Blasphemy Is Bogus, Daily Brief January 9, 2024

If any god, prophet, or saint were to show up in a courtroom and testify about the injury they claimed to have suffered due to some person’s words, then I might – might – be convinced blasphemy is a crime. Until that happens, however, I will consider all such charges bogus.

There is simply no “there” there in blasphemy. No victim, no harm, no nothing. It’s a manufactured crime with zero foundation in objective reality.

Unfortunately, despite being absurdly invented, the “crime” of blasphemy is used to punish innocent people in many parts of the world, encompassing many different faiths. People can receive fines, prison sentences, and even death sentences.

One particularly egregious example comes from Indonesia, where 74-year-old Apollinaris Darmawan has spent more than three years behind bars under the country’s “blasphemy” law. His story demonstrates just how nonsensical such laws are everywhere.

Darmawan is a retired railway company executive who converted from Islam to Catholicism. He wrote a book and social media posts criticizing Indonesia’s Muslim leaders and Islamic law. In August 2020, a Muslim mob stormed his home in Bandung, West Java, dragged him into the street, and stripped him.

Police came to Darmawan’s rescue but then took him into custody and charged him with the “crime” of blasphemy. He was accused of defaming Islam and insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

In December 2020, the Bandung district court convicted Darmawan, sentencing him to five years in prison and handing him a fine equivalent to US$ 55,000. It’s not his first time either: Darmawan spent several years behind bars for an earlier blasphemy conviction, as well.

As my colleague and Indonesia expert Andreas Harsono details, his prosecution and conviction violate Darmawan’s rights to freedom of expression and belief, which are protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other treaties ratified by Indonesia.  

And, of course, it’s not just one case nor just one country that’s the problem here - the basic concept of “blasphemy” laws is inherently flawed.

The UN Human Rights Committee, which provides authoritative interpretations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has made it clear: “blasphemy laws … are incompatible with the Covenant.”

Such laws may not “discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.”

Yes, some people might be offended by what somebody says about their sacred ideas or holy objects. I get that, and I wouldn’t go out of my way to insult anyone’s religious beliefs. I would personally consider it rude to do so.

But, at most, that’s all it would be: rude.

And if we’re only allowed to say what offends no one, then we hardly have freedom of speech, right?