation_vote.doc
44.Jump up ^ "General Assembly Adopts 56 Resolutions, 9 Decisions Recommended by Third Committee on Broad Range of Human Rights, Social, Cultural Issues". Un.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
45.Jump up ^ Staff (2010). "Resolution Adopted by the Human Rights Council 13/16 - Combating the defamation of religions". United Nations. Retrieved 22 July 2010.[dead link]
46.Jump up ^ Islamic bloc drops U.N. drive on defaming religion Reuters 25 March 2011
47.Jump up ^ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/GC34.pdf
48.Jump up ^ http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/4985/united_nations_affirms_the_human_right_to_blaspheme_%7c_politics_%7c_/
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Blasphemy law by country
Afghanistan ·
Algeria ·
Australia ·
Bangladesh ·
Egypt ·
Finland ·
Germany ·
Greece ·
Indonesia ·
Iran ·
Ireland ·
Israel ·
Jordan ·
Kuwait ·
Malaysia ·
Netherlands ·
New Zealand ·
Nigeria ·
Norway ·
Pakistan ·
Saudi Arabia ·
South Africa ·
Sudan ·
Switzerland ·
United Arab Emirates ·
United Kingdom ·
United States ·
Yemen
Blasphemy ·
Blasphemy and the United Nations
Categories: Blasphemy
Criticism of the United Nations
History of the United Nations
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
فارسی
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 May 2015, at 07:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_of_religion_and_the_United_Nations
Defamation of religion and the United Nations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Blasphemy and the United Nations)
Jump to: navigation, search
Defamation of religion is an issue that has been repeatedly addressed by some member states of the United Nations (UN) since 1999. Several non-binding resolutions have been voted on and accepted by the UN condemning "defamation of religion". The motions, sponsored on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference,[1] aim to prohibit expression that would "fuel discrimination, extremism and misperception leading to polarization and fragmentation with dangerous unintended and unforeseen consequences". Religious groups, human rights activists, free-speech activists, and several countries in the West have condemned the resolutions arguing it amounts to an international blasphemy law.[2] Critics of the resolutions including human rights groups argue that they are used to politically strengthen domestic anti-blasphemy and religious defamation laws, which are used to imprison journalists, students and other peaceful political dissidents.[3][4]
Since 2001 there has been a clear split, with the Islamic bloc and much of the developing world supporting the resolutions, and mostly Western democracies opposing. Support has been waning in recent years, due to increased opposition from the West, along with lobbying by religious, free-speech, and human rights advocacy groups. Some countries in Africa, the Pacific, and Latin America have begun switching from supporting to abstaining, or from abstaining to opposing.[1] The most recent "defamation of religions" resolution in 2010, which also condemned "the ban on the construction of minarets of mosques"[5] four months after a Swiss referendum introduced such a ban, passed with only 20 supporting, 17 opposing, and 8 abstaining.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 United Nations resolutions 1.1 1999
1.2 2000 to 2005
1.3 2006
1.4 2007
1.5 2008
1.6 2009
1.7 2010
1.8 2011
2 References
United Nations resolutions[edit]
Defamation of religion resolutions have been the subject of debate by the UN since 1999.
1999[edit]
In April 1999, at the urging of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Pakistan brought before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights a resolution entitled "Defamation of Islam".[7] The purpose of the resolution was to have the Commission stand up against what the OIC claimed was a campaign to defame Islam.[7] Some members of the Commission proposed that the resolution be changed to embrace all religions. The Commission accepted the proposal, and changed the title of the resolution to "Defamation of Religions". The resolution urged "all States, within their national legal framework, in conformity with international human rights instruments to take all appropriate measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by religious intolerance, including attacks on religious places, and to encourage understanding, tolerance and respect in matters relating to freedom of religion or belief". The Commission adopted the resolution without a vote.[7]
2000 to 2005[edit]
In 2000, the CHR adopted a similar resolution without a vote.[7][8] In 2001, a vote on a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions as a means to promote human rights, social harmony and religious and cultural diversity" received 28 votes in favour, 15 against, and 9 abstentions.[7][9] In 2002, a vote on a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religion" received 30 votes in favour, 15 against, and 8 abstentions.[10] In 2003, 2004, and 2005, by similar votes, the CHR approved resolutions entitled "Combating defamation of religions".[7]
In 2005, Yemen introduced a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions" in the General Assembly (60th Session).[11] 101 states voted in favour of the resolution, 53 voted against, and 20 abstained.[12]
2006[edit]
In March 2006, the HRC became the UNHRC. The UNHRC approved a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions", and submitted it to the General Assembly.[13] In the General Assembly, 111 member states voted in favour of the resolution, 54 voted against, and 18 abstained. Russia and China, permanent members of the UN Security Councils, voted for the Resolution.[14]
2007[edit]
On 30 March 2007, the UNHRC adopted a resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions". The resolution called upon the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report on the activities of her office with regard to combating defamation of religions.[15]
On 30 March 2007, the UNHRC adopted a resolution entitled "Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief". The resolution called upon the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief to report on this issue for the Human Rights Council at its sixth session.[16]
In August 2007, the Special Rapporteur, Doudou Diène, reported to the General Assembly "on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on the enjoyment of all rights". Among other recommendations, the Special Rapporteur recommended that the Member States promote dialogue between cultures, civilizations, and religions taking into consideration:
(a) The need to provide equal treatment to the combat of all forms of defamation of religions, thus avoiding hierarchization of forms of discrimination, even though their intensity may vary according to history, geography and culture;
(b) The historical and cultural depth of all forms of defamation of religions, and therefore the need to complement legal strategies with an intellectual and ethical strategy relating to the processes, mechanisms and representations which constitute those manifestations over time;
...
(e) The need to pay particular attention and vigilance to maintain a careful balance between secularism and the respect of freedom of religion. A growing anti-religious culture and rhetoric is a central source of defamation of all religions and discrimination against their believers and practitioners. In this context governments should pay a particular attention to guaranteeing and protecting the places of worship and culture of all religions.[17]
On 4 September 2007, the High Commissioner for Human Rights reported to the UNHRC that "Enhanced cooperation and stronger political will by Member States are essential for combating defamation of religions".[18]
On 18 December 2007, the General Assembly voted on another resolution entitled "Combating Defamation of Religions".[19] 108 states voted in favour of the resolution; 51 voted against it; and 25 abstained.[20] The resolution required the Secretary General to report to the sixty-third session of the General Assembly on the implementation of the resolution, and to have regard for "the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world".
2008[edit]
On 27 March 2008, the UNHRC passed another resolution about the defamation of religion. The resolution :
10. Emphasizes that respect of religions and their protection from contempt is an essential element conducive for the exercise by all of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
11. Urges all States to ensure that all public officials, including members of law enforcement bodies, the military, civil servants and educators, in the course of their official duties, respect all religions and beliefs and do not discriminate against persons on the grounds of their religion or belief, and that all necessary and appropriate education or training is provided;
12. Emphasizes that, as stipulated in international human rights law, everyone has the right to freedom of expression, and that the exercise of this right carries with it special duties and responsibilities, and may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but only those provided by law and necessary for the respect of the rights or reputations of others, or for the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals;
13. Reaffirms that general comment No. 15 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in which the Committee stipulates that the prohibition of the dissemination of all ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred is compatible with the freedom of opinion and expression, is equally applicable to the question of incitement to religious hatred;
14. Deplores the use of printed, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and of any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam or any religion;
15. Invites the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to continue to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions, and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia, on the enjoyment of all rights to the Council at its ninth session;
16. Requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report on the implementation of the present resolution and to submit a study compiling relevant existing legislations and jurisprudence concerning defamation of and contempt for religions to the Council at its ninth session.
21 members were in favour of the resolution; 10 were opposed; 14 abstained.[21]
The High Commissioner presented her report about defamation of, and contempt for, religions on 5 September 2008.[22] She proposed the holding of a consultation with experts from 2 to 3 October 2008 in Geneva about the permissible limitations to freedom of expression in accordance with international human rights law. In another report, dated 12 September 2008, the High Commissioner noted that different countries have different notions of what "defamation of religion" means.[23]
Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, addressed the UNHRC on 19 September 2008. He delivered the report[24] prepared by Doudou Diène. The report called on Member States to shift the present discussion in international fora from the idea of "defamation of religions" to the legal concept: "incitement to national, racial or religious hatred," which is grounded on international legal instruments.
On 24 November 2008, during the Sixty-third Session, the General Assembly's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions".[25] The resolution requests "the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session". 85 states voted in favour of the resolution; 50 states voted against the resolution; 42 states abstained.[26]
2009[edit]
In February 2009, Zamir Akram, permanent representative of Pakistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in a meeting of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, commented on the "defamation of religion". He said "there was an impression that Pakistan was trying to put in place an international anti-defamation provision in the context of the Durban Review Conference". Akram said the impression "was totally incorrect". Akram's delegation said:
. . . defamation of religions could and had led to violence . . . . The end result was the creation of a kind of Islamophobia in which Muslims were typecast as terrorists. That did not mean that they opposed freedom of expression; it merely meant that there was a level at which such expression led to incitement. An example was the propaganda campaign that had been led by the Nazis in the Second World War against the Jews which had led to the Holocaust."[27]
In advance of 26 March 2009, more than 200 civil society organizations from 46 countries, including Muslim, Christian, Jewish, secular, Humanist and atheist groups, urged the UNHRC by a joint petition to reject any resolution against the defamation of religion.[28]
On 26 March 2009, the UNHRC passed a resolution, proposed by Pakistan, which condemned the "defamation of religion" as a human rights violation by a vote of 23-11, with 13 abstentions.[29] The resolution:
17. Expresses its appreciation to the High Commissioner for holding a seminar on freedom of expression and advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, in October 2008, and requests her to continue to build on this initiative, with a view to contributing concretely to the prevention and elimination of all such forms of incitement and the consequences of negative stereotyping of religions or beliefs, and their adherents, on the human rights of those individuals and their communities;
18. Requests the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions, and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia, on the enjoyment of all rights by their followers, to the Council at its twelfth session;
19. Requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report to the Council at its twelfth session on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world.
Supporters of the resolution argued that the resolution is necessary to prevent the defamation of Islam while opponents argued that such a resolution was an attempt to bring to the international body the anti-defamation laws prevalent in some Muslim countries.[30][31]
On 1 July 2009, Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, submitted to the UNHRC the report requested by it on 26 March 2009. The report "reiterates the recommendation of his predecessor to encourage a shift away from the sociological concept of the defamation of religions towards the legal norm of non-incitement to national, racial or religious hatred".[32]
On 31 July 2009, the Secretary General submitted to the General Assembly the report that it requested in November 2008. The Secretary General noted, "The Special Rapporteurs called for anchoring the debate in the existing international legal framework provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — more specifically its articles 19 and 20." The Secretary General concluded, "In order to tackle the root causes of intolerance, a much broader set of policy measures needs to be addressed covering the areas of intercultural dialogue as well as education for tolerance and diversity."[33]
On 30 September 2009, at the UNHRC's twelfth session, the United States and Egypt introduced a resolution which condemned inter alia "racial and religious stereotyping".[34] The European Union's representative, Jean-Baptiste Mattei (France), said the European Union "rejected and would continue to reject the concept of defamation of religions". He said, "Human rights laws did not and should not protect belief systems." The OIC's representative on the UNHRC, Zamir Akram (Pakistan), said, "Negative stereotyping or defamation of religions was a modern expression of religious hatred and xenophobia." Carlos Portales (Chile) observed, "The concept of the defamation of religion took them in an area that could lead to the actual prohibition of opinions."[35][36][37] The UNHRC adopted the resolution without a vote.[35]
In Geneva, from 19 to 30 October 2009, the Ad Hoc Committee of the Human Rights Council on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards[38] met to update the measures for combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance that the Durban I conference had formulated.[39] The committee achieved little because of conflict over a variety of issues including "defamation of religion". The United States said that defamation of religion is “a fundamentally flawed concept”. Sweden, for the European Union, argued that international human rights law protects individuals, not institutions or religions. France insisted that the UN must not afford legal protection to systems of belief. Syria criticized the "typical and expected Western silence" on "acts of religious discrimination". Syria said "in real terms defamation means targeting Muslims".[40]
Zamir Akram (Pakistan) wrote to the Ad Hoc Committee on 29 October 2009 to explain why the OIC would not abandon the idea of defamation of religion. Akram's letter states:
The OIC is concerned by the instrumentalization of religions through distortion or ridicule aimed at demeaning and provoking their followers to violence as well as at promoting contempt towards religious communities in order to de-humanize their constituent members with purpose of justifying advocacy of racial and religious hatred and violence against these individuals.[41]
The letter says defamation of religion has been "wrongly linked with malafide intentions to its perceived clash with" the freedom of opinion and expression. The letter declares:
All religions are sacred and merit equal respect and protection. Double standards, including institutional preferential treatment for one religion or group of people must be avoided. The OIC demands similar sanctity for all religions, their religious personalities, symbols and followers. Tolerance and understanding cannot merely be addressed through open debate and inter-cultural dialogue as defamation trends are spreading to the grass root levels. These growing tendencies need to be checked by introducing a single universal international human rights framework.
In New York, on 29 October 2009, the UN's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a draft resolution[42] entitled "Combating defamation of religions" by a vote which had 81 for, 55 against, and 43 abstaining.[43]
On 18 December 2009, the General Assembly approved a resolution deploring the defamation of religions by a vote of 80 nations in favour and 61 against with 42 abstentions.[44]
2010[edit]
In March 2010, Pakistan again brought forward a resolution entitled "Combating defamation of religions" on behalf of the OIC.[6]
The resolution received much criticism. French ambassador Jean-Baptiste Mattei, speaking on behalf of the European Union, argued that the "concept of defamation should not fall under the remit of human rights because it conflicted with the right to freedom of expression".[6] Eileen Donahoe, the US ambassador, also rejected the resolution. She said, "We cannot agree that prohibiting speech is the way to promote tolerance, because we continue to see the 'defamation of religions' concept used to justify censorship, criminalisation, and in some cases violent assaults and deaths of political, racial, and religious minorities around the world."[6]
The UNHRC passed the resolution on 25 March 2010 with 20 members voting in favour; 17 members voting against; 8 abstaining; and 2 absent.[45]
2011[edit]
In March, 2011, the UN Human Rights Council has shifted from protecting beliefs to protection of believers in its resolution.[46]
In July, 2011, the UN Human Rights Committee released a 52-paragraph statement, General Comment 34, concerning freedoms of opinion and expression. According to paragraph 48, "Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favor of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith."[47][48]
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Waning Support for Defamation of Religion Resolution Undermines Defense of Islam, OIC Chief Says
2.Jump up ^ Dacey, Austin (12 June 2012). "Calvin’s Geneva? The New International Discourse of Blasphemy". The Revealer. Retrieved 25 Sep 2012.
3.Jump up ^ No to an international blasphemy law
4.Jump up ^ UN anti-blasphemy measures have sinister goals, observers say
5.Jump up ^ "Combating defamation of religions" (PDF). UN. 15 April 2010. Retrieved 18 April 2015.
6.^ Jump up to: a b c d Neo, Hui Min (25 March 2010). "UN rights body narrowly passes Islamophobia resolution". Canada.com. Retrieved 27 March 2010.
7.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f "Combating Defamation of Religions" (PDF). Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. February 2009.
8.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/CHR/resolutions/E-CN_4-RES-2000-84.doc
9.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/CHR/resolutions/E-CN_4-RES-2001-4.doc
10.Jump up ^ http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/AllSymbols/AFE565E9560973C9C1256C93004A41E0/$File/G0215272.pdf?OpenElement
11.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/60/150&Lang=E A/RES/60/150
12.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/60/PV.64&Lang=E Vote on 16 December 2005 (A/60/PV.64)
13.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/61/164&Lang=E A/RES/61/164
14.Jump up ^ Vote on 19 December 2006
15.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A-HRC-RES-4-9.doc
16.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A-HRC-RES-4-10.doc
17.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/6/6&Lang=E Report by Doudou Diène U. N. doc. A/HRC/6/6 (21 August 2007)
18.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/6/4&Lang=E
19.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/62/154&Lang=E A/RES/62/154
20.Jump up ^ Vote on 18 December 2007
21.Jump up ^ http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A_HRC_RES_7_19.pdf
22.Jump up ^ High Commissioner's report 5 September 2008(A/HRC/9/25).
23.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/9/7&Lang=E
24.Jump up ^ Report by Doudou Diène
25.Jump up ^ http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=A/C.3/63/L.22/Rev.1&Lang=E
26.Jump up ^ Third Committee vote on defamation of religions Item 64(b) 24 November 2008.
27.Jump up ^ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination -- Report of Pakistan, Press Release, 20 February 2009.
28.Jump up ^ International Humanist and Ethical Union. "Human Rights Council Resolution "Combating Defamation of Religion" | International Humanist and Ethical Union". Iheu.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
29.Jump up ^ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/10session/A.HRC.10.L.11.pdf
30.Jump up ^ "U.N. rights council passes religious defamation resolution". Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA). 26 March 2009. Retrieved 26 March 2009.
31.Jump up ^ MacInnis, Laura (26 March 2009). "UNHRC Resolution 26 March 2009". Reuters. Retrieved 27 March 2009.
32.Jump up ^ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-38_E.pdf
33.Jump up ^ A/64/209.
34.Jump up ^ http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/documents/Oct2009-UNHRC/A_HRC_12_L.14_Rev.1-English.pdf
35.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/6A69FF0F95283CE7C12576430046793B?opendocument
36.Jump up ^ "UNHRC: Egypt-U.S. Resolution Concerns Rights Activists Supporting Freedom to Challenge Religious Views :: Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.)". Realcourage.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
37.Jump up ^ Bayefsky, Anne (5 October 2009). "You Can't Say That". The Weekly Standard. Retrieved 5 November 2009.
38.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
39.Jump up ^ ""Defamation of Religion" archive at View from Geneva". Blog.unwatch.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
40.Jump up ^ "Durban Ad Hoc Committee: Day 4 Afternoon at View from Geneva". Blog.unwatch.org. 23 October 2009. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
41.Jump up ^ "OIC DOCUMENT TO AD HOC COMMITTEE 29 OCTOBER 2009.PDF" (PDF).
42.Jump up ^ http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/A_C.3_64_L.27.pdf
43.Jump up ^ http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/8139_defamation_vote.doc
44.Jump up ^ "General Assembly Adopts 56 Resolutions, 9 Decisions Recommended by Third Committee on Broad Range of Human Rights, Social, Cultural Issues". Un.org. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
45.Jump up ^ Staff (2010). "Resolution Adopted by the Human Rights Council 13/16 - Combating the defamation of religions". United Nations. Retrieved 22 July 2010.[dead link]
46.Jump up ^ Islamic bloc drops U.N. drive on defaming religion Reuters 25 March 2011
47.Jump up ^ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/GC34.pdf
48.Jump up ^ http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/4985/united_nations_affirms_the_human_right_to_blaspheme_%7c_politics_%7c_/
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Blasphemy law by country
Afghanistan ·
Algeria ·
Australia ·
Bangladesh ·
Egypt ·
Finland ·
Germany ·
Greece ·
Indonesia ·
Iran ·
Ireland ·
Israel ·
Jordan ·
Kuwait ·
Malaysia ·
Netherlands ·
New Zealand ·
Nigeria ·
Norway ·
Pakistan ·
Saudi Arabia ·
South Africa ·
Sudan ·
Switzerland ·
United Arab Emirates ·
United Kingdom ·
United States ·
Yemen
Blasphemy ·
Blasphemy and the United Nations
Categories: Blasphemy
Criticism of the United Nations
History of the United Nations
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
فارسی
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 May 2015, at 07:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_of_religion_and_the_United_Nations
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment