Insulting Islam is not free speech: European court
Chase Winter
October 26, 2018
The ECHR ruled against an Austrian woman who claimed calling the Prophet Muhammad a pedophile was protected by free speech. The applicant claimed she was contributing to public debate.
Image: Colourbox
Advertisement
An Austrian woman's conviction for calling the Prophet Muhammad a pedophile did not violate her freedom of speech, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday.
The Strasbourg-based ECHR ruled that Austrian courts carefully balanced the applicant's "right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria."
The woman in 2009 held two seminars entitled "Basic Information on Islam," during which she likened Muhammad's marriage to a six-year-old girl, Aisha, to pedophilia.
Limits of free speech
The marriage according to Islamic tradition was consummated when Aisha was nine and Muhammad was around 50. Aisha was the daughter of Muhammad's best friend and the first caliph, Abu Bakr.
The court cited the Austrian women stating during the seminar that Muhammad "liked to do it with children" and "... A 56-year-old and a six-year-old? ... What do we call it, if it is not pedophilia?"
An Austrian court later convicted the woman of disparaging religion and fined her €480 ($546). Other domestic courts upheld the decision before the case was brought before the ECHR.
#FreedomOfSpeech across the world
What's freedom of speech like in your country? We asked media experts from more than 100 nations attending this year's Global Media Forum. It's part of a DW campaign calling attention to jailed bloggers around the world.
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Shammi Haque, blogger, Bangladesh
"People in Bangladesh can't say what's on their mind. There is no freedom of speech at all and every day the situation is getting worse. I'm a social activist and blogger and my topics include religion. Islamists don't like this. They already killed six bloggers - my friends - so I decided to leave the country. I want to return but I don't know when and if it will be safe."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Anonymous (for security reasons), Venezuela
"Freedom of speech is a concept that doesn't exist in my country, it would be kryptonite to a dictatorship. Journalists try not to criticize the government to avoid fines and to protect their own lives. Journalists are persecuted if they are critical and many journalists have left the country. The government owns around 80 percent of the media so social media is the only voice we have now."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Amukelani Mayimele, youth activist, South Africa
"There is a big debate about freedom of speech in South Africa right now. Freedom of speech still exists, but there is currently an intervention by our national broadcasting association. They are trying to enact new laws of what can and can't be covered."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Rachid Boukhenfer, journalist, Morocco
"In the last decade there has been more space for freedom of speech in Morocco. It's not something we've simply received, many people had to fight for it. We still need to enlarge it but also make optimum use of the space we already have. In a country that is in the process of becoming democratic, we need to develop as we go, because there is always something standing in the way."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Binta Coudy Dé, entrepreneur, Senegal
"People in Senegal are not so free to express themselves. If you're not in the political field you have to be careful with what you say. As an entrepreneur, you can't be critical of the government, otherwise you won't get any funding."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Roman Dobrokhotov and Ekaterina Kuznetsova, journalists, Russia
Roman: "In Russia you're censored by the government at around one million readers. My website is smaller and is registered in Latvia so we can avoid censorship. The only attention we get from the government is occasional attacks on our server." Ekaterina: "Freedom of speech doesn't exist in Russia. In Europe, people are free to criticize politicians. I hope things will change in Russia."
"Freedom of speech has not existed in Syria for ages. In fact, people can't express their opinion about the Assad regime without asking. It's forbidden. They would be killed. If I were to post something critical on social media, I would not be living for very long."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Ayesha Hasan, journalist, Pakistan
"In Pakistan, 'freedom of press' are three very dangerous words. It might cost you your career or your life. They say, 'with great freedom comes great responsibility.' Well, we have freedom but no responsibility. I even have to watch what I am saying right now. I was almost kidnapped once when reporting, so we had to drop the story. But we have very brave journalists in Pakistan."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Mohammed Al-Azzani, development worker, Yemen
"In my country, freedom of speech is like a bear locked inside a cage and it needs to be let out. One and a half months ago, a 17-year-old boy was killed because of a Facebook post."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Rabaa Ben Doukhan, radio journalist, Tunisia
"The only result of our revolution is freedom of speech. We are free to criticize our government now. When I ask others in the region about freedom of speech in their home countries, the difference is huge. People in Tunisia do speak out. There are many difficulties like corruption in my country, but thankfully, freedom of speech is not one of them anymore."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Khushal Asefi, radio manager, Afghanistan
"Freedom of speech is a 'soft gun' in Afghanistan. It's the voice of the people that the government is afraid of. It's challenging but we are at a better level than our neighbors."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Salim Salim, journalist, Palestine
"There's not a lot of freedom in Palestine for journalists. A big problem is that journalists can't travel freely. They need to complete an application to go here but they can't because Gaza is under siege. Journalists are arrested by Israel and by the Palestinian Authority. If they write an opinion on Facebook, they're arrested by the government. But it's still better than in Syria or Iraq."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
A.N. (full name not revealed for security reasons), TV journalist, Kenya
"We enjoy quite a bit of freedom of speech in Kenya, but there are hefty fines for defamatory statements against the government. You can't air your opinion of a leader without your impartiality as a journalist being called into question - even if you think what they're doing is wrong. That's too bad."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Ananya Azad, blogger, Bangladesh
"In my country there is no freedom of speech. You can't say anything about Islam or criticize the government. Islamic fundamentalists have declared that if anyone criticizes Islam, they'll be killed. I'm a journalist and I was threatened by Islamist terrorists myself last year. They declared that I will be their next target and uploaded my photo on a hitlist, so I had to flee my country."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
Boureima Salouka, sustainable development consultant, Burkina Faso
"In my country we are free but we fight for our freedom. We pushed out our dictator and now we are free to express ourselves. But you have to work for your freedom. Freedom is a constant struggle."
Image: DW/A. S. Brändlin
15 images1 | 15
The women had argued that her comments fell within her right of freedom of expression and religious groups must tolerate criticism. She also argued they were intended to contribute to public debate and not designed to defame the Prophet of Islam.
No intention of promoting public debate
The ECHR recognized that freedom of religion did not exempt people from expecting criticism or denial of their religion.
However, it found that the woman's comments were not objective, failed to provide historical background and had no intention of promoting public debate.
The applicant's comments "could only be understood as having been aimed at demonstrating that Muhammad was not worthy of worship," the court said, adding that the statements were not based on facts and were intended to denigrate Islam.
It also found that even in a debate it was not compatible with freedom of expression "to pack incriminating statements into the wrapping of an otherwise acceptable expression of opinion and claim that this rendered passable those statements exceeding the permissible limits of freedom of expression."
