By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
A twenty seven year old Christian woman, who is presently eight months pregnant, has been sentenced to death by hanging for apostasy and adultery. Having been born to a Muslim father, the Sudanese government contends that Meriam Yahia Ibrahim Ishag, was Muslim and that she later converted to Christianity before marrying her South Sudanese husband, a Christian. Sudanese law considers marriages between Muslims and non-Muslims to be invalid. Under Sudan’s interpretation of sharia, a Muslim woman cannot marry a non-Muslim man and any such relationship is regarded as adulterous. Thus, her pregnancy is considered to be resulting from an adulterous relationship, punishable by one hundred lashings.
Judge Abbas Mohammed Al-Khalifa sentenced Meriam to death and declared:
“We gave you three days to recant but you insist on not returning to Islam. I sentence you to be hanged,” The judge addressed her by her father’s Muslim name, Adraf Al-Hadi Mohammed Abdullah.
Ms Ishag reacted without emotion when the judge delivered the verdict at a court in the Khartoum district of Haj Yousef. Earlier in the hearing, an Islamic religious leader spoke with her in the caged dock for about 30 minutes. Then she calmly told the judge:
“I am a Christian and I never committed apostasy.”
Amnesty International said Ms Ishag was raised as an Orthodox Christian, her mother’s religion, because her Muslim father was absent.
Despite the attendance of Western officials from various embassies, and others pleading for reasonableness, no reprieve seems to have been made.
After the hearing about 50 people demonstrated against the verdict.
“No to executing Meriam,” said one of their signs while another proclaimed: “Religious rights are a constitutional right.” In a speech, one demonstrator said they would continue their protests until she is freed.
In a joint statement on Tuesday, four embassies expressed “deep concern” over her case.
“We call upon the government of Sudan to respect the right to freedom of religion, including one’s right to change one’s faith or beliefs,” the embassies of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands said in their statement. That right is included in Sudan’s 2005 interim constitution as well as in international human rights law, they said. The embassies urged Sudanese legal authorities “to approach Ms Meriam’s case with justice and compassion that is in keeping with the values of the Sudanese people”.
While Western officials have made a compelling case for this being a case of religious freedom pursuant to the Sudanese Interim Constitution, there are some troubling issues regarding allowance of Sharia Law to be considered constitutional by the courts.
The constitution does provide for several articles that could factor into the case; some in her favor and some not.
Under 32(3), Rights of Women: “The State shall combat harmful customs and traditions which undermine the dignity and the status of women.”
In this case one could argue the imposition of the state’s interpretation of Sharia Law prohibiting the right of women to enter into marriage with a person of their own choosing is unconstitutional. The Christian minority of Sudan is marginalized in their culture by the imposition of another culture’s values and traditions. This is further pronounced under the next article:
Under 47 Ethnic and Cultural Communities: “Ethnic and cultural communities shall have the right to freely enjoy and develop their particular cultures; members of such communities shall have the right to practice their beliefs, use their languages, observe their religions and raise their children within the framework of their respective cultures and customs.”
This seems to be at a fundamental conflict with the statutory Sharia Law. The argument might be that conversion, apostasy, is not a constitutionally protected expression of religion. If Meriam had both parents who were Christians the courts might not have carried out the prosecution. But it seems Merriam, as being Muslim strictly by virtue of a Muslim father, cannot under Sudanese law ever renounce this religion, even though she has later in life claimed to not have been a part of this faith.
A lesser argument can be made under the freedom of association right:
40 (1) “The right to peaceful assembly shall be guaranteed; every person shall have the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form or join political parties, associations and trade or professional unions for the protection of his/her interests.”
It would seem the act of marriage would constitute an association for the purposes of Article 40, but how strongly this is incorporated into any common law of Sudan is not known to your author.
Despite these constitutional rights another aspect of the constitution seemingly has allowed the court to impose a death sentence which is rooted in the constitution itself. Yet there are two restrictions on the state:
Restriction on Death Penalty
36 (1) “No death penalty shall be imposed, save as retribution, hudud or punishment for extremely serious offences in accordance with the law.”
This is where the issue becomes problematic. Hudud is generally a term meaning a crime that is intrinsically illegal under Sharia Law and generally has essentially a pre-defined punishment. These include for this case Adultery and Apostasy. Hudud is considered one of the four categories of punishment in Islamic Law and is considered offenses against divinity. In a sense Merriam could be considered fortunate in that some interpretations of how the punishment might be administered make Adultery to be of a lesser offense if the convicted was not legally married to another, hence the lashings. Punishments for married persons can include stoning. But it is rather moot since her death sentence was for Apostasy.
The time frame for which the execution might be delayed due to subsection 3:
(3) “No death penalty shall be executed upon pregnant or lactating women, save after two years of lactation.”
Merriam is reportedly eight months pregnant and as such is supposedly safe from immediate execution. If she gives birth without complication she might be given a reprieve for another two years if she is allowed to nurse her child.
Yet, this is all it seems subject to how willing a Constitutional Court and a Human Rights Commission, established under the Sudan Constitution, will be to save Merriam from death or other punishment. Sudan’s reputation in the world for human rights is notorious, especially when its president Omar al-Bashir has an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court for allegedly being a co-conspirator or otherwise criminally responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity. A charge he and the Sudanese government contests.
Yet despite this one of the articles in the constitution can some hope in the future, barring a change of governance on its own accord:
Under Article 27 (3): “All rights and freedoms enshrined in international human rights treaties, covenants and instruments ratified by the Republic of the Sudan shall be an integral part of this Bill [of rights].”
This possibly could be an avenue for which the international community might have some diplomatic influence in the long term and strategic sense. If Sudan was to be enjoined into an international agreement guaranteeing the human rights it might be a possibility the government of Sudan might change its statutes out of a constitutional requirement. The human rights agreement could be made to be conditional upon accepting an endorsement from the West for economic and trade agreements.
It certainly can be hoped that with the involvement and pressure exerted by the international community and dissenters within Sudan a second round of appeal might provide a face saving way of putting this issue to rest. But what Meriam is going to endure is certainly going to be an injustice no matter what the ultimate outcome.
By Darren Smith
Sources:
Sudan Constitution via wipo.int
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Also, her 20 month old son is in prison with her. So a toddler is suffering deplorable conditions, as well as the threat of losing his mom.
The US has given billions of dollars to Sudan, with goals of stabilizing the nation, preventing it from harboring terrorists, and improving its human rights abuses.
http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/countryprofile/sudan
We should STOP giving aid to countries under Sharia Law, and other human rights abuses. I realize that this will label us anti-Islamic, to openly use Sharia Law as a disqualifier, but the facts are what they are: Sharia Law, by definition, allows the abuse of women, gays, and anyone who offends the Faith. Getting a Western haircut, wearing nail polish, and criticizing Islam can all carry extreme punishments. Muslims can easily have their Christian neighbors killed by claiming they insulted the Prophet. No proof is needed.
It is not anti-Catholic to sincerely state that the faith has an entrenched problem with pedophilia, and it needs to clean up its act. Similarly, it is not anti-Islam to state that it, too, needs reform. It is entirely possible, and even common, here in the US for moderate Muslims to practice their faith in a very positive way. But it is a demonstrable fact that radical Islam is the norm in Islamic countries. It has taken over the region. It is not a minority, or a fringe group. One has only to read the Sharia Law interpretations for each of the Muslim countries in the region to understand this.
We need to stop worrying about what is PC, and start defending our American values, proudly, of equality and human rights. We should openly state that when Sharia Law allows human rights abuses, we will not support that country. You want our billions of dollars in aid? Then stop abusing and murdering your own people.
Because our aid is obviously neither reducing human rights abuses nor reducing extremism. If an experiment does not have the desired result, stop running it.
Thank you so much, Darren, for writing about a story that has been preying on my mind. I do not know what our country can do to secure her release, but I want us to express our displeasure in every way possible.
Religion is the opiate of the people. This schmuck overdosed. He needs to be killed. Hanging is too good for him. The Oklahoma method would be appropriate. Stick a needle in the groin and inject poison. I wont say balls because Oklahoma calls it groin. I groan when I read about it. Send this Judge to Oklahoma and give it to him straight. As for the Sudan: Pirate Territory, fly over and flush.
Karen – depending on the prison, kids are resilient Many of this countries do not heed our money but they do need our protection. They are as nervous about Iran as we are. The keys are Iran and protection..
joshzzzz – what I said was that killing the innocent is deplorable under both a ‘Christian’ set of rules and a ‘Muslim’ set of rules. This woman being sentenced to death for her religion is as abominable as the innocent person sentenced to death in US because evidence was hidden, incompetent counsel, DNS evidence that isn’t admitted, or false testimony. Both are murder by the state (religious or secular), and both are barbaric and inhuman.
If all else fails, I think a drone visit would be appropriate for the so called court and judge. As TR said, speak softly and carry a big stick. Without a big stick, your words often have no effect. It is time for those fools to visit their Allah if they try to execute her.
@Jamie Dimon – bankster I oppose the death penalty, but equating executing convicted murderers with executing a (supposed) Muslim for marrying a Christian is a bit much.
@ Michelle
Nothing in Islamic law is settled more firmly than the death penalty for apostasy. The following Islamic scripture is perceived to be prescriptive, not just descriptive:
Sunan Ibn Majah 2535—It was narrated from Ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.”
Sahih al-Bukhari 6878—Narrated Abdullah: Allah’s Messenger said, “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that La ilaha illallah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah) and that I am the Messenger of Allah, cannot be shed except in three cases: (1) Life for life; (2) a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and (3) the one who turns renegade from Islam (apostate) and leaves the group of Muslims.”
Sahih al-Bukhari 6921—Ibn Umar, Az-Zuhri and Ibrahim said, “A female apostate (who reverts from Islam), should be killed.”
Sahih al-Bukhari 6922—Narrated Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to Ali; and he burnt them. The news of this event reached Ibn Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Messenger forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Messenger, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.’”
And many, many more…
And Islamic scholars rule accordingly:
Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik 36.18.15—Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that the Messenger of Allah said, “If someone changes his religion—then strike off his head!” The meaning of the statement of the Prophet in our opinion—and Allah knows best—is that, “If someone changes his religion—then strike off his head!” refers to those who leave Islam for something else—like heretics and suchlike, about whom that is known. They are killed without being called to repent because their repentance is not recognized. They were concealing their disbelief and making their Islam public, so I do not think that one should call such people to repent and one does not accept their word. As for the person who leaves Islam for something else and divulges it, he is called on to repent. If he does not turn in repentance, he is killed. If there are people in that situation, I think that one should call them to Islam and call on them to repent. If they repent, that is accepted from them. If they do not epent, they are killed. That does not refer as we see it, and Allah knows best, to those who convert from Judaism to Christianity or from Christianity to Judaism, nor to someone who changes his religion from any of the various forms of religion except for Islam. Whoever comes out of Islam to something else and makes that known, that is the one who is referred to, and Allah knows best!
Well, Michelle was willing to pressure Barack to go after the girls because he had girls of his own, maybe she can pressure him to save this woman because he has a wife of his own?
Except if, from a neurological, hence biological, view, the whole of the human species is embedded in a form of existentially-imposed insane psychosis, I have no way to grasp a hint of any understanding of how the people of one nation-state in which central government law enforcement can impose on deviant citizens the death penalty for apostasy can honestly and truthfully object to another central government of another nation state imposing the death penalty for a contrasting form of apostasy.
While a misbegotten lethal injection method effectively tortures a condemned person to death, a nation state within which a state within that a nation state allows imposition of the death penalty for social deviance, decries the wrongfulness of another nation state for imposition of the death penalty for social deviance.
So, a nation state which has in its sight, on its land, a forest of giant sequoias objects to a nation state which has in its sight, on its land no forest of very large trees comparable to the giant sequoiias of the termperate rain forest of the western United Sates
The Unites States of American has giant timbers of deception having such immensity that they go un-noticed while the lesser specks in other nation states are resoundingly decried as wrong?
While I find no hypocrisy in that apparent phenomenon, I do find robust evidence of massive socialization-trauma-induced devastating moral injury.
More than anything else, as best I can yet discern, the truthful honesty inherent in a newborn infant is the greatest enemy of the state that can ever exist. As I give aid and comfort to autistic people who have retained a decent portion of the truthfully honest innocence of newborn infants, I cannot other than herwith make my Confession, in the open Court of public opinion, to being a traitor to the nation state of the United States of America in its present, deceptively dishonest condition.
How do I properly go about demanding that The Congress declare a Punishment of Treason with regard to my having been conceived, seemingly in 1938, as an apparently intractably autistic person?
See The Constitution of the United States of America, Article III, Section 3, for the constitutional provisions which cry out for my mandatory Punishment of Treason in consequence of my being autistic by conception.
when its these kind of people or regimes that bring the bad name to religion in all religions, we shall not remain quiet. its an easy word to say,” im muslim” but in reallity are they really?.when it comes to these kind of people all they do is promote trouble, disorder ,torture and any other wrongs that come with it .its there own way of interpreting religion. shame be on them all .
When people pretend to have a deity on their side, anything and everything is permissible.
So far righteous indignation and one tepid, “Ho hum.” This is what has evolved. This is what occurs when our President narcissistically believed he would be embraced by the Muslim world. These people hate us and our way of life. Like the Nazi’s, they want to destroy us and then convert us, Hitler to an Aryan world, radical Islam to a Muslim world. Thanks for posting this, Darren.
Those who hold that religious dictates are legitimate justice, and even ignore the law of the land carrying them out, are purely and simply criminals and terrorists. Such lunacy, being the most corrupt of criminal enterprises, should be declared to be just what they are, treated as such and dealt extermination by international justice.
Seems sharia is the supreme law of the land. While I do not agree with it, not much I can do.
Comment eaten.
It’s certainly another sign of religion gone mad and it demands a strong response and severe condemnation. But when I see these disturbing instances of ‘justice’ I am reminded of the innocents that are killed by the state in ‘Christian’ response to crime.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/The_Innocent_and_the_Death_Penalty.php
If it weren’t for involvement of outside organizations, those innocent people would have been killed by the state.
And as a recent study found:
The rate of erroneous conviction of innocent criminal defendants is often described as not merely unknown but unknowable. We use survival analysis to model this effect, and estimate that if all death-sentenced defendants remained under sentence of death indefinitely at least 4.1% would be exonerated. We conclude that this is a conservative estimate of the proportion of false conviction among death sentences in the United States.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/04/23/1306417111
Sensationalism aside, is it ok for the ‘Christian’ US to kill innocents, but it’s wrong for ‘Muslim’ Sudan to do the same? The hypocrisy around this matter is sometimes mind numbing….
Jamie:
I restored your comment above. 8:17 AM
This is a judicial problem. The father was absent, the mother was Christian. End of case. The judge is the one who is apostate.
My heart is sick with the horror of this situation – what kind of ‘god’ are they ‘worshipping;? – just a bunch of words they are interpreting in whatever way they see fit. Blinded by their own conceit and pomposity and the lowest human feelings of their own importance.
I feel sorry for Muslims, their ‘religion’ is hate-filled nonsense which has trapped them. These beliefs are showing the rest of the world that the Muslim faith is something to be avoided at all costs !
I belong to no religion at the moment, but from my knowledge of the story of Christ – there is a demonstration of what humanity’s best can and should be ! We in the west do all understand what that story taught us.
May this little lady be rescued and those that persecute her be removed from their powerful positions.
This is such a good example of bad comprehension. This goes against the earliest teachings of Islam. The quran does not mandate this. Scholars have. In Quran the only “apstacy” that involved a death sentence was connected to the crime of treason.
First, it is time for the US and President Obama to make it clear that these blasphemy prosecutions must stop. Second Obama must stop supporting any work on an international blasphemy standard. The international standard should be free dime of and freedom from religion as well as strict separation of church and state. Third no more money arms or any form of foreign aid should go to Sudan or any other country that carries out, supports or allows such prosecutions and I do mean any other country.
Fourth, it is time to tell religious extremists in our own country that if they cannot rely on the faithfulness of their own members to follow their rules they should not expect our government to incorporate those rules into our laws. In the same vain no further tax exemptions or public funding of any sort should be given to any religious entity for any reason.
As to the victim of this travesty we should make every effort to get her out of Sudan because even if the government relents on the death penalty her life is over there. I cannot think of a better case for asylum.