When the Afghanistan Constitution was first introduced, there was an uproar over the fact it established an Islamic republic based on Islamic law.
President Bush assured Americans that the cost of establishing this democracy (both in terms of lives and money) was worth it because the Constitution protected freedom of religion. Now that a Christian is set to be executed in Afghanistan for, well,
being a Christian converting to Christianity, the true impact of that Constitution is being revealed.
Abdul Rahman, as you know, converted to Christianity over 14 years ago, yet is now facing death in Afghanistan because he will not accept the Muslim faith. Both President Bush and President Karzai are now under fire. Has President Bush's attempt to establish democracy at the end of a gun failed? What do American soldiers have to say now that the democracy they bled for is acting just like the Taliban? As for President Karzai, will he step in and affirm human rights (and look like a puppet of the West to some Aghanis) or will he stand by his nation's court? When the story first broke, Karzai appeared to take the latter course, declaring that the judiciary in Afghanistan was "independent." The judiciary itself has said it won't bow to international pressure. Well, it looks now like Karzai, Bush--and most importantly, the man to be executed--can possibly breath a sigh of relief:
An Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor said Wednesday amid growing international condemnation of the case. [...]
"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari told The Associated Press. [...]
"If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him," [Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai] said. "He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped."
This is, as diplomats have stated, a way to drop the hot potato. So if he is declared unfit for trial, the international pressure will fade away, Bush can go back to pointing to Afghanistan as a "successful" democracy, and Karzai can go back to trying to quell the Taliban uprising in his country. But what of Abdul Rahman, the man who insists he is not crazy but may be labelled as such to spare his life? Will his life truly be spared, or will Afghan clerics follow through on their threats to cut off his head when he is freed?
Declaring this Christian crazy to spare judicial execution does not solve the deeper problem that such undemocratic and immoral action is enshrined in the text of the Afghanistan Constitution, that same Constitution Bush praised as a hallmark of democracy. Is this democracy? Or is this the type of case that reminds us that freedom is not on the march in Afghanistan, no matter how many purple fingers are waived in the air?
Update: As some noted below, Rahman is being prosecuted for refusing to renounce his Christianity and becoming a Muslim again. It is not illegal to be a Christian in Afghanistan, though, under the Constitution, you can practice your beliefs so long as they don't conflict with the law, which is based on Islam.
Comments are closed on this story.