Death for insulting the prophet

Last month, an Afghan journalism student was sentenced to death for distributing a paper printed from the Internet that violated the laws of Islam. Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh “insulted the prophet Mohammed,” calling him “a murderer and a womanizer,” according to the Afghan court’s chief judge.\nThe penalty is legal under the Afghan Constitution, which is loosely based on Islamic sharia law.\nThis is a complicated issue. The United Nations has called the decision a “possible misuse of the judicial process,” and human rights organizations are in an uproar. However, the move is legal, according to the Afghan Constitution, which provides for a democratic system in Afghanistan.\nThe problem is that even when an undemocratic solution for a problem is reached via a democratic process, it’s still an undemocratic solution. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are two of the most important building blocks of a truly free nation. If religious commentary is off-limits to journalists, that represents a fairly large hole in those freedoms. No nation that takes actions like these can be truly democratic.\nBut is it the place of the United Nations, or the U.S., or anybody else to step in here and influence the Afghan government? Both entities – and the rest of the world – have a vested interest in this specific situation and in others like it. The job of the United Nations is essentially to do things just like this – to promote peace, justice and general well-being throughout the world. Kambakhsh’s trial is alleged to have been closed and secret, with his brother saying that the family didn’t know it had been scheduled. If that’s not a violation of justice, then nothing is.\nAdditionally, the U.S. still has a great stake and influence in Afghanistan. Since the U.S. military essentially overthrew the former Afghan Taliban government, the current rulers are essentially in power because of the U.S. This gives the U.S. a unique diplomatic position. A request to give the journalist a fair trial, or even to respect his right to free speech and free him, may be heeded.\nAnd this is a job that the U.S. undertook when President Bush said many times that he wanted the country to spread freedom and democracy throughout the world, and especially in the Middle East. This would be a perfect time for him to make good on that promise and to score a diplomatic victory in the region. One might rightly wonder what it is we are trying to defend, if the countries we are supporting militarily are clinging to such oppressive laws.\nThe U.S. doesn’t necessarily need to act as the world’s police in every situation, swooping around like a great militaristic superhero to free the world’s people by force. But there are situations where diplomacy can spread freedom and situations where there’s a responsibility to take action. This is one of those cases.