It is vital for people to realise that, in spite of what is being widely maintained to the contrary, the present furore over the now notorious cartoons has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of freedom of expression. Seeing it within this framework has led, and can only lead, to a real inability to understand the nature of the extreme vehemence of the virtually universal Muslim response to their repeated publication. The Muslims are not attacking the principle of freedom of the press by their hostile reaction to these cartoons. What they are reacting to is what they unanimously see as a criminal act. In fact, in the eyes of the Muslims, two distinct crimes have been committed. The first is the pictorial representation of the Prophet Muhammad. The second far more serious crime is the outright defamation of the Prophet intended by that representation.

Under Islamic law defamation of the Prophet Muhammad is one of the worst crimes it is possible to commit and incurs the severest of penalties. It is, moreover, one of the few crimes in Islamic law, jurisdiction over which extends to non-muslims as well as Muslims. So under Islamic law a very specific crime has been committed. This is the sole basis of the Muslim response. It is not in any way an attempt on the part of the Musl;ims to limit general freedom of expression. Nor is it a matter of "Muslim oversensitivity" which would suggest that Muslims, if only they were a little more mature, less touchy and more civilised, would take it in good part and swallow their feeling of offense. Surely the unprecendented universal condemnation expressed at every level of the Muslim community throughout the whole world must give intelligent non-muslims everywhere pause to think.

The fact is that the Muslims, denied any other kind of legal redress, have had no choice but to react in this way in order to make it clear beyond doubt that such a fundamental law of Islam cannot be broken with impunity and to deter any future breaches being perpetrated. The inexcusable overzealotry of an extremist fringe of the Muslim community, which has been expressed in writing in this country and by more direct action elsewhere, is regretably the inevitable consequence of the outrage felt by all Muslims everywhere. What must be repeated is that none of this is an attack by the Muslims on the general principle of freedom of expression; it is merely the response to the perpetration of a very specific crime – the depiction and defamation of the Prophet Muhammad.

There is, in fact, an interesting parallel in the legal systems of two of the countries responsible for reprinting the cartoons. In both France and Germany it is a criminal offence to deny the Holocaust. This shows that in certain specific instances a legal limit can and should be placed on the general principle of freedom of expression. It is also noteworthy that, in the several instances that this law has been enforced to prevent those who have contravened it from making their views known or to prosecute them for doing so, there has certainly been no general outcry against the legal authorities concerned, claiming that their action consitutes an attack on freedom of expression.

It may well be rightly argued that no law prohibiting defamation of the Prophet Muhammad exists in the countries where the cartoons were published. However, this is, in fact, beside the point. The Muslims are not claiming this to be the case. They are saying that a law of Islam – one of the few Islamic laws which encompasses non-muslims – has been cynically flouted. It is possible that this was done in the first instance out of ignorance, although there is no excuse for this because all the issues involved were thoroughly aired at the time of the Rushdie affair only fifteen years ago. But it is quite clear that the republication of the cartoons was a blatant act of provocation on the part of those who did so, who must have been aware, in the age of global communication in which we all now live, that their action would inevitably incite the active indignation of Muslims everywhere.

Ironically, the truth is that freedom of expression is highly valued by the Muslims. Traditionally the highest expression of this freedom has been when it has been employed in the press and elsewhere to right wrongs and counter injustice on the part of unjust authorities, particularly when doing so requires courage on th part of those who do so. The Prophet Muhammad advocated precisely this freedom by saying: "The highest act of jihad is speak the truth in the face of a tyrannical ruler.

"Abdalhaqq Bewley
Translator of the Qur’an
Lecturer in Islamic Studies