Pakistan more tolerant than EU - Blasphemy laws

Freedom to express an opinion is one of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Courts have interpreted that right to include statements that may be disagreeable, disturbing, and even offensive to others. Up to last week’s referendum, that right, or liberty, was tempered by a provision that declared blasphemy an exception.

It is notable that the decision by the majority who voted to remove the blasphemy provision from the Constitution comes at the same time when the European Court of Human Rights has decided that insulting religions — specifically, the prophet Muhammad — may be deemed a criminal offence, subject to all the sanctions that this implies.

This follows a decision by the court last June to uphold mass internet interference by Swedish authorities, contradicting a 2014 ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU that found in favour of a Digital Rights Ireland claim that the EU’s Data Retention Directive was “invalid”.

It is ironic that the European Court of Human Rights decision also comes in the wake of the decision by the Supreme Court of Pakistan to set free Asia Bibi, a Christian woman sentenced to death in 2010 after being accused of insulting the Muhammad. It seems extraordinary that Pakistan — a nation where practising apostasy or insulting Islam is punishable by hanging — should appear more tolerant than the so-called European Court of Human Rights.