May 17
SUDAN:
Christians condemn death penalty for Sudanese doctor accused of apostasy
Sudanese Christians have condemned the sentencing of a Christian woman to death
by hanging after she married a Christian man.
Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, 27, refused to recant her Christian faith as ordered by
the court.
A doctor who is 8 months pregnant and currently in detention with her
20-month-old son, Ibrahim was charged with adultery last year. Recently, the
court added an apostasy charge when she declared her Christian faith in court.
"This is very disturbing," said Roman Catholic Auxiliary Bishop Daniel Adwok of
Khartoum.
Born of a Muslim father and an Orthodox Christian mother, Ibrahim married
Daniel Wani, a South Sudanese Christian with U.S. citizenship, in 2012.
Adwok said he could not understand why the sentence was issued when the 2005
Interim National Constitution allowed freedom of religion throughout the
country.
"She had openly declared her Christian faith," said Adwok. "I don't think it's
right to deny her that freedom."
But the Sudanese minister for information, Ahmed Bilal Osman, told Agence
France-Presse that Sudan is not unique in its law against apostasy.
"In Saudi Arabia, in all the Muslim countries, it is not allowed at all for a
Muslim to change his religion," he said.
The Rev. Mark Akec Cien, a South Sudan church leader, said he wasn't surprised,
either. Sudan is governed by Islamic law and has always persecuted Christians,
he said.
Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a British religious freedom advocacy group, has
called for the annulment of the sentence and the release of Ibrahim, while
Amnesty International said adultery and apostasy should not be considered
crimes.
(source: Washington Post)
*********************************
No imminent execution for Christian in Sudan, despite death sentence
Meriam Yehya Ibrahim faces a death sentence in Sudan for apostasy after a court
ruled she converted from Islam.
Now the 27-year-old Christian woman, a wife and mother expecting another child,
embarks on a long and unpredictable legal journey.
A variety of factors -- Sudan's legal system, differences between its
constitution and Sharia law imposed by the sentencing judge, her pregnancy --
ensure there will no execution any time soon.
Ibrahim's lawyer argues the sentence should not stand, and an international
outcry could pressure Sudan's government to intervene.
Even if the sentence stands, Sharia law as practiced in Sudan prohibits
carrying out the death sentence on an expectant woman until 2 years after she
gives birth.
Here are some questions and answers on what happens now:
What is this all about?
On Thursday, a Khartoum court convicted Ibrahim of apostasy, or the
renunciation of faith, and sentenced her to death.
Ibrahim was born to a Sudanese Muslim father and an Ethiopian Orthodox mother.
Her father left when she was 6, and she was raised by her mother as a
Christian.
Her lawyer, Mohamed Jar Elnabi, said the case started after Ibrahim's brother
filed a complaint against her.
The brother alleged Ibrahim had gone missing for several years and that her
family was shocked to find she had married a Christian man.
Because her father was Muslim, the Sharia law court considered her to be the
same. It refused to recognize her marriage to a Christian and also convicted
her of adultery, with an additional sentence of 100 lashes.
Before imposing the sentence, the court gave her an opportunity to recant her
Christian faith, but Elnabi said Ibrahim refused to do so, declaring: "I am a
Christian, and I will remain a Christian."
Attempts by CNN to contact Sudan's justice minister and foreign affairs
minister about the case were unsuccessful.
Can she appeal?
Elnabi told CNN on Friday that he plans to ask an appeals court to review the
sentence, and could file the request as soon as Sunday.
That will begin a legal process in which the case works its way through Sudan's
Supreme Court and up to the Constitutional Court, the nation's highest, he
said.
There was no definite timetable for the appeal process, according to Elnabi,
who said any death sentence must be ratified by both the Supreme Court and
Constitutional Court.
What is the basis of the appeal?
Elnabi argues that Sudan's constitution allows religious conversion without
restriction.
"I am very much optimistic that the appeal court will reverse the death
sentence issued by the primary court," he said.
Katherine Perks of the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies agreed. She
said the verdict goes against Sudan's "own constitution and commitments made
under regional and international law."
However, Sudan has a history of religious discrimination.
Under President Omar al-Bashir, the African nation "continues to engage in
systematic, ongoing and egregious violations of freedom of religion or belief,"
the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom said in its 2014 report.
The country imposes Sharia law on Muslims and non-Muslims alike and punishes
acts of "indecency" and "immorality" by floggings and amputations, the
commission said.
"Conversion from Islam is a crime punishable by death, suspected converts to
Christianity face societal pressures, and government security personnel
intimidate and sometimes torture those suspected of conversion," said the
commission appointed by the U.S. Congress and president.
Since 1999, the State Department has called Sudan one of the worst offenders of
religious rights.
Do her pregnancy and family situation make a difference?
Ibrahim is 8 months pregnant and has a 20-month-old son who stays with her in
prison. Elnabi said her husband, Daniel Wani, uses a wheelchair and "totally
depends on her for all details of his life."
As practiced in Sudan, Sharia law prohibits the execution of pregnant women.
Instead, the sentence is delayed until 2 years after lactation.
In past cases involving pregnant or nursing women, the Sudanese government
waited until the mother weaned her child before carrying out the sentence, said
Christian Solidarity Worldwide spokeswoman Kiri Kankhwende.
According to Elnabi, Ibrahim is having a difficult pregnancy, but a request to
send her to a private hospital was denied "due to security measures."
Will international pressure make any difference?
Human rights groups and Western governments are complaining about Ibrahim's
case.
"We call upon the government of Sudan to respect the right to freedom of
religion, including one's right to change one's faith or beliefs, a right which
is enshrined in international human rights law as well as in Sudan's own 2005
Interim Constitution," said a statement by the embassies of the United States,
Britain, Canada and the Netherlands.
Amnesty International described Ibrahim as a prisoner of conscience.
"Adultery and apostasy are acts which should not be considered crimes at all,
let alone meet the international standard of 'most serious crimes' in relation
to the death penalty," said Manar Idriss, Amnesty International's Sudan
researcher. "It is a flagrant breach of international human rights law."
The case comes as the world focuses on more than 200 schoolgirls abducted by
Islamic extremists in northern Nigeria who threaten to sell them into slavery.
Whether Ibrahim's case will generate the same strong reaction as the Nigerian
situation remains unclear.
In the past, a forceful international outcry has influenced similar apostasy
cases.
In 2006, an Afghan man threatened with the death penalty for converting to
Christianity was released into exile after Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai
reportedly intervened at the behest of his Western backers, over the objections
of the country's conservative judiciary.
********************
Why marrying for love should never mean death
A Sudanese court sentenced a pregnant 27 year old woman, called Meriam Yehya
Ibrahim, to death this week. Her crime was she fell in love and married a
Christian man and affirmed her faith in Christianity.
She was subsequently accused, and convicted, of apostasy, since the court in
Khartoum regards her as a Muslim even though she was raised Christian by her
mother after her Muslim father left when she was 6 years old. Since the court
does not recognise her marriage to a non-Muslim either, she has also been
convicted of adultery and sentenced to 100 lashes.
As disturbing as the above story may be, unfortunately it does not come as a
surprise. Countries such as Sudan, Pakistan and more recently Brunei are
increasingly lurching towards archaic and inane interpretations of Sharia and
applying laws that undermine basic human rights and equality.
This not only puts them at odds with the modern world, it puts them at odds
with the trajectory progressive Muslim thinkers and reformists have been
travelling in for the last 200 years.
The idea that Muslims who leave Islam should be killed is prominent in medieval
jurisprudential texts that were written at a time when religious faith and
political allegiance were inextricably linked. Hence, leaving the faith was
deemed treason and construed as an act of rebellion against political
authorities.
As Muslim political empires became more diverse, conceptions of political
allegiance began to change and in 1844, the Ottoman Empire abolished the death
penalty for apostasy from Islam. Al-Azhar in Egypt, the world's most
influential Sunni religious authority, followed suit in 1958 and issued a
formal fatwa (religious edict) abolishing the death penalty for apostasy.
Apostasy laws also blatantly contradict the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UGHR) which was introduced in 1948 and signed by most Muslim-majority
countries at the time. However, the so-called "Cairo Declaration on Human
Rights in Islam," issued by Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) Foreign
Ministers in 1990, contains the following clauses:
"Article 10: Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to
exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance
in order to convert him to another religion or to atheism."
"Article 22(a): Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in
such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shar'iah."
"Article 25: The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the
explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration."
The last 2 articles of this bizarre and highly-politicized declaration, allow
Muslim-majority countries to violate the UDHR by invoking the Sharia as though
there was a unified version of it.
Not only is there no single interpretation of Sharia, but certain
Muslim-majority countries seem adamant on re-invigorating some of the most
regressive and outmoded interpretations of it in an almost defiant and
aggressive manner.
This lurch towards medievalism is largely driven by the global Islamist
movement, which was born in 1928 when the Muslim Brotherhood was established,
and gained real momentum after the Iranian revolution in 1979.
The current regime in Sudan, which seized power after a military coup in 1989,
has systematically used Islamism to silence domestic dissent. They have even
reached out to Islamist militant groups in the region and hosted the late al
Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, in the early 1990s.
The global Islamist movement seeks a much greater role for Islam in the
political sphere and, in its political stances, is defined by its opposition to
the West.
In synchronizing a medieval interpretation of Islam with politics, this
movement seeks to challenge and reverse progress on human rights and equality
that has been made in recent decades. Hence, we are witnessing the introduction
of increasingly antiquated laws that discriminate and undermine basic rights.
It is time for the Cairo Declaration to be revoked and for the Muslim human
rights discourse to catch up with, and contribute as an equal partner to,
modern international human rights discourse.
It is also time for human rights groups and the international community to take
a strong stance against any state that violates the rights of ordinary citizens
for making choices the rest of us take for granted.
(source for both: CNN)
IRAN----executions
11 prisoners hanged in Ghezel Hesar Prison
11 prisoners have been hanged in Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj on May 10, on
charge of drug trafficking. According to the report of Human Rights Activists
News Agency (HRANA), the prisoners were transferred from ward 2 to the solitary
confinements of Ghezel Hesar Prison on May 8 and the official Iranian media
have not published the report of these executions yet.
4 of 11 prisoners have been identified as: Fakhreddin Besharati, Ali Ghobadi,
Jafar Tamami and Salaheddin Ghiasi.
(source: Human Rights Activists News Agency)
*************************
3 prisoners hanged, 2 prisoners lashed in Qazvin
The Iranian regime judiciary in city of Qazvin announced the execution of 3
prisoners in the city's main prison, state-run Fars News Agency reported on
Saturday. 2 other prisoners received 10 and 30 lashes.
The prisoners who were hanged early morning on Saturday were identified by
their 1st name as Mohsen, Yousef and Saeed. All prisoners had been arrested on
drug related charges.
Despite claims of moderation by Hassan Rouhani, the regime's president, there
have been more executions over the past year compared with any other year in
the past 25 years.
More than 700 have been executed in Iran during 2013, 2/3 of which occurred
during Rouhani's tenure.
The executions in cities across Iran is being carried out to intimidate an
angry and disillusioned society that the mullahs have no other way to contain.
The desire for change is pervasive in Iran, in particular among women, who are
treated as 2nd-class citizens, and youth (55 % of Iranians are younger than
30), who have little hope that their desires will be met under the mullahs'
rule.
(source: NCR-Iran)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~