PASTORS IN AUSTRALIA TAKEN TO COURT -
ISLAM
*<A HREF="http://www.baptisttop1000.com/cgi-bin/1000/show.cgi?id=xofc" target="_blank"> <IMG SRC="http://www.baptisttop1000.com/cgi-bin/1000/counter.cgi?id=xofc" BORDER=0></A>
Friday, September 12, 2003
CHRISTIAN PASTORS IN AUSTRALIA TAKEN TO COURT TO SILENCE CRITICISM OF ISLAM
By Michael Ireland
Chief Correspondent, ASSIST News Service
VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA (ANS) -- Barnabas
Fund reports that two Christian pastors have been taken to court by the Islamic
Council of Victoria and three Australian Muslims after making critical
statements about the Islamic faith on a website and at a seminar for Christians
held in March last year.
A complaint of religious vilification was made against the two Christian
pastors, Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot. The complaint deals with many issues,
such as the nature of jihad, aspirations of Muslims in the west, and the
connection between the laws of jihad and the treatment of non-Muslims under
Islam.
The Victorian Racial and Religious Vilification Act was passed in 2001 and has
yet to be fully put to the test. It was established in order to promote
intercultural and interfaith harmony in Victoria, in support of democratic
ideals, in itself a worthy aim. Victoria has established an Equal Opportunity
Commission which is empowered to develop programs under this legislation. One of
their programs, called “Stand up to Racism,” promotes positive regard for
Islam's stand on universal human rights.
The complaint against the two pastors has had to be mediated through this same
Victorian Equal Opportunity Commission, but attempts at achieving conciliation
failed. Following this the Islamic Council of Victoria brought the case before
the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, a legal court which has the
power to impose a significant fine against the two pastors, if they are found
guilty. The case is due to be heard at the Tribunal in mid-October 2003.
To pursue their complaint, the well-funded Islamic Council of Victoria has
retained the services of the prestigious Australian law firm, Allens Arthur
Robinson, which has offices in seven countries throughout the Asia-Pacific
Region.
The case is one of the first to be brought under the new legislation and its
result will set an important precedent which will have influence and
ramifications not only in Victoria, but also in other parts of Australia.
Many evangelical Christians in the state fear that the Islamic Council of
Victoria is using the case to stifle all criticism of Islam or Muslims, in
effect bringing in a pseudo-blasphemy law to protect Islam. Similar legislation
against religious ‘hate speech’ is currently before parliament in both New
Zealand and the UK and is prompting serious concern from libertarians and
supporters of free speech who fear the similar misuse of such laws.
DANIEL SCOT
The fact that one of the defendants is Pastor Daniel Scot is bitterly ironic.
Scot, a Pakistani Christian, became one of the first victims of Pakistan’s
notorious blasphemy laws when in 1986 he was charged with insulting the Islamic
prophet Muhammad, which under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code carries a
death sentence.
The blasphemy laws have attracted widespread condemnation from human rights
groups and the international community for their harsh punishments and the way
they have been misused to target vulnerable religious minorities (see www.barnabasfund.org/News/Archive/Pakistan/Pakistan-20030821.htm).
Scot had been threatened by the council of the college in Okara, Pakistan, where
he worked, that a charge would be brought against him unless he converted to
Islam.
The charge was brought after he refused to do so and explained his belief that
his spiritual salvation could come only from Jesus Christ, and not Muhammad.
Political pressure meant that Daniel was never prosecuted. However, he was
forced to flee to Australia with his family to escape the threat of Islamic
extremists who have since murdered four Christians accused of blasphemy in
Pakistan.
Now seventeen years later, having fled religious discrimination in Pakistan,
Scot again finds himself accused of a similar crime in Australia, the country in
which he originally found refuge. This is an indication of the growing trend to
place Islamic teaching and Muslim actions beyond the bounds of criticism, not
only in the Islamic world, but also, as a result of misguided ideas of political
correctness, in the West as well.
Barnabas Fund says it is a bitter twist that Scot, an Asian Christian, should
face this accusation from three white Australian converts to Islam who
unannounced attended the March 2002 seminar (intended for the religious
instruction of Christians only – and as such should fall outside the remit of
the Act) and took offence resulting in the complaint. In a painfully ironic
reversal a law designed to prevent racial and religious abuse under which the
Equal Opportunity Commission operates is being used by three white men to attack
an Asian.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Barnabas Fund says it is clear from the charges brought against Danny Nalliah
and Daniel Scot, that both may well have been unwise in their choice of words,
and over-the-top in some of their criticisms of Islamic teaching. However it
would be a travesty of justice should their statements be found illegal in a
country which claims to be a strong advocate of freedom of speech and
expression. One of the grounds of the complaint is that Pastor Daniel Scot
mentioned in a seminar that Muslim fundamentalists have the responsibility to
“kill” apostates from Islam. This was cited in the complaint as unlawful
vilification of Muslim believers.
This is despite the fact that the death penalty for apostates from Islam is an
extremely well documented part of Islamic law (shari’a) and is well attested
by Muslim sources both historically and today
(Application http://www.barnabasfund.org/Apostasy/application.htm;
Consequences http://www.barnabasfund.org/Apostasy/Consequences.htm).
Furthermore it is not merely a matter of language or legal niceties but a very
real problem for thousands of converts around the world today which has resulted
in many deaths attested to by numerous creditable human rights organizations,
Barnabas Fund says. Nevertheless it seems that merely drawing attention to this
problem may be considered a vilification of Islam; in future converts may have
to suffer in silence and those who seek to draw attention to their plight may
face prosecution for offending Muslim sensibilities.
However Muslims in Victoria may, in the future, find this law being used against
them, Barnabas Fund says. For if drawing attention to the more unpalatable
teachings of one particular religion is to be regarded as religious
vilification, surely the actual expounding of those teachings will certainly
attract prosecution under this law. The next law. The next time Qur’anic
verses such as the famous sword verse, “But when the forbidden months are
past, then fight them and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them
and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)” (9:5
A. Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an: Text, Translation and Commentary and Meaning)
are quoted in a mosque, there may be anonymous pagans in the audience who take
offence and bring a case against them for ‘unlawful vilification.' Could the
unpalatable verses of the Qur’an (together with those of the scriptures of
other religions) be effectively banned in Victoria?
The two Australian pastors are seeking the support of international experts in
Islam to assist in their defense. Inquiries about the case can be sent to Mark
Durie
PRAYER POINTS
Pray that a just decision would be reached that does not set a precedent
restricting freedom of speech. Pray also that similar legislation in the UK and
New Zealand will have suitable safeguards ensuring the protection of free
speech.
THERE IS NOT ONE CHRISTIAN NATION ON EARTH WHERE MUSLIMS ARE PERSECUTED.
Yet in most nations where the majority of the population are Muslims, there is systematic government persecution of Christians.
"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."
--Article 18 of the Universal
Declaration of
Human
Rights--
Christian Conversions - According to the Bible - Can NEVER be forced.
Any Conversion to Christianity which would be "Forced" would NOT be recognized by God. It is in
His True and KIND nature, that those who come to Him and choose to believe in Him, must come to Him OF
THEIR OWN FREE WILL.
Don't Let anyone tell you that Christians support Forced Conversions.
That is False. True Christianity is NEVER forced.
Core Universal Rights
The right to believe, to worship and witness
The right to change one's belief or religion
The right to join together and express one's belief
Book about Apostacy Law in Islam
