INTERNATIONAL HUMANIST AND ETHICAL UNION

Mr. Kofi Annan
Secretary General
United Nations

(On an official visit to Norway)

Oslo, 20 August 2001

The International Humanist and Ethical Union wish to bring to His Excellency’s attention the case of Dr. Yunis Shaikh in Pakistan. Dr. Shaikh only two days ago fell victim to one of the most pernicious trends of our times – religious intolerance and fanaticism – as he was sentenced to death for blasphemy after an in camera trial in Pakistan on 18 August.

Dr. Shaikh was accused of blasphemy and arrested in October last year. He is a medical doctor and he was a teacher at the Capital Homeopathic Hospital. Dr. Shaikh is alleged to have made the blasphemous remarks in one of his lectures. The charges against Dr. Shaikh were brought by the Majlis Tahaffuz Khatm-i-Nabuwat (Committee for the Protection of the Finality of the Prophethood) under section 290 C of the Pakistani penal code. Dr. Shaikh is risking death for merely saying that neither Prophet Mohammed nor his Parents could logically have been Muslims before Islam was revealed to the Prophet. The other charges of blasphemy against Dr. Shaikh’s remarks – supposedly made in the course of a routine classroom lecture – are also nonsensical and malicious. Furthermore, none of the complainants to the police were eyewitnesses to the alleged offence.

The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), which has observer status at the UN, is hoping, first, that His Excellency will use his good office and all the diplomatic means and channels available to him to influence Pakistan’s authorities in this case. We urge His Excellency to do everything within his powers to help save the life of Dr. Shaikh. Dr. Shaikh has been given only one week, as against the usual 30 days, to appeal the verdict handed down on Saturday. The matter is therefore having the utmost importance and urgency.

Furthermore, the IHEU would like the UN to put the matter of blasphemy laws on the agenda. In addition to being notoriously open to abuse, blasphemy laws are undesirable and redundant: there exist already laws against obscenity, slander, defamation etc., which could be used without an explicit reference being made to religion. Blasphemy laws are also discriminating because they usually apply only to the predominant religion in the country. As in the case of Dr. Shaikh, such laws can also easily be used to prohibit legitimate and rational criticism of religious beliefs and practices, as well as limit artistic freedom. This is a serious impediment to the growth of human knowledge, not least in the so-called developing world, as well as a violation of the general human right to freedom of expression.

In view of His Excellency’s initiative on the millennium conference in New York last year, where religious leaders came together in a unique expression of religious tolerance, in view of the recent 20th anniversary of the UN Declaration against religious intolerance, and in view of the forthcoming world conference on racism and intolerance in Durban, we believe that the United Nations is the right institution to put the matter of blasphemy laws on the agenda.

The IHEU is confident that His Excellency will follow the case of Dr. Shaikh with urgency and express our gratitude for his and the UN’s efforts in this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Levi Fragell
President