Afghan Journalist Sentenced to Death

[ZuzuBailey]

This is the Islam the Muslims here try so hard to defend!

Afghan Journalist Sentenced to Death

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — An Afghan court on Tuesday sentenced a 23-year-old journalism student to death for distributing a paper he printed off the Internet that three judges said violated the tenets of Islam, an official said.

The three-judge panel sentenced Sayad Parwez Kambaksh to death for distributing a paper that humiliated Islam, said Fazel Wahab, the chief judge in the northern province of Balkh, where the trial took place. Wahab did not preside over the trial.

Kambaksh’s family and the head of a journalists group denounced the verdict and said Kambaksh was not represented by a lawyer at trial. Members of a clerics council had been pushing for Kambaksh to be punished.

The case now goes to the first of two appeals courts, Wahab said. Kambaksh, who has been jailed since October, will remain in custody during appeal.

Wahab said he did not immediately have the details of the paper that Kambaksh circulated, other than that it was against Islam. Kambaksh discussed the paper with his teacher and classmates at Balkh University and several students complained to the government, Wahab said.

Kambaksh’s brother, Yacoubi Brahimi, described Tuesday’s proceeding as a “secret trial,” saying the family did not know it had been scheduled. Some have accused Kambaksh of writing the paper in question, but Brahimi said that his brother printed it off the Internet.

“He told them he didn’t write this article,” said Brahimi. “It was written by an Iranian.”

Wahab said that Kambaksh told the court that he could defend himself and did not need a lawyer. But Kambaksh’s brother said his brother should have had an attorney.

Wahab said that only President Hamid Karzai can forgive Kambaksh because he had confessed to violating the tenets of Islam.

 

[Sister_Amy]

This article is not about Islam though, is it? It’s about an Afghan court. I don’t really see any Muslims standing up to defend an Afghan court. Do you? It’s not about Islam.

Not to trying to be curt or dismissive here… but of all places, Afghanistan?

 

[ralphinal]

Sister Amy,

You are an American, so you should understand where the op is coming from. We see these types of stories and we have trouble separating the religion of Muslims from the Government of Muslims. If the laws of a Muslim Nation are based on the Laws given in Islam, and there is no separation of church and state, please provide us with a reason we should separate the actions of the governments from the religion.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Sister Amy,

You are an American, so you should understand where the op is coming from. We see these types of stories and we have trouble separating the religion of Muslims from the Government of Muslims. If the laws of a Muslim Nation are based on the Laws given in Islam, and there is no separation of church and state, please provide us with a reason we should separate the actions of the governments from the religion.

The statement that I bolded is crucial. The laws of a “muslim nation” (for example, Afghanistan) may be supposedly BASED ON laws given in Islam. That is the same as saying the laws of the United States are BASED ON laws of Christianity–they are… based on. But if for example the USA allows gay marriage–that isn’t based on Christianity but has diverged from it.

If there were no separation of church and state, the president would be the leader of the church. In the same way, the leader of Afghanistan would be the leader of the Muslims. But… that’s not the case. These countries try to start with Islamic Law–because by and large that’s what the people want–and then they leave it when it becomes cumbersome. I mean, it’s hard for a government to allow dissent.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[seekerz]

Sister Amy,

You are an American, so you should understand where the op is coming from. We see these types of stories and we have trouble separating the religion of Muslims from the Government of Muslims. If the laws of a Muslim Nation are based on the Laws given in Islam, and there is no separation of church and state, please provide us with a reason we should separate the actions of the governments from the religion.

For one thing, religion has been used throughout history to defend wrong or perverted behavior. Incidentally, does Afghanistan have Sharia law?

Personally I would not like to live in any country where there was no separation of Church and state. Too many people seem to think they can read God’s mind; add the power to forcefully impose their interpretation of God’s will on others and you have a recipe for disaster.

 

[ralphinal]

The statement that I bolded is crucial. The laws of a “muslim nation” (for example, Afghanistan) may be supposedly BASED ON laws given in Islam. That is the same as saying the laws of the United States are BASED ON laws of Christianity–they are… based on. But if for example the USA allows gay marriage–that isn’t based on Christianity but has diverged from it.

Well, I must say that the United States laws are actually based on England’s common laws, which did have a basis in Christian ideals. However, we also took in a bunch of other philosophies before we got our current system. By the way, the US government does not allow for homosexual marriage. At this time, marriage is a state issue and not a federal one. It is being decided state by state.

If there were no separation of church and state, the president would be the leader of the church. In the same way, the leader of Afghanistan would be the leader of the Muslims. But… that’s not the case. These countries try to start with Islamic Law–because by and large that’s what the people want–and then they leave it when it becomes cumbersome. I mean, it’s hard for a government to allow dissent.

I hope that makes sense.

This part does make sense. If it will not work, why try it? Is it strange that a government based on Islamic laws seems not ot be able to hold to them, when the citizens seem able to hold up their end?

Our government allows dessent. IN fact, we allow stuff that you get your whole family killed in some nations. Why do we survive?

 

[ASimpleSinner]

This is the Islam the Muslims here try so hard to defend!

Afghan Journalist Sentenced to Death

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — An Afghan court on Tuesday sentenced a 23-year-old journalism student to death for distributing a paper he printed off the Internet that three judges said violated the tenets of Islam, an official said.

The three-judge panel sentenced Sayad Parwez Kambaksh to death for distributing a paper that humiliated Islam, said Fazel Wahab, the chief judge in the northern province of Balkh, where the trial took place. Wahab did not preside over the trial.

Kambaksh’s family and the head of a journalists group denounced the verdict and said Kambaksh was not represented by a lawyer at trial. Members of a clerics council had been pushing for Kambaksh to be punished.

The case now goes to the first of two appeals courts, Wahab said. Kambaksh, who has been jailed since October, will remain in custody during appeal.

Wahab said he did not immediately have the details of the paper that Kambaksh circulated, other than that it was against Islam. Kambaksh discussed the paper with his teacher and classmates at Balkh University and several students complained to the government, Wahab said.

Kambaksh’s brother, Yacoubi Brahimi, described Tuesday’s proceeding as a “secret trial,” saying the family did not know it had been scheduled. Some have accused Kambaksh of writing the paper in question, but Brahimi said that his brother printed it off the Internet.

“He told them he didn’t write this article,” said Brahimi. “It was written by an Iranian.”

Wahab said that Kambaksh told the court that he could defend himself and did not need a lawyer. But Kambaksh’s brother said his brother should have had an attorney.

Wahab said that only President Hamid Karzai can forgive Kambaksh because he had confessed to violating the tenets of Islam.

I try hard to be fair and understand Islam (which has variance the same way Christianity does) but I keep running into the same problem…

Namely the gentle peaceful Muslim neighbors I grew up with - kindly people, pious people - would be classified as “bad Muslims” or lax by a great many of their co-religionists…

So my questions I guess are these:

(1) how essential to the practice of Islam is this sort of crime and punishment? I can’t get around the fact that where Islam predominates, this sort of punishment is common. Even in Pakistan which is largely credited as being very secular, reports come out frequently of Christians or converts sentenced to prison or death for conversion or “blaspheming” (Largely, international outcry is successful in getting them pardon… The stories that don’t make the news, I wonder about.

(2) would the pleasnt peaceful folks I know be considered “unorthodox” or otherwise “bad Muslims”?

I am not here to Muslim-bait or Muslim-bash… But I am trying to wrap my mind between the disconnect in this face of Islam where it predominates in the population, and the congenial gentle face of some of the good people I have known?

 

[Sister_Amy]

I didn’t mean to be distracting with the gay marriage comment–it was just an example, and it’s a popular topic these days.

About keeping Islamic Law… let’s look at Pakistan. The official title of the country is “The Islamic Republic of Pakistan.” Some of the law is based on English law, some based on Islamic law. But the president decides he doesn’t want to obey the rules, and what does he do? Declares martial law (“state of emergency”) and suspends the constituion, replaces the supreme court with lackeys.

I think it’s a really good example of him just not wanting the laws to apply to him. And for most rulers–the laws of Islam apply to them too, but they generally don’t like that.

In the USA we are allowed to dissent. At least we have been–but don’t dissent too loudly or you get put on “watch” lists and “no-fly” lists. But our government is growing at the federal level in a way I think is kind of dangerous. But it was set up originally to prevent the leader from having too much power.

Some people have the idea that there is no separation of church and state in Islam. But let me say that the leader of a country is not the leader of Islam. The leader of even a Muslim state does not have the authority to change Islam. Interpretation of Islam is done by the scholars, not by the rulers.

 

[iamrefreshed]

This is the Islam the Muslims here try so hard to defend!

Afghan Journalist Sentenced to Death

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — An Afghan court on Tuesday sentenced a 23-year-old journalism student to death for distributing a paper he printed off the Internet that three judges said violated the tenets of Islam, an official said.

This article is not about Islam though, is it? It’s about an Afghan court. I don’t really see any Muslims standing up to defend an Afghan court. Do you? **It’s not about Islam. **

Not to trying to be curt or dismissive here… but of all places, Afghanistan?

Obviously, it is about Islam. Right from the mouths of those condemning this man to death.

 

[ralphinal]

I should point out two things in fairness.

Separation of church and state has two components. First, there is no state sponsored church. Second, the government is not controlled by a church. Now, saying that the leader of the state is not the leader of the faith does not disprove that there is no separation. Is Islam the “official” religion? If so, there is no separation.

Second, I agree that these people in charge tend to be corrupt. They gladly twist and bend rules and teachings. You are right about Pakestan, for example. However, they are using the name of Islam to do it, so there is an issue.

 

[Sister_Amy]

I found this to be an interesting point about the “crime” and “punishment.”

**Kambaksh was convicted of blasphemy for distributing papers questioning why Islam permits men to have up to four wives while women cannot have multiple husbands. **The closed court invoked Article 130 of the Afghanistan Constitution [text] to sentence Kambaksh to death, a penalty for blasphemy consistent with Hanafi [GlobalSecurity backgrounder] law. Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai has received international pressure to pardon Kambaksh, but said earlier this month that he would not intervene during the pendency of Kambaksh’s appeal [JURIST reports]. Afghan Supreme Court Justice Bahauddin Baha said last week that the appeals hearing would be held in open court and that Kambaksh will be allowed to choose his own defense lawyer for the proceeding. From here.

I’m going to share something that I learned from my sheikh a few weeks ago. We talked about how doing certain things would be an “act of kufr” which is probably what is meant by “blasphemy.” However, the punishment being invoked here seems to be for apostasy, which is not appropriate in this case at all.

I want to point this out because in places like Afghanistan, when someone publishes something that is not nice about Islam, it is very scary to the leadership. I think it shows a lack of faith on their behalf but I’m not the judge of that. I’m not a student of law but I hope my explanation above makes sense.

I have examined the Afghani Constitution by the way just now, and see that what they are using is just authority of the court to implement Hanafi fiqh, but I’m fairly confident that they are actually incorrectly applying it…

So whoever said above that “it is about Islam.” Perhaps you are right and I was wrong. It might be about their ignorance of Islam that they are doing this.

 

[bpbasilphx]

This article is not about Islam though, is it? It’s about an Afghan court. I don’t really see any Muslims standing up to defend an Afghan court. Do you? It’s not about Islam.

Do you see any Mahometans condeming the action, Sister Amy?

 

[Sister_Amy]

What is a “Mahometan?”

I actually asked my sheikh a question tonight about this case without mentioning it specifically. I understand, I think, what the court did and their reasoning, but I still think it was wrong.