The value of a secular society is the value of equality for all under the law. This means a universal ethic, not a particular ethic. A morality bound by universal standards. A universality of the application of the law to every citizen.
Whether by the local or national citizenry, everyone gets the same treatment. Or the international community, a violation of rights and laws is a violation of international human rights and international law.
Nasir Ahmad, as with the other cases of Abdul Waheed, Rana Nouman Rafaqat, and Anwaar Ahmad, is an individual jailed for an imaginary crime. An imaginary crime bound to another of a global system of practice and superstition, namely religious law.
The claim of online activity and religious discourse is a mixed one. However, the claim of blasphemy, being a religious law, is dubious at best. Furthermore, the claim of this in a free forum online is even moreso.
It is akin to getting an indulgence recorded on television, then replaying this repeatedly for indefinite indulgence. Blessings and cursings cannot be dished out by the hand of Man. They belong with God if such a God exists. It is, in fact, blasphemy to proclaim a moral law on Earth and authority as if holding the authority of God. It is to claim to know the Mind of God. Do you? No. Do they? No.
Why are online blasphemy charges even considered legitimate, especially amongst devout believers? My hunch: It was merely a group of powerful theocrats in society making an arbitrary decision without consulting the wider believing public, especially women.
Nasir Ahmad’s death sentence for blasphemy constitutes a severe violation of human rights, contradicting international human rights standards. Ahmad has freedom of expression, particularly online and regarding religious discourse.
The charge of blasphemy, apart from an imaginary crime, requires more solid evidence and fair standards because of uploading to YouTube. In many countries, similar actions would not constitute a criminal offense, underlining the need for Pakistan to align its blasphemy laws with international norms.
These actions underscore a miscarriage of justice against Ahmad. As part of a global minority, it bothers me. As a humanist, it seems illegitimate, unjust, and unfair. For Nasir Ahmad, Abdul Waheed, Rana Nouman Rafaqat, and Anwaar Ahmad, they should be unconditionally released and given a formal apology.
The ethical implications of such laws and implementations of religious blasphemy laws could result in the same charges and convictions against Muslims or Christians or others in similar contexts. “If they do it, we can too.”
Again, I’m making the call for their release for international human rights reasons and for the prevention of injustice against the non-religious in the future.
The cases of Abdul Waheed, Rana Nouman Rafaqat, and Anwaar Ahmad, who faced similar charges, show a pattern of misuse of blasphemy laws in Pakistan. This is about universal justice rather than particular justice benefitting one and only one religion or the religious in general against the minority non-religious in particular. A culture with aspects of a beautiful religious aesthetic could be matched by its adherence to international norms.
***
If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project and want a deeper connection with our community, please join us as a Premium Member today.
Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here.
—
Photo credit: Photo by Abuzar Xheikh on Unsplash.
