Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A FEW WEEKS ago, I had the honour of welcoming a young Sudanese woman, Meriam Ibrahim, to the European Parliament to speak at a conference I hosted to launch an annual report on Freedom of Religion or Belief.
Meriam is an extraordinary woman who was sentenced to death and served two years in a Sudanese prison, giving birth to her second child there. Her crime? Marrying a Christian man, considered apostasy against Islam under Sudanese law.
Movingly, Meriam told MEPs that she was a lucky woman as she was freed and able to start a new life in exile in the US. She urged us to concentrate on the countless women still in prison with death sentences hanging over them for similar “crimes”.
Condemned to death for blasphemy
One such woman is Asia Bibi, languishing in a Pakistani jail since 2010, having been condemned to death for blasphemy. Following a dispute with some Muslim women in her village, they accused Asia, a Christian, of insulting the Prophet Mohammed. Appeals from the European Parliament and other bodies have fallen on deaf ears.
In Pakistan politicians who dare to speak out against that country’s blasphemy laws become the subject of fatwas themselves; even to discuss repealing the law has been deemed blasphemy by the religious authorities.
Two such politicians – the Governor of the Punjab, Salmaaan Taseer, and the Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti – were assassinated in 2011. Both men sought to defend Asia Bibi.
In May this year an Indonesian court imposed a two-year prison sentence on Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (known as Ahok), the outgoing governor of Jakarta under the Islamic country’s draconian blasphemy laws. Ahok’s “crime” was to have cited the Koran during an election speech, as he sought to persuade Indonesians that there was nothing in Islam to prevent them voting for him, a Christian.
As the false accusations provoked violent Muslim demonstrations against him, he was also convicted of “incitement to violence”. Ahok’s sentence is “light” compared to what can be handed down in other countries.
Efforts to defend religious freedom
At another European Parliament conference on freedom of religion or belief, a speaker from the EU’s External Action Service told us of their efforts to defend religious freedom – a core European value enshrined in the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights. It was an opportunity to review the implementation of the EU’s Guidelines on Freedom of Religion and Belief, adopted by Foreign Affairs Ministers of the 28 member states three years ago.
It is worth citing from the Guidelines the justification for EU action on religious freedom:
As a universal human right, freedom of religion or belief safeguards respect for diversity. Its free exercise directly contributes to democracy, development, rule of law, peace and stability.
All of these values listed are essential elements to our modern European societies. It is only natural that we should seek to promote them in other parts of the world.
The problem is when Europeans criticise the abusive blasphemy or apostasy laws in countries such as Indonesia, Pakistan, Sudan or a host of others, the local authorities frequently accuse us of hypocrisy. A very real difficulty referred to by diplomats, NGOs and human rights advocates at our conference, is that too many Western countries have their own blasphemy laws.
A study published in March this year by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found that 20 participating states of this club of developed countries “can be considered to have criminal blasphemy laws or religious insult laws on the statute books”. The 20 include 12 EU member states, among which are Ireland, but also countries such as Denmark and Finland.
Irish blasphemy law
The recent Stephen Fry case in Ireland drew public attention to the Irish blasphemy law, introduced as recently as 2009 as a result of an earlier Supreme Court ruling. The underlying difficulty is the wording in Bunreacht na h-Éireann which provides that:
The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.
As long as this wording remains in our Constitution, the Oireachtas will need to keep a law on the Irish statute books to give legal effect and clarity to what is constituted by blasphemy. This in turn runs the risk of vexatious cases being brought which ultimately limit freedom of speech and expression by their very shadow.
The obvious answer is to hold a referendum to amend the Constitution, which in turn will allow the law to be repealed. All of the main political parties, and all of the main churches in Ireland are in favour of such a change. Such a constitutional amendment is long overdue and would improve that part of the Constitution which in fact addresses citizen’s freedom of expression and conviction.
Religion remains an important facet of Irish life and central to the identity of very many Irish people. Their freedom to openly practice their faith must always be legally protected and should be respected. However, there are adequate ways to do this under other laws, such as those against incitement to violence or hatred, anti-discrimination provisions, property laws etc.
But beyond Ireland, where no citizen has actually been prosecuted since the introduction of the 2009 law, removing blasphemy from our statute books would increase our moral authority to push for such laws to be repealed worldwide. As Vice-President responsible for the European Parliament’s dialogue with churches, religions and non-confessional organisations, I am increasingly being called upon to work on the crucial issue of freedom of religion or belief.
Blasphemy laws in Ireland or other EU countries may be a mild inconvenience from time to time. In other parts of the world, they can be a matter of life or death. Ireland should set an example by undertaking this necessary reform and then we should urge our EU partners to follow suit. This is a good opportunity for Ireland to show leadership on a fundamental human rights issue.
Mairead McGuinness MEP is First Vice-President of the European Parliament with responsibility for the European Parliament’s dialogue with churches, religions and non-confessional organisations.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Great article, well argued. The section on blasphemy in Bunreacht na hÉireann is utterly scandalous and shouldn’t have made it this far into the existence of our republic.
The more important point as illustrated in this article is not what the blasphemy law means here (it means little in practical terms) but what it means abroad.
When you have Pakistani demagogues standing up and pointing to our blasphemy law as some sort of disgraceful defence for their continued curtailing of human freedoms – it is simply acceptable that our country is used by such ghastly characters.
@Malachi: Well said
@Malachi:
Leaving the issue of blasphemy aside for a moment it seems a ridiculous proposition to argue for constitutional change here on the grounds that a particular grouping in some backward society elsewhere might misinterpret Irish law for sinister purposes and in my opinion would add no weight to the real cause of universal human rights.
A poor argument setting a dangerous precedent which would soon result in our Constitution unravelling quicker than an imitation Aran sweater.
@Emmet Dillane: ms Mc Guinness the former Taoiseach who was also leader of your political party decided that having a referendum on reducing the age of future presidents was more important on having one on our blasphemy laws. As an Irish politician and an MEP you are well paid to protect the people who voted for you as well as those who qualify for that honour. The Muslim Brotherhood are ensuring that they will punish us with our own blasphemy laws as soon as they can. We have rid ourselves in the main of the scourge of The Catholic Church but stand by idly waiting for sharia get a grip which will see the end of what we hold dear. Don’t go writing articles about how awful Islam is in other countries while you ignore the grip it is slowly getting on Europe.
@Emmet Dillane: Who said anyone abroad was misinterpreting anything? You’re working with a flawed premise. The theocrats in Pakistan are well aware of our situation, have studied our laws in detail and used them for nefarious purposes.
Indeed, they took the section from the 2009 defamation act (based on the constitutional blasphemy ban) *verbatim* and used it in their wording proposal to the UNHRC.
You tell me what they’re misinterpreting – they’re taking it word-by-word from the statute books.
@Blarneykite: Isn’t it great that you can say that about Christianity in the west. Go to the Middle East and publish the same about Islam.
@Jho Harris: Miaread should be helping to stop the mass migration into Europe of the Allah brigades, before they out breed the Natives, and drag us back to the dark ages.
Even the Rubber Bandits respect the blasphemy laws in Ireland where it concerns Islam….
@John003: really? The rubber bandits have been clear they believe in no gods, but say they cannot ridicule it in the same way as they do Irish Catholicism as they have no experience of it and were not subject to state indoctrination of it in Limerick.
1.3% of the population is Islamic according to the census, if the Rubberbandits start making jokes about Islam nearly 99% of the population will not get those jokes so why bother make them?
@Paul Fahey: It’s a pretty tired excuse, isn’t it?
I don’t have any “experience” of Islam but we live in an age where you can buy a Quran (or read it online) and find out what all the fuss is about.
Do we have to “experience” beheadings for apostasy and blasphemy in the public squares of Riyadh to be critical of them? Do we need to “experience” being branded with an international Islamic death warrant to call it out as offensive to civilisation? Do we need to “experience” the Hadith in which the clear instruction is given that muslims who leave the faith are to be killed, to note the barbarism?
@John003:
Well said John.
Like all bullies Irish atheists always go for the soft targets. Some poor elderly Catholic in an isolated parish in rural Ireland makes more appeal to them than a stout hearted Muslim community capable of standing their ground.
@Emmet Dillane: but by that logic we can’t slag off anything in case an old catholic person in rural Ireland happens to like it.
@Joseph Bloggs:
Rubber Bandit jokes are like plastic bags – environmentally unfriendly.
@Malachi: There is a high chance you have experienced Islam without realising it. If you ever order a ham and pineapple pizza there is a good chance that the ham was not ham but pink dyed turkey meat which may be small to a lot of people but it is imposing religious believes on unsuspecting customers who have no desire to eat halal food and if you buy Kelloggs, Green Isle, Godfella’s or Donegal Catch etc products it is funding ISIS via The Department of Halal Certification. Quote ” A Halal certificate is a guarantee that products comply with the Islamic dietary requirements. Halal…” see
@Jho Harris: See this site – http://halalcertification.ie/
@fiachra29: Why would you need to be Muslim to get a joke?
@Jho Harris: according to that web site its no longer about a religious requirement , it’s about assurance and quality. . What a joke!
@Paul Fahey: Rubber bandits cop out merchants.
@Suzie Sunshine: None of those companies who are helping to fund ISIS were too high on my list but I am sure there was assurance and quality before we were invaded by this sect members. Tiqqya is a great way to be allowed with your God’s permission.
@Paul Fahey: That’s a cowardly cop out. If they just said they didn’t want their heads chopped off Id respect that. There are plenty of children born in Ireland being indoctrinated in to Islamic extremism at the Clonskeagh mosque.
@AR Devine:
“ICCI employed as a religious teacher Abderrahmane
Katrani, an Afghanistan veteran and Moroccan national wanted
in Morocco for the 2003 Casablanca bombings. Also, terrorism
financier and U.S. Executive Order 13224 designee Ibrahim
Buisir is known to frequent the center.”
@Remy: Terrifying. And to think throughout the West our ludicrously lax immigration policies to the Islamic world have facilitated us importing such lunatics. This in turn feeds actual racists who view all brown & black skinned people as being problematic. However, Nigerian Christians, Indian Hindus & Sikhs & even the minority of genuine moderate Muslims integrate & become productive citizens. Merkel’s & Sweden’s insane open door policy is already having disastrous consequences & it is only going to get worse.
It’s more hypocritical to talk about apostasy laws in Indonesia etc. without mentioning the big Saudi elephant in the room. I’d love to see a simple list of trade & other deals that EU have made with countries with all countries below usual Human Rights standards.
We’ve been getting our fair share of scrutiny ourselves from international human rights bodies so it’d be nice for elected FG members to be focused on that too. Especially seeing as that scrutiny is as a direct result of the Catholic Cult’s influence on successive FG/FF govts.
@Blarneykite: the Catholic church has stuck itself into important public services like education and medicine. I don’t want to send my children to a Catholic school but I don’t have an option. It’s time women have a right of choice when it comes to their bodies.
In reality you don’t have a choice if it involves a round trip of 30 miles or more twice a day. Generally in rural Ireland there are no options.
@Blarneykite:
And The Mosques?
Blasphemy laws should not exist full stop.
However we seem to forget the likes of Charlie Hebdo etc. How many papers refused to publish the cartoons?
We should face this head on. No religion should be exempt from public scrutiny or debate.
Pandering to certain beliefs while ripping apart others is just plain hypocrisy.
@Theunpopularpopulist: The Charlie Hebdo incident (I dunno what else to call it) exposed the fact that most of the western media are hypocrites and cowards
Members of their own profession were murdered over some drawings. They were quick to publish pictures of themselves holding up signs saying “je suis Charlie” but failed to publish the drawings themselves.
You’re not Charlie if you’re too scared to publish them, so stop saying you are. There was a massive public interest in having the media publish them en bloc. 1) Because the public can’t be properly informed without seeing them and 2) To stand up for the right to publish them
The failure to publish the cartoons (just like with the Danish cartoons 10 years earlier) was a victory for the murderers, handed to them by our media
@Lorem Ipsum: You couldn’t be more right. The post Charlie Hebdo grovelling outlined how little (most of) the media care about standing up for free expression when it’s really under attack.
@Lorem Ipsum: couldn’t agree with you more. Point very well made.
Islam receives a free ride in comparison to other religion, if a rc radio station played anti-Islam propaganda for 24 hrs some one would b in jail for hate crimes or when was the last time u heard of someone selling beheading DVDs in a Hindu temple car park
Islam is such a progressive religion
@John Ryan: catholism, as practiced a few decades ago and still by some people in this country is very similar
So what’s your point?
@Brendan Cooney: a few decades ago or today? What is your point ?
@Brendan Cooney: go back to bed.
@Brendan Cooney: Bit of a false equivalence. I’m disgusted at the idea that our republic was so infected by RCC doctrine in years gone by, but we just have to be realistic about the facts.
There are no international death warrants being issued and assassinations being carried out in the name of Catholic clerics for the writing of anti-Catholic books.
The 10 states in which homosexuality is a crime punishable by death are not based on Catholic law.
There is no sustained campaign of global martyrdom/civilian massacre being carried out in the name of re-establishing a Catholic empire.
The comparison just doesn’t work. If we were in the 1930s, the association between Catholicism and fascism would certainly be the more pressing issue – however an honest assessment of current events shows there are bigger fish to fry re: religious violence.
@Brendan Cooney: Well Brendan nowhere in the Bible does it advocate expansion of the religion by warfare. By taken the inhabitants as war booty and encouraging the practitioners to kill the members of a particular religion (Jews) and also other non believers if they do not convert. And of course to kill their own if they attempt to leave.
@Warthog: you obviously haven’t read the bible, as it says as much and much more.
@John Ryan: why John? Is it because I made a valid point which upset your argument?
@Malachi: no Malachi, we just hushed everything up and either hid our unspeakable deeds in magdalene laundries or buried the bodies in septic tanks. Or exported it all away to the godless UK.
@Brendan Cooney: Can we discuss what the situation is today? The stupid blasphemy law in Ireland has to be removed. It is unintentionally giving shield to Islamic fascism. That is what is going on today. We need to be able to critic and make fun of all forms of religion and beliefs.
With regard to people being killed purely because of someone’s religion not being acceptable to others we are not a country to lecture others with our recent history. Shooting farmers on their tractors or putting bombs under school buses purely because the victims were protestants is not intelligent or acceptable. Ireland should butt out of such moralising arguments. If humans are really intelligent then we will consign religion to the bin asap with no recycling option.
@KerryBlueMike: absolutely! ! Trying to latch on to one religion as more dangerous than others is lazy and erroneous. They all have a penchant to totalitarianism if let.
@Brendan Cooney: No. That’s silly.
Religions are not always equally dangerous at all times, that makes no sense. Catholicism was extremely dangerous in the 1930s because of close fascist ties, and at many other periods in history. You could easily argue it was the most dangerous religious ideology in the world at that time.
Nowadays, Islam is more dangerous in a global context than any other religions. I have already listed the reasons above, they are comprehensive. I have no idea where you’re going with this.
@Malachi: your not taking into account the extremist “christian” religions in the USA which exist today which are as fundamentalist as anything in the past, and are exhibiting serious intolerance of anything which does not totally agree with their world view. Support state executions, body shaming any female who is deemed immodestly dressed, body integrity control via denial to abortion or even contraception, the list goes on. And there are plenty of believers in this country too. They are not in the media much as they are considered acceptable. As I said the latching onto one religion is lazy and erroneous and lets the others away with murder, literally.
@Brendan Cooney: Rubbish, I’m sorry to say. Christian fundamentalists do some damage in the US, sure. The odd bombing of an abortion clinic, tampering with science classes in schools, etc.
All bad things. Not, however, even on the same plane as the mass murder of civilians being carried out in the name of Islam practically daily – a global jihad. That’s not even counting the regimes that run grotesque Sharia states where you and I both know they are doing far worse than shaming women over immodesty – try prosecution and deplorable public stonings.
It’s 2017 and we’re still discussing religion. Whichever brand of the stuff you choose, it’s pretty crappy product.
@Cat Agatha: because the likes of Russia are doing so well. Religion ain’t going away. Nature of the human beast is to be cared for
@lavbeer: Russia? K?
@Cat Agatha: Few bother to make the distinction between Christ/Christianity and the failings of the denominational Churches or the broad umbrella called religion. As a Christian there is only one cruel offence against spirituality and that is to be mediocre as being inspiring and inspired covers all human endeavor from the smallest kindness to the greatest masterpieces. If people want to replace the Churches with the colleges then so be it but academics can be just as narrow and smallminded as anything the Church ever created. Instead of indulgences to forgive naughty behavior as the Church did before the reformation, people now pay weekly taxes for naughty behavior for using petrol and diesel.
@Cat Agatha: We’re discussing Islam which really isn’t liked by a lot of people. These head in the sand apologists do not want any light or open debate on Islam in case it is shown up for what it is a backward vicious ideology that seems to attract a lot of malcontents, nare do wells, physcopaths and lots of people with mental problems. Sure what could go wrong?
@Blarneykite:
After 4 weeks those Human “bunch of cells” have a heart beat, what happens your heart is forcibly stopped?
*if
Across the West Islamic blasphemy laws have been internalised by large swathes of the media. Fear of violent repurcussions is one of the reasons but many supposed liberals in the media have also bought in to the Islamist narrative that criticism of Islam equals hatred against Muslims a.k.a ‘Islamophobia’. The treatment of Louis Smith by the British media for a joke about Islam is a case in point.
https://areomagazine.com/2016/11/21/louis-smith-and-the-media-enforcement-of-blasphemy-laws/
@AR Devine: Yes true, AR Devine.
Look up what happened in the Iran Revolution. One day free society, next day death penalty for blasphemy. It happened very quick.
A friend of mine is a Pakistani asylum seeker who had to flee Pakistan for the ‘crime’ of apostasy (leaving Islam) which is covered under their blasphemy laws. He told me never mind the government sticking him in jail he could be killed by a random mob in the street as a fatwah had been issued against him.
http://quillette.com/2016/10/14/fleeing-theocracy-an-asylum-seekers-defence-of-the-west/
Anyone who wants to kill for their religion, is not comfortable in their religion.
@Paul Culligan: I would argue it is the opposite
@lavbeer: Thought that too, but either way of looking at it works.
Correction: The Danish blasphemy law was repealed about one month ago. It’s doable.
Today minor punishment for blasphemy law.
Tomorrow death penalty for blasphemy law.
This is what we can learn from history.
I wouldnt even go as far as to say Irish Blasphamey laws are an inconvienience, i’d say practically a non-issue. Who has ever has ever been inconvienienced by the law?
Religion of any type you can take it or leave it it doesn’t bother me one way or another. If you have a religion of any sort then that’s your own business as long as you don’t try to force it down my neck. You can find fault in anything if you go back far enough. I do take issue with the fact that if I have an opinion that disagrees with any religion that some would possibly try to track me down & try to murder me for it. I also believe that Islamophobia is a term too loosely used today just because you don’t agree with something in that religion.
have your say