Algerian academic gets three years in jail for offending Islam

Nadeemp

Local Club Regular
Joined
Jan 21, 2020
Runs
1,571
renowned Algerian scholar on Islam, Said Djabelkhir, was handed a three-year prison sentence on Thursday for “offending Islam”, but pledged to appeal and keep fighting for “freedom” of thought.

Djabelkhir, 53, who has called for “reflection” on Islam's founding texts, was put on trial after seven lawyers and a fellow academic made complaints against him.

Speaking to AFP after the verdict, Djabelkhir, who was released on bail, said he was surprised by the severity of the sentence and that he would appeal to the Court of Cassation if necessary.


“The fight for freedom of conscience is non-negotiable,” the academic, a specialist on Sufi Islam, said. “It is a fight which must continue.”

A little earlier, Djabelkhir's lawyer Moumen Chadi, who also expressed shock over the ruling, said his client had “been sentenced to three years in prison ... [for] offending the precepts of Islam.” “There is no proof,” the lawyer said, describing the case as baseless.

The offence he was convicted of can be punished by up to five years in prison.

The scholar, author of two well-known works, was criticised for writing that the sacrifice of sheep predates Islam and for criticising practices including the marriage of pre-pubescent girls in some Muslim societies.


Algerian law stipulates a three to five-year prison term and/or a fine for “anyone who offends the Prophet (PBUH) or denigrates the dogmatic precepts of Islam, whether it be by writings, drawings, a statement or another means”.

During his trial in April, Djabelkhir defended himself against accusations that he had “harmed Islam”, the religion of the Algerian state, arguing he had only provided “academic reflections”.

He has said that he was targeted by accusers who “have no expertise on religious matters”.

In a recent interview with AFP, he said that “a very great effort of new reflection on the founding texts of Islam is necessary.”

This was “because the traditional readings no longer meet the expectations, needs and questions of modern man”.

“The Salafists want to impose on Muslims their reading of texts as being the absolute truth,” he said. “It is this that I do not cease to contest in my writings,” he added.

His lawyers argued before the court that the complaint against him was inadmissible because it came from individuals and not from the public prosecutor.

They also warned against the trial becoming a launchpad for courts becoming an arena for “religious debates”.

Djabelkhir has received the backing of many academic colleagues and Algerian politicians since the accusations against him surfaced.

Opponents, however, accuse him of disrespecting the Holy Quran and the five pillars of Islam, including the annual Haj pilgrimage.
 
Another stupid decision. Every faith should be open to scrutiny. Nothing should be followed for the sake of satisfying our family and lineage. That even reflecting on Islam is disallowed shows what a terrible state the Muslims are in.
 
These Takfiri Muslims have a long history of calling other Muslims Kaafir. Whether its Algeria or subcontinent, they are not different.
 
These Takfiri Muslims have a long history of calling other Muslims Kaafir. Whether its Algeria or subcontinent, they are not different.

Punishment for blasphemy should not be more than 6 months. For repeat offenders it can be doubled for every repeat offence.
 
North Africans are confused. They're largely secular countries and Algeria, like Morocco, is basically a French colony where the traditions of the Moors has long been superseded.

Qurbani is Abrahamiic but Hazrat Ibrahim (AS) was 'Muslim'.
 
North Africans are confused. They're largely secular countries and Algeria, like Morocco, is basically a French colony where the traditions of the Moors has long been superseded.

Qurbani is Abrahamiic but Hazrat Ibrahim (AS) was 'Muslim'.

I have been to Algeria. Unlike tunisia or morocco it’s still a religious country
 
North Africans are confused. They're largely secular countries and Algeria, like Morocco, is basically a French colony where the traditions of the Moors has long been superseded.

Qurbani is Abrahamiic but Hazrat Ibrahim (AS) was 'Muslim'.

Also why does being secular make you confused?
 
It is not as if the historical record of Islam is stellar to make any analysis or criticism of it harmful.

4 of the first 5 Caliphs were killed by other Muslims. That should be enough to ask questions if this philosophy will give us the best possible lives on Earth.
 
It is not as if the historical record of Islam is stellar to make any analysis or criticism of it harmful.

4 of the first 5 Caliphs were killed by other Muslims. That should be enough to ask questions if this philosophy will give us the best possible lives on Earth.
How one relates to the other I'm not sure but Muslims need to move away from being zealots; it goes against the Sunnah
Also why does being secular make you confused?

You either are or aren't. Islam has major sins that are outlawed, if a state then allows that which is forbidden, it leaves little in the way of underlying morality
 
How one relates to the other I'm not sure but Muslims need to move away from being zealots; it goes against the Sunnah

Ideolo
You either are or aren't. Islam has major sins that are outlawed, if a state then allows that which is forbidden, it leaves little in the way of underlying morality

Ideologies change with time. There are secular Jews now. Actually most of the Jews are secular. Muslims will follow the same path
 
It is not as if the historical record of Islam is stellar to make any analysis or criticism of it harmful.

4 of the first 5 Caliphs were killed by other Muslims. That should be enough to ask questions if this philosophy will give us the best possible lives on Earth.

Ideologies change with time. There are secular Jews now. Actually most of the Jews are secular. Muslims will follow the same path
The same jews who don't have any allegiance with Judaism but want to preserve a culture hence Zionism; there is Jewish ethnicity distinct to the religion akin to Punjabis and sikism
 
Last edited:
How can one offend an idea?

No. One can only offend people who believe in the idea.
 
The same jews who don't have any allegiance with Judaism but want to preserve a culture hence Zionism; there is Jewish ethnicity distinct to the religion akin to Punjabis and sikism

There la a big percentage of Jews who don’t care about Israel. Most of Jews marry non Jews. At least in New York City.
 
How about grow up and ignore if you are offended

Population is at various stages of growing up. There will always be a segment which is yet to grow up to a level where they learn to ignore. This is why blasphemy law is needed.
 
It is the people who breathe life into the idea, otherwise any idea is just some text in a book.

Yes. And people around the globe have different ideas of what is considered offensive, it is unreasonable to expect everyone to be well read enough in western languages to have grasped western ideals at this point in time.
 
Yes. And people around the globe have different ideas of what is considered offensive, it is unreasonable to expect everyone to be well read enough in western languages to have grasped western ideals at this point in time.

You understand this concept as you have best of both worlds, native pakistani and native british. we all need to be able to think from others perspective also, as seeing only from one view leaves us blind to others pain. cc [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]
 
There la a big percentage of Jews who don’t care about Israel. Most of Jews marry non Jews. At least in New York City.

The % of Jews that are Ultra Orthodox is actually invreasing every year because they have a very high fertility rate, meanwhile Secular Jews are slowly reducing in population due to low number of births and intermarriage/assimilation.
 
You understand this concept as you have best of both worlds, native pakistani and native british. we all need to be able to think from others perspective also, as seeing only from one view leaves us blind to others pain. cc [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

If you could separate your ideas from yourself, you would not feel pain. Ideas are just things that accrete around your true self. They are not part of your true self.
 
If you could separate your ideas from yourself, you would not feel pain. Ideas are just things that accrete around your true self. They are not part of your true self.

You should tell blacks to separate the idea of race from themselves. Then they wont feel pain when someone says the N word. It is not part of their true self.
 
You should tell blacks to separate the idea of race from themselves. Then they wont feel pain when someone says the N word. It is not part of their true self.

False equivalence.

Being oppressed by discriminatory laws does more than hurting feelings, it hurts bodies. Being discriminated against by a justice system is more than hurting feelings, it hurts bodies, it hurts true self.

Telling you your religion is nonsense is not discriminating against you. Giving someone else a job ahead of you because they have a different religion, or treating them better than you because of your religion, is discriminating against you.
 
False equivalence.

Being oppressed by discriminatory laws does more than hurting feelings, it hurts bodies. Being discriminated against by a justice system is more than hurting feelings, it hurts bodies, it hurts true self.

Telling you your religion is nonsense is not discriminating against you. Giving someone else a job ahead of you because they have a different religion, or treating them better than you because of your religion, is discriminating against you.

Are you allowed to call Obama the N word? Because he is not discriminated. He was the potus?
Are you allowed to call a black in africa the N word, because there are no whites making laws for him there?
 
Back
Top