Home      |      Weblog      |      Articles      |      Satire      |      Links      |      About      |      Contact

Militant Islam Monitor > Articles > Jordanian Court Proceeds With Action Against Europeans, Charging Blasphemy And Insulting The Prophet

Jordanian Court Proceeds With Action Against Europeans, Charging Blasphemy And Insulting The Prophet

September 10, 2008

Jordanian Court Proceeds With Action Against Europeans, Charging Blasphemy And Insulting The Prophet


September 10, 2008 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - A court in Aman, Jordan is going ahead with plans to prosecute 12 Europeans who allegedly "defamed" Mohammed and engaged in "blasphemy."

The unusual action targets such critics of Islam as the Dutch cartoonist who in 2005 caused an international stir - and attending riots in the Muslim world which killed dozens - with a series of drawings perceived to be defamatory to Muslims. Also in the court's crosshairs is Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, a vocal critic of Islamic fundamentalism.

Though the alleged offenses were not committed in Jordan and are unlikely to result in the extradition of the parties named, it is less clear what might take place should those charged travel to countries which don't have the West's tradition of free speech.

Jordan's actions are not isolated however, with NGOs such as the United Nations moving in essentially the same direction, attempting to ban speech critical of particular religions, all of these efforts must be interpreted as part of a master strategy, advanced by Islamists worldwide, to criminalize any criticism of Islam. http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=jordanid=9.10.08%2Ehtm


Criminalizing Criticism of Islam
September 10, 2008 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122099204692716155.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
There are strange happenings in the world of international jurisprudence that do not bode well for the future of free speech. In an unprecedented case, a Jordanian court is prosecuting 12 Europeans in an extraterritorial attempt to silence the debate on radical Islam. The prosecutor general in Amman charged the 12 with blasphemy, demeaning Islam and Muslim feelings, and slandering and insulting the prophet Muhammad in violation of the Jordanian Penal Code. The charges are especially unusual because the alleged violations were not committed on Jordanian soil. Among the defendants is the Danish cartoonist whose alleged crime was to draw in 2005 one of the Muhammad illustrations that instigators then used to spark Muslim riots around the world. His co-defendants include 10 editors of Danish newspapers that published the images. The 12th accused man is Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, who supposedly broke Jordanian law by releasing on the Web his recent film, "Fitna," which tries to examine how the Quran inspires Islamic terrorism. Jordan's attempt at criminalizing free speech beyond its own borders wouldn't be so serious if it were an isolated case. Unfortunately, it is part of a larger campaign to use the law and international forums to intimidate critics of militant Islam. For instance, in December the United Nations General Assembly passed the Resolution on Combating Defamation of Religions; the only religion mentioned by name was Islam. While such resolutions aren't legally binding, national governments sometimes cite them as justification for legislation or other actions. More worrying, the U.N. Human Rights Council in June said it would refrain from condemning human-rights abuses related to "a particular religion." The ban applies to all religions, but it was prompted by Muslim countries that complained about linking Islamic law, Shariah, to such outrages as female genital mutilation and death by stoning for adulterers. This kind of self-censorship could prove dangerous for people suffering abuse, and it follows the council's March decision to have its expert on free speech investigate individuals and the media for negative comments about Islam. Given this trend, it's worth taking a closer look at the Jordanian case. The prosecutor is relying on a 2006 amendment to the Jordanian Justice Act that casts a worryingly wide net for such prosecution. Passed in response to the Danish cartoons incident, the law allows the prosecution of individuals whose actions affect the Jordanian people by "electronic means," such as the Internet. The 2006 amendment, in theory, means anyone who publishes on the Internet could be subject to prosecution in Jordan. If the case against the 12 defendants is allowed to go forward, they will be the first but probably not the last Westerners to be hit by Jordan's law. Amman has already requested that Interpol apprehend Mr. Wilders and the Danes and bring them to stand before its court for an act that is not a crime in their home countries. To the contrary. Dutch prosecutors said in July that although some of Mr. Wilders's statements may be offensive, they are protected under Dutch free-speech legislation. Likewise, Danish law protects the rights of the Danish cartoonists and newspapers to express their views. Neither Denmark nor the Netherlands will turn over its citizens to Interpol, as the premise of Jordan's extradition request is an affront to the very principles that define democracies. It is thus unlikely that any Western country would do so, either. But there is no guarantee for the defendants' protection if they travel to countries that are more sympathetic to the Jordanian court. Unless democratic countries stand up to this challenge to free speech, other nations may be emboldened to follow the Jordanian example. Kangaroo courts across the globe will be ready to charge free people with obscure violations of other societies' norms and customs, and send Interpol to bring them to stand trial in frivolous litigation. A new form of forum shopping would soon take root. Activists would be able to choose countries whose laws and policies are informed by their religious values to prosecute critical voices in other countries. The case before the Jordanian court is not just about Mr. Wilders and the Danes. It is about the subjugation of Western standards of free speech to fear and coercion by foreign courts. Ms. Samson, an attorney specializing in international and constitutional law, will join the Hudson Institute this fall.

Printer-friendly version   Email this item to a friend