The 41-year-old convert from Islam to Christianity, who had been threatened
with a death sentence for apostasy, is to be released by the Afghan
authorities. In response to pressure from many Western governments a
pretext has been found to dismiss the case against him, though whether this
pretext is lack of evidence or his alleged insanity is not yet clear.
This resolution to the problem is not necessarily the good news which it
appears at first to be. For one thing, an anonymous official has said that
the prosecutors will be doing further investigation of the case. Secondly,
senior Muslim clerics in Afghanistan had already warned that if Rahman were
released he would be murdered. Indeed a member of the country’s main
Islamic organisation, the Afghan Ulama Council, said, “We will call on the
people to pull him to pieces so there’s nothing left.” It seems likely
that the people would willingly respond to such incitement for, according
to the BBC, “an overwhelming number of ordinary Afghans appear to believe
that Mr Rahman has erred and deserves to be executed”.
Even if Rahman is able to flee to a safe country which will agree not to
deport him, the question remains of Islam’s apostasy law, under which he
was convicted. All four schools of Sunni Islamic law, as well as Shi‘a
Islamic law, agree that the penalty for a sane adult male who leaves Islam
is death. The sanctioning of murder in this way makes Islam unique among
world faiths.
The 2004 Afghan constitution states that “no law can be contrary to the
beliefs and provisions of the sacred law of Islam.” (Article 3). Hence the
death sentence for apostasy from Islam which the Afghan judge and
prosecutor in Rahman’s case have declared to be a part of Afghan law.
In a complete contradiction of this, the constitution also states that
Afghanistan will respect (Preamble) and abide by (Article 7) the United
Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration guarantees
the freedom to change one’s religion in its Article 18.
If Abdul Rahman were the only convert from Islam to Christianity, his
fellow Christians around the world and all who love liberty could simply
rejoice at his escape from hanging. The teachings of Islamic law [shari‘a]
and the ambiguity of the Afghan constitution would be irrelevant. But
there are former Muslims who now follow Jesus Christ in every country of
the world, including others in Afghanistan. For all of them Islam’s
apostasy law has implications. Though only a handful of countries have the
death sentence for apostasy in their law, in every Muslim society there is
a widespread knowledge of what shari‘a says on this subject. This
knowledge has tainted the attitudes of Muslims to those who have left their
faith. As a result converts from Islam suffer harassment even where the
law of the land does not forbid them from converting. Typically they are
rejected by their families, marginalised by the community, and persecuted
by officialdom and society by a variety of methods and pretexts. Often
they suffer violence, sometimes they are murdered. These things happen in
the West as well as in the Muslim world.
Unless the shari‘a’s ruling on apostasy is challenged this will continue.
Abdul Rahman himself recognises the futility of his fleeing Afghanistan
without the issue of punishment for a sane convert being settled. “If I
flee again that would mean my country hasn’t changed. It would mean that
they have won, our enemies.” He said, “I don’t want to die. But if God
decides, I am ready to confront my choices, all the way.” Abdul Rahman is
willing to die for his faith, but evidently hopes that if he has to die it
would help to save other converts from a similar fate.
A number of Muslim voices have been raised around the world in the last few
days saying that Islam does not really teach that apostates should be
executed. The argument usually is that (1) what the Qur’an says about
apostasy is ambiguous and (2) what the hadith [traditions] record of
Muhammad’s words and example on this subject should never have been
universalised but were only applicable for particular contexts in which the
apostates were also traitors to the Islamic state. This reasoning has long
been held by a minority of liberal Muslims, but has never yet managed to
make any impact on the official teachings of shari‘a, formulated in the
Middle Ages.
Let these arguments be addressed to Muslims as well as to non-Muslims. Let
them be announced and taught by Islamic leaders at every level, in every
country and within every group and sect of Islam. Let it be announced by
fatwas from the most senior scholars and in Friday sermons from local imams
in their mosques. Let it be promoted on Islamic television stations,
Islamic websites and circulated through the videos and DVDs by which
extremism is so often promoted. Let it be reinforced with new legislation
in the relevant countries and re-training of police and security personnel.
Let shari‘a be re-written on this point.
I'm thinking about this and hope to post further when I have more to say. Suffice to say at the moment that I am uncomfortable with this issue because I would hope better of Muslims than Islam appears to promote in this matter... at first blush Barnabas Fund have a point. And we should recall that the director is himself a convert from Islam and so it is a matter of no small significance and import to him too.
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Afghans protest at Christian's death sentence delay
Filed in: religion, Christian, Islam, conversion, Afghanistan, human_rights
No comments:
Post a Comment