The case involves a young mother and medical doctor, Meriam Yahia Ibrahim, who has been sentenced to death (ironically on the day when much of the world celebrates Mother's Day) for the crimes of 'apostasy' -- for practicing Christianity her entire life, despite her birth father, who abandoned her Christian mother very early, being a Muslim. Under Sharia law, if the child's father is a Muslim, that child is a Muslim. (Rather like the Jewish law which declares someone Jewish if the mother is Jewish.) Under a similar reckoning, one might argue, as no doubt some extremists have done, that President Obama is "guilty" of apostasy to Islam, as his birth father was a Muslim (albeit an atheist, yet in these legal cases, that does not matter), but that is a very unpleasant line of thought. Further, Mrs Ibrahim has been accused of adultery, for (here is where it gets even more twisted) the crime of sleeping with her husband. The problem is that her husband is also a Christian. As the court has declared her (against her will) a Muslim, she therefore would be bound by Islamic law, which forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man. Therefore, her marriage is void; therefore, the fact that she has one child and another on the way is evidence that she has slept with a man who is not legally her husband, and thus guilty of adultery. Did you follow that? The word I used to describe this kind of convoluted rationalization that arrives at the opposite conclusion is Orwellian. Good is bad. Freedom is Slavery. Marriage is Adultery.
Here are some articles about Mrs Ibrahim and her life-or-death situation. She has been given just a few days to consider whether she wants to be a Muslim (and if so then just guilty of adultery and due 100 lashes, I imagine, rather than apostasy, which carries the death sentence--although 100 lashes can and frequently is a de facto death sentence). Amnesty International has written here, another article here, from the very reliable CSW, another here, and another update here. This article adds the interesting fact that her South Sudanese husband is also an American citizen (my guess is perhaps he was a refugee during the war?). The Tablet (a venerable UK Catholic publication) has written about it here. So far, not much mention in the mainstream press.
If you would like to do something, feel free to pick up the phone, dial the embassy (from the UK the number is 0207 839 8080 and navigate the menus for the Consular Section. (I think it was 'Press 2.') Feel free to sign an online petition here.
So... here is my letter.
His Excellency Abdullahi H A El AzregAmbassador of the Republic of the Sudanto United Kingdom and IrelandEmbassy of the Republic of the Sudan3 Cleveland RowSt. JamesLondon SW1A 1DD14 May 2014Dear Ambassador,Today I phoned your Embassy in London to register my concern over the case of Mrs Meriam Yahia Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman who was brought on the 4th of March before a Public Order Court in El Haj Yousif Khartoum, and sentenced to death on the 11th of May. I would ask you respectfully to urge your government to release Mrs Ibrahim and absolve her of all charges.Mrs Ibrahim was raised as a Christian by her Christian mother, and has only ever practised Christianity. Her father abandoned the family not long after her birth and she has no contact with him. However, because her birth father was at least nominally Muslim, she has been declared by the court guilty of apostasy. How can a court be so callous as to punish a child for being abandoned by her father? Should not the guilt, if there is any, fall on him? Further, she has behaved modestly and married, but has been declared guilty of adultery as she chose to marry a fellow Christian. Should not a person have the right to marry within his or her religious community? As an academic teaching theology at the University of Oxford, and as a mother and wife and believer, I find this situation very concerning.Further, this judgement violates the Constitution of Sudan, which guarantees religious freedom. This court is thus behaving in a capricious way, contrary to the law of the land. “Sudanese Tolerance” is a title of great significance to your country, and it would not seem that this court is acting in the light of that noble heritage and aspiration.The gentleman in the Consular Section of the Embassy with whom I spoke over the telephone said that he was not familiar with Mrs Ibrahim’s case, and suggested very kindly and helpfully that I write directly to the Consular Section so that the concern may be forwarded to the Sudanese government by them, so I am also sending a copy of this letter directly to that Section. I am grateful for the help he offered. I was a bit surprised that he had not yet heard of this case, as it came to my attention in the UK press. But his lack of awareness only goes to show how this court has clearly passed sentence in the shadows and in a way not fitting to the kindness and respect of the Sudanese people.Thank you for your time, and I wish you and your country, and Mrs Ibrahim, all the very best.Yours sincerely,Dr Susan GriffithCc: Consular Section, Embassy of the Republic of the Sudan
No comments:
Post a Comment