Доклад на Ибн Уарак: Вероотстъпничеството и човешките права

Самото понятие за вероотстъпничество (апостасия) е изчезнало от мисленето на Запада, където можем да използваме понятия като „бивш католик“ или „непрактикуващ християни“, но не и „вероотстъпник“. Със сигурност не съществуват наказателни санкции заради преминаването от християнство в друга религия. От друга страна, в ислямските страни този проблем далеч не е преключил.

Коранът

Ясно е, че в ислямското право вероотстъпникът трябва да бъде убит. По това правило няма никакви спорове сред традиционните мюсюлмани или съвременните учени и ние ще се обърнем към текстовите доказателства за това. Някои съвременни учени твърдят, че вероотстъпникът подлежи на наказание единствено в отвъдния свят, като например стих 16:106 ("Който отрече Аллах, след като е повярвал - освен който е бил принуден, но сърцето му е спокойно с вярата... Ала които разтворят гръд за неверието, над тях е гневът на Аллах и за тях има огромно мъчение"). Подобен е и стих 3:90-91 ("От онези, които се отричат, след като са повярвали, а после неверието им порасне, не ще бъде прието покаяние. Те са заблудените.От онези, които се отрекат и умрат неверници, не ще бъде приета като откуп дори пълна със злато земя. За тях има болезнено мъчение и никой не ще ги избави")

Въпреки това Сура 2:217 бива тълкувана от един не по-малък авторитет като Ал-Шафи‘и (поч. през 820 г. сл. Хр.), основател на една от четирите традиционни школи по право в сунни-исляма, в смисъл, че отстъпниците подлежат на смъртно наказание. В Сура 2:217 четем: ("А които от вас отстъпят от религията си и умрат неверници, на такива пропадат делата и в земния живот, и в отвъдния, и те са обитателите на Огъня, там ще пребивават вечно."). Ал-Талаби и Ал-Хазан са съгласни с това. Ал-Рази в своя коментар върху стих 2:217 казва, че вероотстъпникът трябва да бъде убит.^[1]

Подобен е и стих 4:89:("Желаят и вие да сте неверници, както и те са неверници, за да бъдете равни. И не взимайте ближни от тях, докато не се преселят по пътя на Аллах! А отметнат ли се, хващайте и ги убивайте, където ги заварите - и не взимайте от тях нито ближен, нито помощник"). Байдауи (поч. ок. 1315-16 г.) в своя знаменит коментар върху Корана тълкува този пасаж в следния смисъл: „Който се отрече от своята вяра (иртада), открито или тайно – хванете го и го убийте, където и да го намерите, като всеки друг неверник. Отделете се напълно от него. Не приемайте ходатайства спрямо него.“^[2] В своя коментар върху този пасаж Ибн Катир, като цитира Ал Судди (поч. през 745 г.), казва, че понеже неверниците са проявили своето неверие, те трябва да бъдат убити.^[3]

Абул Ала Маудиди [1903-1979 г.], основател на Джамат-и Ислами, е вероятно най-влиятелният мюсюлмански мислител на 20-ти век, с значителна роля за ислямското възраждане в нашето съвремие. Той призоваваше за завръщане към Корана и за една пречистена сунна като път за съживяване и възстановяване на исляма. В своята книга за вероотстъпничеството в исляма, Маудиди твърди, че дори Коранът предписва смъртно наказание за всички отстъпници. Той посочва сура 9-та като доказателство: "И ако се покаят и отслужват молитвата, и дават милостинята закат, тогава те са ваши братя в религията. Разясняваме знаменията на хора проумяващи. И ако нарушат клетвите си подир своя обет, и поругаят вашата религия, сражавайте се с водителите на неверието, за да престанат! Няма клетви за тях"(9:11,12)^[4]

Хадисите

Here we find many traditions demanding the death penalty for apostasy. According to Ibn Abbas the Prophet said, "Kill him who changes his religion," or "behead him."^[5] The only argument was as to the nature of the death penalty. Bukhari recounts this gruesome tradition: "Narrated Anas:Some people from the tribe of Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam .The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch ) camels of charity to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine).They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment they turned renegades (reverted from Islam, irtada ) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away .The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were caught and brought, and the Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron , and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterised, till they die."^[6]

Abu Dawud has collected the following saying of the Prophet: " 'Ikrimah said: Ali burned some people who retreated from Islam. When Ibn Abbas was informed of it he said, 'If it had been I, I would not have them burned, for the apostle of Allah said: 'Do not inflict Allah's punishment on anyone.' But would have killed them on account of the statement of the Apostle of Allah, 'Kill those who change their religion.' "^[7]

In other words, kill the apostates (with the sword) but certainly not by burning them, that is Allah's way of punishing transgressors in the next world. According to a tradition of Aisha's, apostates are to be slain, crucified or banished.^[8] Should the apostate be given a chance to repent? Traditions differ enormously. In one tradition, Muadh Jabal refused to sit down until an apostate brought before him had been killed "in accordance with the decision of God and of His Apostle."^[9]

Under Muslim law, the male apostate must be put to death, as long as he is an adult, and in full possession of his faculties. If a pubescent boy apostatises, he is imprisoned until he comes of age, when if he persists in rejecting Islam he must be put to death. Drunkards and the mentally disturbed are not held responsible for their apostasy. If a person has acted under compulsion he is not considered an apostate, his wife is not divorced and his lands are not forfeited. According to Hanafis and Shia, a woman is imprisoned until she repents and adopts Islam once more, but according to the influential Ibn Hanbal, and the Malikis and Shafiites , she is also put to death. In general, execution must be by the sword, though there are examples of apostates tortured to death, or strangled, burnt, drowned, impaled or flayed. The caliph Umar used to tie them to a post and had lances thrust into their hearts, and the Sultan Baybars II (1308-09) made torture legal.

Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR,1948] states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance".^[10]

The clause guaranteeing the freedom to change one's religion was added at the request of the delegate from Lebanon, Charles Malik, who was a Christian.^[11] Lebanon had accepted many people fleeing persecution for their beliefs, in particular for having changed their religion. Lebanon especially objected to the Islamic law concerning apostasy. Many Muslim countries, however, objected strongly to the clause regarding the right to change one's religion. The delegate from Egypt, for instance, said that "very often a man changes religion or his convictions under external influences with goals which are not recommendable such as divorce." He added that he feared in proclaiming the liberty to change one's religion or convictions the Universal Declaration would encourage without wishing it "the machinations of certain missions well- known in the East, which relentlessly pursue their efforts with a view to converting to their faith the populations of the East".^[12] Significantly, Lebanon was supported by a delegate from Pakistan who belonged to the Ahmadi community which, ironically, was to be thrown out of the Islamic community in the 1970s for being non-Muslim. In the end all Muslim countries except Saudi Arabia adhered to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

During discussions of Article 18 in 1966, Saudi Arabia and Egypt wanted to suppress the clause guaranteeing the freedom to change one's religion. Finally a compromise amendment proposed by Brazil and the Philippines was adopted to placate the Islamic countries. Thus, "the freedom to change his religion or belief" was replaced by "the freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of his choice."^[13] Similarly in 1981, during discussions on the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, Iran, under the new regime reminded everyone that Islam punished apostasy by death. The delegate from Iraq, backed up by Syria, speaking on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference expressed his reserve for any clauses or terms that would contradict the Islamic Sharia, while the delegate from Egypt felt that they had to guard against such a clause being exploited for political ends to interfere in the internal affairs of states.^[14]

The various Islamic human rights schemes or declarations - such as the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (1981) are understandably vague or evasive on the issue of the freedom to change one's religion, since Islam itself clearly forbids apostasy and punishes it with death. As Elisabeth Mayer says, "The lack of support for the principle of freedom of religion in the Islamic human rights schemes is one of the factors that most sharply distinguishes them from the International Bill of Human Rights, which treats freedom of religion as an unqualified right. The [Muslim] authors' unwillingness to repudiate the rule that a person should be executed over a question of religious belief reveals the enormous gap that exists between their mentalities and the modern philosophy of human rights."^[15] Islamic Human Rights Schemes are clearly not universal since they introduce a specifically Islamic religious criterion into the political sphere, whereas the UDHR of 1948 places human rights in an entirely secular and universalist framework. The Islamic human rights schemes severely restrict and qualify the rights of individuals, particularly women, non-Muslims and those, such as apostates, who do not accept Islamic religious orthodoxy.

As for the constitutions of various Muslim countries, while many do guarantee freedom of belief (Egypt,1971; Syria, 1973; Jordan, 1952) some talk of freedom of conscience (Algeria:1989), and some of freedom of thought and opinion (Mauritania: 1991). Islamic countries with two exceptions do not address the issue of apostasy in their penal codes; the two exceptions are the Sudan, and Mauritania. In the Sudanese Penal Code of 1991, article 126. 2, we read: "Whoever is guilty of apostasy is invited to repent over a period to be determined by the tribunal. If he persists in his apostasy and was not recently converted to Islam, he will be put to death." The Penal Code of Mauritania of 1984, article 306 reads: "...All Muslims guilty of apostasy, either spoken or by overt action will be asked to repent during a period of three days. If he does not repent during this period, he is condemned to death as an apostate, and his belongings confiscated by the State Treasury." This applies equally to women. The Moroccan Penal Code seems only to mention those guilty of trying to subvert the belief of a Muslim, or those who try to convert a Muslim to another religion. The punishment varies between a fine and imprisonment for anything up to three years.^[16]

The absence of any mention of apostasy in some penal codes of Islamic countries of course in no way implies that a Muslim in the country concerned is free to leave his religion. In reality, the lacunae in the penal codes are filled by Islamic Law. Mahmud Muhammad Taha was hanged for apostasy in 1985, even though at the time the Sudanese Penal Code of 1983 did not mention such a crime.^[17]

In some countries, the term apostate is applied to some who were born non-Muslim but whose ancestors had the good sense to convert from Islam. The Baha'is in Iran in recent years have been persecuted for just such a reason. Similarly, in Pakistan the Ahmadiya community were classed as non-Muslims, and are subjected to all sorts of persecution.

There is some evidence that many Muslim women in Islamic countries would convert from Islam to escape their lowly position in Muslim societies, or to avoid the application of an unfavourable law, especially Sharia law governing divorce.^[18] Muslim theologians are well aware of the temptation of Muslim women to evade the Sharia laws by converting from Islam, and take appropriate measures. For example, in Kuwait in an explanatory memorandum to the text of a law reform says: "Complaints have shown that the Devil makes the route of apostasy attractive to the Muslim woman so that she can break a conjugal tie that does not please her. For this reason, it was decided that apostasy would not lead to the dissolution of the marriage in order to close this dangerous door."^[19] Several cases are discussed in my book, Leaving Islam Apostates Speak Out (Prometheus Books, 2003):

Charges of apostasy, unbelief , blasphemy and heresy, whether upheld or not, clearly go against several articles in UDHR of 1948 , and the legally binding International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [ICCPR] of 1966 to which 147 states are signatories.

General comment No 22, adopted by the UN Human Rights Commission at its 48th session (1993) ( HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 of 22 May 2003 , pp.155-56 ) declares (quote):"Article 18 protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief. The term "belief" and "religion" are to be broadly construed".

As with my statement to the 60th Session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights delivered by the President of the IHEU, We urge the Commission to call on all governments to comply with applicable international human rights instruments like the ICCPR and to bring their national legislation into accordance with the instruments to which they were a party , and to forbid fatwas and sermons preaching violence in the name of god against those holding unorthodox opinions or those who have left a religion.