Apostasy and Human Rights
21 Dec, 2006
First Published in International Humanist and Ethical Union
The very notion of apostasy has vanished from the West 
            where one would talk of being a lapsed Catholic or non-practising 
            Christian rather than an apostate. There are certainly no penal 
            sanctions for converting from Christianity to any other religion. In 
            Islamic countries, on the other hand, the issue is far from dead.
            
            Koran
It is clear quite clear that under Islamic Law an 
            apostate must be put to death. There is no dispute on this ruling 
            among classical Muslim or modern scholars, and we shall return to 
            the textual evidence for it. Some modern scholars have argued that 
            in the Koran the apostate is threatened with punishment only in the 
            next world, as for example at XVI.106, "Whoso disbelieveth in Allah 
            after his belief -save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is 
            still content with the Faith but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On 
            them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom." Similarly 
            in III.90-91, "Lo! those who disbelieve after their (profession of) 
            belief, and afterward grow violent in disbelief, their repentance 
            will not be accepted. And such are those who are astray. Lo! those 
            who disbelieve, and die in disbelief, the (whole) earth full of gold 
            would not be accepted from such an one if it were offered as a 
            ransom (for his soul). Theirs will be a painful doom and they will 
            have no helpers."
            
            However, Sura II.217 is interpreted by no less an authority than al-Shafi'i 
            (died 820 C.E.), the founder of one of the four orthodox schools of 
            law of Sunni Islam to mean that the death penalty should be 
            prescribed for apostates. Sura II.217 reads: "... But whoever of you 
            recants and dies an unbeliever , his works shall come to nothing in 
            this world and the next, and they are the companions of the fire for 
            ever." Al-Thalabi and al -Khazan concur. Al-Razi in his commentary 
            on II:217 says the apostate should be killed .1
            
            Similarly, IV. 89: "They would have you disbelieve as they 
            themselves have disbelieved, so that you may be all like alike. Do 
            not befriend them until they have fled their homes for the cause of 
            God. If they desert you seize them and put them to death wherever 
            you find them. Look for neither friends nor helpers among them..." 
            Baydawi (died c. 1315-16), in his celebrated commentary on the 
            Koran, interprets this passage to mean: "Whosover turns back from 
            his belief ( irtada ), openly or secretly, take him and kill him 
            wheresoever ye find him, like any other infidel. Separate yourself 
            from him altogether .Do not accept intercession in his regard".2 Ibn 
            Kathir in his commentary on this passage quoting Al Suddi (died 745) 
            says that since the unbelievers had manifested their unbelief they 
            should be killed.3
            
            Abul Ala Mawdudi [1903-1979 ], the founder of the Jamat-i Islami, is 
            perhaps the most influential Muslim thinker of the 20th century, 
            being responsible for the Islamic resurgence in modern times. He 
            called for a return to the Koran and a purified sunna as a way to 
            revive and revitalise Islam. In his book on apostasy in Islam, 
            Mawdudi argued that even the Koran prescribes the death penalty for 
            all apostates. He points to sura IX for evidence:
            "But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then 
            are they your brethren in religion. We detail our revelations for a 
            people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after 
            their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, 
            then fight the heads of disbelief Lo! they have no binding oaths in 
            order that they may desist."(IX: 11,12)4
            
            Hadith
            Here we find many traditions demanding the death penalty for 
            apostasy. According to Ibn Abbas the Prophet said, "Kill him who 
            changes his religion," or "behead him."5 The only argument was as to 
            the nature of the death penalty. Bukhari recounts this gruesome 
            tradition:
            "Narrated Anas:Some people from the tribe of Ukl came to the Prophet 
            and embraced Islam .The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the 
            Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch ) camels of charity 
            to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine).They did so, and after 
            they had recovered from their ailment they turned renegades 
            (reverted from Islam, irtada ) and killed the shepherd of the camels 
            and took the camels away .The Prophet sent (some people) in their 
            pursuit and so they were caught and brought, and the Prophet ordered 
            that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes 
            should be branded with heated pieces of iron , and that their cut 
            hands and legs should not be cauterised, till they die."6
            
            Abu Dawud has collected the following saying of the Prophet:
            " 'Ikrimah said: Ali burned some people who retreated from Islam. 
            When Ibn Abbas was informed of it he said, 'If it had been I, I 
            would not have them burned, for the apostle of Allah said: 'Do not 
            inflict Allah's punishment on anyone.' But would have killed them on 
            account of the statement of the Apostle of Allah, 'Kill those who 
            change their religion.' "7
            
            In other words, kill the apostates (with the sword) but certainly 
            not by burning them, that is Allah's way of punishing transgressors 
            in the next world. According to a tradition of Aisha's, apostates 
            are to be slain, crucified or banished.8 Should the apostate be 
            given a chance to repent? Traditions differ enormously. In one 
            tradition, Muadh Jabal refused to sit down until an apostate brought 
            before him had been killed "in accordance with the decision of God 
            and of His Apostle."9
            
            Under Muslim law, the male apostate must be put to death, as long as 
            he is an adult, and in full possession of his faculties. If a 
            pubescent boy apostatises, he is imprisoned until he comes of age, 
            when if he persists in rejecting Islam he must be put to death. 
            Drunkards and the mentally disturbed are not held responsible for 
            their apostasy. If a person has acted under compulsion he is not 
            considered an apostate, his wife is not divorced and his lands are 
            not forfeited. According to Hanafis and Shia, a woman is imprisoned 
            until she repents and adopts Islam once more, but according to the 
            influential Ibn Hanbal, and the Malikis and Shafiites , she is also 
            put to death. In general, execution must be by the sword, though 
            there are examples of apostates tortured to death, or strangled, 
            burnt, drowned, impaled or flayed. The caliph Umar used to tie them 
            to a post and had lances thrust into their hearts, and the Sultan 
            Baybars II (1308-09) made torture legal.
            
            Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR,1948] 
            states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience 
            and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or 
            belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in 
            public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, 
            practice, worship and observance". 10
            
            The clause guaranteeing the freedom to change one's religion was 
            added at the request of the delegate from Lebanon, Charles Malik, 
            who was a Christian.11 Lebanon had accepted many people fleeing 
            persecution for their beliefs, in particular for having changed 
            their religion. Lebanon especially objected to the Islamic law 
            concerning apostasy. Many Muslim countries, however, objected 
            strongly to the clause regarding the right to change one's religion. 
            The delegate from Egypt, for instance, said that "very often a man 
            changes religion or his convictions under external influences with 
            goals which are not recommendable such as divorce." He added that he 
            feared in proclaiming the liberty to change one's religion or 
            convictions the Universal Declaration would encourage without 
            wishing it "the machinations of certain missions well- known in the 
            East, which relentlessly pursue their efforts with a view to 
            converting to their faith the populations of the East".12 
            Significantly, Lebanon was supported by a delegate from Pakistan who 
            belonged to the Ahmadi community which, ironically, was to be thrown 
            out of the Islamic community in the 1970s for being non-Muslim. In 
            the end all Muslim countries except Saudi Arabia adhered to the 
            Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
            
            During discussions of Article 18 in 1966, Saudi Arabia and Egypt 
            wanted to suppress the clause guaranteeing the freedom to change 
            one's religion. Finally a compromise amendment proposed by Brazil 
            and the Philippines was adopted to placate the Islamic countries. 
            Thus, "the freedom to change his religion or belief" was replaced by 
            "the freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of his choice."13 
            Similarly in 1981, during discussions on the Declaration on the 
            Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on 
            Religion or Belief, Iran, under the new regime reminded everyone 
            that Islam punished apostasy by death. The delegate from Iraq, 
            backed up by Syria, speaking on behalf of the Organisation of the 
            Islamic Conference expressed his reserve for any clauses or terms 
            that would contradict the Islamic Sharia, while the delegate from 
            Egypt felt that they had to guard against such a clause being 
            exploited for political ends to interfere in the internal affairs of 
            states.14
            
            The various Islamic human rights schemes or declarations - such as 
            the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (1981) are 
            understandably vague or evasive on the issue of the freedom to 
            change one's religion, since Islam itself clearly forbids apostasy 
            and punishes it with death. As Elisabeth Mayer says, "The lack of 
            support for the principle of freedom of religion in the Islamic 
            human rights schemes is one of the factors that most sharply 
            distinguishes them from the International Bill of Human Rights, 
            which treats freedom of religion as an unqualified right. The 
            [Muslim] authors' unwillingness to repudiate the rule that a person 
            should be executed over a question of religious belief reveals the 
            enormous gap that exists between their mentalities and the modern 
            philosophy of human rights."15 Islamic Human Rights Schemes are 
            clearly not universal since they introduce a specifically Islamic 
            religious criterion into the political sphere, whereas the UDHR of 
            1948 places human rights in an entirely secular and universalist 
            framework. The Islamic human rights schemes severely restrict and 
            qualify the rights of individuals, particularly women, non-Muslims 
            and those, such as apostates, who do not accept Islamic religious 
            orthodoxy.
            
            As for the constitutions of various Muslim countries, while many do 
            guarantee freedom of belief (Egypt,1971; Syria, 1973; Jordan, 1952) 
            some talk of freedom of conscience (Algeria:1989), and some of 
            freedom of thought and opinion (Mauritania: 1991). Islamic countries 
            with two exceptions do not address the issue of apostasy in their 
            penal codes; the two exceptions are the Sudan, and Mauritania. In 
            the Sudanese Penal Code of 1991, article 126. 2, we read: "Whoever 
            is guilty of apostasy is invited to repent over a period to be 
            determined by the tribunal. If he persists in his apostasy and was 
            not recently converted to Islam, he will be put to death." The Penal 
            Code of Mauritania of 1984, article 306 reads: "...All Muslims 
            guilty of apostasy, either spoken or by overt action will be asked 
            to repent during a period of three days. If he does not repent 
            during this period, he is condemned to death as an apostate, and his 
            belongings confiscated by the State Treasury." This applies equally 
            to women. The Moroccan Penal Code seems only to mention those guilty 
            of trying to subvert the belief of a Muslim, or those who try to 
            convert a Muslim to another religion. The punishment varies between 
            a fine and imprisonment for anything up to three years.16
            
            The absence of any mention of apostasy in some penal codes of 
            Islamic countries of course in no way implies that a Muslim in the 
            country concerned is free to leave his religion. In reality, the 
            lacunae in the penal codes are filled by Islamic Law. Mahmud 
            Muhammad Taha was hanged for apostasy in 1985, even though at the 
            time the Sudanese Penal Code of 1983 did not mention such a crime.17
            
            In some countries, the term apostate is applied to some who were 
            born non-Muslim but whose ancestors had the good sense to convert 
            from Islam. The Baha'is in Iran in recent years have been persecuted 
            for just such a reason. Similarly, in Pakistan the Ahmadiya 
            community were classed as non-Muslims, and are subjected to all 
            sorts of persecution.
            
            There is some evidence that many Muslim women in Islamic countries 
            would convert from Islam to escape their lowly position in Muslim 
            societies, or to avoid the application of an unfavourable law, 
            especially Sharia law governing divorce.18 Muslim theologians are 
            well aware of the temptation of Muslim women to evade the Sharia 
            laws by converting from Islam, and take appropriate measures. For 
            example, in Kuwait in an explanatory memorandum to the text of a law 
            reform says: "Complaints have shown that the Devil makes the route 
            of apostasy attractive to the Muslim woman so that she can break a 
            conjugal tie that does not please her. For this reason, it was 
            decided that apostasy would not lead to the dissolution of the 
            marriage in order to close this dangerous door."19 Several cases are 
            discussed in my book, Leaving Islam Apostates Speak Out (Prometheus 
            Books, 2003):
            
            Charges of apostasy, unbelief , blasphemy and heresy, whether upheld 
            or not, clearly go against several articles in UDHR of 1948 , and 
            the legally binding International Covenant on Civil and Political 
            Rights [ICCPR] of 1966 to which 147 states are signatories.
            
            General comment No 22, adopted by the UN Human Rights Commission at 
            its 48th session (1993) ( HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 of 22 May 2003 , pp.155-56 
            ) declares (quote): "Article 18 protects theistic, non-theistic and 
            atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion 
            or belief. The term "belief" and "religion" are to be broadly 
            construed".
            
            As with my statement to the 60th Session of the U.N. Commission on 
            Human Rights delivered by the President of the IHEU, We urge the 
            Commission to call on all governments to comply with applicable 
            international human rights instruments like the ICCPR and to bring 
            their national legislation into accordance with the instruments to 
            which they were a party , and to forbid fatwas and sermons preaching 
            violence in the name of god against those holding unorthodox 
            opinions or those who have left a religion.
            Ibn Warraq
            Geneva, 18th April 2005
            
            Ibn Warraq is the author of Why I am not a Muslim (1996), and the 
            editor of The Origins of the Qur'an (1999); The Quest for the 
            Historical Muhammad (2000), What the Qur'an Really Says (2002), 
            Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out (2003)
            1.  S. Zwemer ,The Law of Apostasy in Islam (New York ,1924 ), 
            pp.34-35. See also al-Razi, al-Tafsir al-Kabir (Cairo ,1308 A.H.), 
            Vol.2,lines 17-20.
            2 . Zwemer ,op. cit. pp.33-34.
            3.  Ibn Kathir, L'Interpretation du Coran , trans.Fawzi Chaaban 
            (Beirut, 1998),Vol.2 , p.128.
            4.  Abul Ala Mawdudi , The Punishment of the Apostate according 
            to Islamic Law , trans. Syed Silas Husain and Ernest Hahn (1994) , 
            available at www.answering-islam.org .
            5.  Ibn Maja , Hudud , bab 2 ; al-Nisai , Tahrim al-Dam, bab 14 
            ; al-Tayalisi , no.2689 ; Malik, Aqdiya tr.15;al-Bukhari , 
            Institabat al-murtadin , bab 2; al-Tirmidhi , Hudud , bab 25 ; Abu 
            Dawud , Hudud ,Bab 1 ; Ibn Hanbal i. 217, 282, 322.
            6.  Al-Bukhari , Sahih , Trans.Ahmad Hasan (Delhi ,1987 
            ),Vol.8, pp.519-520.
            7.  Abu Dawud , Sunan , Trans.Ahmad Hasan , Vol.3 , Kitab al-Hudud 
            , chap.1605, Punishment of an Apostate, Hadith No. 4337 (Delhi 
            1990), p.1212.
            8.  al-Nisai , Tahrim al-Dam , bab 11; Qasama , Bab 13 ; Abu 
            Dawud , Hudud , bab 1.
            9.  Al-Bukhari , Maghazi bab 60 ; Istitabat al-Murtaddin , bab 
            2 ; Ahkam , bab 12 ; Muslim , Imara , tr. 15 ; Abu Dawud, Hudud , 
            bab 1 ; Ibn Hanba,l, v. 231.
            10.  Available online at the United Nations Website : 
            www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htm
            11.  Sami A.Aldeeb Abu-Sahlieh , Le Delit d'Apostasie 
            Aujourd'hui et ses Consequences en Droit Arabe et Musulman, 
            Islamochristiana 20 (1994) : 93-116 ; A.E.Mayer , Islam and Human 
            Rights ( Boulder , 1991), p.164.
            12.  Abu Sahlieh , Le Delit d'Apostasie , p.94
            13.  Ibid.
            14.  Ibid.
            15.  A.E.Mayer , Islam and Human Rights , p. 187.
            16.  Abu Sahlieh , Le Delit d'Apostasie , p. 98.
            17.  Sami A.Aldeeb Abu-Sahlieh , Les Musulmans face aux droits 
            de l'homme (Bachum , 2001) p. 110.
            18.  A.E.Mayer , op.cit., p. 167
            19.  A.E.Mayer , op.cit., pp. 167-68.

	