The Christian governor of Jakarta, Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama, said he would appeal a two-year sentence for blasphemy over “his comment during an election campaign that people were being deceived if they believed the Quran forbids Muslims from voting for non-Muslims…The trial was a purely criminal one and the court disagreed that there were political aspects to the case, the lead judge said….Hardline Islamist groups, whose supporters were also gathered outside the courtroom, had called for the maximum penalty possible on the basis that Purnama’s comments had insulted the Quran.” [Independent, U.K.]
Search Results for ‘blasphemy’
How to revive blasphemy law in just a few easy steps
Denmark had allowed its old blasphemy law to fall into disuse, but now it’s reviving prosecutions by way of its ban on hate speech purportedly aimed at religious groups [Jacob Mchangama, Columbia U. Global Freedom of Expression & Information Jurisprudence Project]
In Belgium, hate speech law converges with blasphemy law
Anti-religious, xenophobic, and “Islamophobic” speech has already drawn prosecution in a number of cases and some in the European country wish to push the trend further [Dr. Jogchum Vrielink, University of Leuven, via Volokh]:
On the political level too some are attempting to increase the legal sensitivity for ‘Islamophobia’. Senators Fauzaya Talhaoui and Bert Anciaux, for instance, introduced a draft resolution on 21 February 2013, aimed at the ‘the fight against Islamophobia’. Following the definition offered by the Runnymede Trust, the Senators understand ‘Islamophobia’ to entail the ‘strong presence’ of any of eight elements, including: ‘Islam as monolithic and static’; ‘Islam as inferior to the West and as barbaric, irrational and sexist’; and ‘Islam as violent, providing support to terrorism, and actively involved in a clash of civilisations’. Such ‘Islamophobic’ ideas, Talhaoui and Anciaux contend, “incite to discrimination and racism, and require unequivocal condemnation and judicial prosecution”. They argue that the police and that the office of the public prosecutor should be instructed to treat the issue as an absolute priority.
The Runnymede Trust, incidentally, “is the UK’s leading independent race equality think tank. We generate intelligence for a multi-ethnic Britain through research, network building, leading debate, and policy engagement.”
Meanwhile, in blasphemy prosecutions elsewhere, a court in Turkey has convicted composer and pianist Fazil Say of committing blasphemy on Twitter [Guardian] And Islamists are inciting prosecution and worse for atheist bloggers in Bangladesh [Volokh, Christian Post]
Long-arm blasphemy prosecution
Islamists are demanding the execution of Saudi journalist Hamza Kashgari over tweets, since retracted, that they say are blasphemous toward their religion. Malaysia has detained Kashgari and may extradite him to face the charges; according to reports, the international police organization had put out an order for his arrest at the behest of the Saudi government [Guardian, Nina Shea/NRO, Daily Beast, Reason, Facebook support page, blog, #FreeHamza]
[]
“Just say no to blasphemy laws”
“Perhaps in an effort to rehabilitate the United States’ image in the Muslim world, the Obama administration has joined a U.N. effort to restrict religious speech. This country should never sacrifice freedom of expression on the altar of religion.” [Jonathan Turley, USA Today via Balko; & welcome Above the Law readers]
Blasphemy laws
Europe has them, and we’re lucky we don’t, says James Lileks (“Leave the Anti-Blasphemy Laws in Europe”, syndicated/Newhouse, Mar. 16).
International free speech roundup
- “30 Years After the Rushdie Fatwa, Europe Is Moving Backward” on speech that gives religious offense [Jacob Mchangama and Sarah McLaughlin, Foreign Policy] Whether you call it blasphemy or hate speech, chilling effects on expression are the same [Helen Dale, Unherd]
- British writer faces police inquiry after “deadnaming” transgender activist online [Katie Herzog, The Stranger; Sophie Law, Daily Mail on Graham Linehan case] Social media “like” contributes to another police call [James Kirkup, The Spectator]
- How American law came to recognize hate speech as part of the zone of protected free speech: a look at the history [Flemming Rose, Cato Institute]
- Labour MP introduces bill to ban private Facebook groups [Tom Rogan, Washington Examiner]
- Far-right French politico Marine Le Pen, prosecuted over speech on Twitter, “ordered to undergo a psychiatric examination as part of the investigation.” Say what? [Jacob Sullum]
- The U.K.’s new anti-terrorism efforts should be terrifying to anyone who cares about free speech [J.D. Tuccille, Reason]
Free speech roundup
- Internet companies aren’t the government and their actions don’t violate the First Amendment – but if we want a liberal society they should think hard before yanking connectivity from groups they politically despise [John Samples, Cato]
- An argument you may not have heard before: “The neurodiversity case for free speech” [Geoffrey Miller, Quillette]
- Prof. Joel Gora: over past decade “the Roberts Supreme Court may well have been the most speech-protective court in a generation, if not in our history.” [Steve Chapman]
- “Respecting Rights? Measuring the world’s blasphemy laws” [Joelle Fiss and Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom report via Eugene Volokh]
- Michigan man appeals jury tampering conviction over “fully informed jury” leafleting outside courthouse [Jacob Sullum]
- New law school buzz over proposals to ban “atrocity speech,” seemingly defined to include speech that might touch off future atrocity [David J. Simon, Opinio Juris on Gregory Gordon’s Atrocity Speech Law] Revealingly, author says opposition to idea “is primarily of American origin — owing to a rabid free speech ethos flowing from libertarian impulses” [Gregory Gordon at Opinio Juris]
Social media liberty roundup
- “Congress is on the cusp of gutting Section 230. This is the threat we’ve always knew was coming” [Eric Goldman, R Street Institute/TechFreedom letter, Emma Llansó/CDT on SESTA, Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act]
- Psychiatrist sues to unmask author of 1-star review that caused him “extreme and constant distress” [Post and Courier]
- Judge: Loudoun County, Va. public official violated constituent’s rights by blocking him from “Chair Randall” Facebook page [Sydney Kashiwagi, Loudoun Times, Eugene Volokh, earlier on asserted First Amendment right not to be blocked or deleted on officials’ accounts]
- “Ominous: Canadian Court Orders Google To Remove Search Results Globally” [Daphne Keller/CIS via Volokh, EFF; decision defended by Neil Turkewitz, Truth on the Market]
- “Washington law bans repeated online posts intended to ‘embarrass’ anyone” [Eugene Volokh and second post on Rynearson/Moriwaki dispute]
- Blasphemy laws: Taimoor Raza becomes first person sentenced to death in Pakistan over Facebook posts [CNN]
Free speech roundup
- Until late night talker Stephen Colbert became a target, many people didn’t realize the FCC looks into every complaint of on-air obscenity. Time to revisit that practice? [Amy B. Wang and Callum Borchers, Washington Post; Volokh]
- First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams on his new book, The Soul of the First Amendment [Cato podcast, panel discussion with Abrams, Ronald Collins, and Ilya Shapiro, Roger Pilon moderating]
- Worth a read: promote legal liability for speech and watch it come back to bite you, time and again [Jason Harrow, Take Care Blog on purported incitement by President Trump at his rallies]
- Irish blasphemy investigation of comedian/actor Stephen Fry, though quickly dropped, prompts major political parties in New Zealand to pledge repeal of that nation’s blasphemy law [Independent, U.K.]
- Singing legend Joan Baez on letting the other side have its say [Facebook post]
- On the Macron email dump shortly before the French election, Will Saletan: “All advocates of limits on campaign speech should think about this: Law-abiders can’t respond, so lawbreakers have the field to themselves.”