A divergent thought on Abdul Rahman

As I’m sure you must know by now (it was in all the papers) Abdul Rahman, an Afghani man was on trial in Afghanistan for converting from Islam to Christianity, has had his case dismissed for a lack of evidence:

KABUL, Afghanistan – An Afghan court on Sunday dismissed a case against a man who converted from Islam to Christianity because of a lack of evidence and he will be released soon, officials said.

The announcement came as U.S.-backed President Hamid Karzai faced mounting foreign pressure to free Abdul Rahman, a move that risked angering Muslim clerics here who have called for him to be killed.

An official closely involved with the case told The Associated Press that it had been returned to the prosecutors for more investigation, but that in the meantime, Rahman would be released.

“The court dismissed today the case against Abdul Rahman for a lack of information and a lot of legal gaps in the case,” the official said Sunday, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

“The decision about his release will be taken possibly tomorrow,” the official added. “They don’t have to keep him in jail while the attorney general is looking into the case.”

Abdul Wakil Omeri, a spokesman for the Supreme Court, confirmed that the case had been dismissed because of “problems with the prosecutors’ evidence.”

There’s been a tremendous amount of breast-beating about this in the blogosphere over the last week.

May I offer a different view than you may have considered on this subject? Yes, we in the West would prefer a situation of religious tolerance and pluralism. That’s a lot rarer from a world perspective than you might think. In parts of the world where a religious monoculture has been enforced for centuries (or millenia) what would be the best way to move towards religious tolerance and pluralism?

Fiat? From a liberty interest standpoint it seems to me that that would be little better than monoculture by fiat.

Wouldn’t the best way be to enter into a national dialogue? And isn’t a highly publicized trial an opportunity for just that kind of dialogue? And isn’t that what happened? And hasn’t the man been released? (at least for now)

Just a thought.

UPDATE: The Sandmonkey sees this outcome as cutting off just the debate I’m suggesting. I still think it’s a step.

Cassandra at Villainous Company has a glimmer of the same thought:

These are cracks in the ice that has frozen the Arab world in time. Hopefully they will grow wider as our two worlds exchange ideas.

Leaving aside that Afghanistan is not an Arab country and, that part of the world being what it is, what happens in Afghanistan stays in Afghanistan, I think she’s on the right track.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Dean’s on the right track, too:

Instead, while we may not approve of putting someone on trial for his religious beliefs, at least this guy got judged by a real court, in full public scrutiny, with a defense attorney, AND, the elected government of Afghanistan felt that it should answer to not just its nearby theocratic neighbors, but, also to its fellow democratic nations, including governments from places like France, Germany, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

Think on it: President Karzai of Afghanistan actually felt the need to take phone calls on this matter from the Canadian Prime Minister. And the American Secretary of State. And the German Prime Minster. And the leaders of many other democratic nations. And he felt the need to take their concerns seriously. And he felt the need to assure them all that this man would not be executed. All of which actually happened within the last 72 hours.

Read that all as an indictment of the eville moooslims if you like. I read it as a country that is emerging at astonishing speed from the 12th century into the 21st.

1 comment… add one
  • I reckon I am cynical because I got a different read. I saw the release as a result of pressure from the governments that are supporting the current Afghanistan government. Never kid yourself about Islam. I was in Turkey, a country that is supposed to have religious freedom but don’t ever believe it. Any Turk away from the major population areas such as Ankara or Instanbul who converted to any religion other tha Islam would be either beheaded or stoned to death by the mullah led crowds. Simply put, Islam as it is practised by the majority of Islam today is not compatable with religious freedom or for that matter freedom of speech ( ie, the Danish Cartoon riots ) The time may come, and I hope that it does, that Islam may progress to extend the kind of tolerance that most Christian societies enjoy. But it will take a stronger secular presence than is allowed now. Only continued pressure from the governments supporting the Afghan government and later the Iraqi government will insure any freedom in those countries.

Leave a Comment