Communication Justice, Rights and Law class task 1 - Case Study Example

BLASPHEMY LAW OF PAKISTAN-ASIA BIBI’S CASE Inductive persuasion from the facts and context According to its constitution, the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" is the official name of Pakistan. In addition, only less than 4% of Pakistans 167 million citizens (2008) are non-Muslims. Pakistan, among countries with a Muslim majority, has the most stringent anti-blasphemy laws. The chief purpose of those laws is to defend Islamic authority. Article 2 of the Supreme Law affirms that Islam is the state religion and no other religion supersedes it.

By extension, Article 31 of the supreme law provides that it is the countrys obligation to cultivate the Islamic way of life. According to Article 33, it is the countrys responsibility to discourage racial, parochial, sectarian, tribal, and provincial discrimination among the citizens. In this case, Kinyua (2014) asserts that the citizens in context are Muslim citizens. As it has been indicated above, Pakistan is a Muslim country where every person within the confinement of her territories, including Asia Bibi and her family, are required to heed to these provisions.

The fact of this matter is that Asia Bibi was living within the Pakistan’s territories. In this case, she was under the laws and regulations that governed the nation. In this case, it is reported that she insulted her fellow workers in the name of Islam. Accordingly, she takes water from the same well as the Muslims. Not only did she commit the heinous act, but also she professed her religion (Christianity) by indicating that it is superior that Islamic. According to the evidence presented during the proceeding, Asia Bibi committed a capital crime of blaspheming prophet Mohamed.

All these offences committed by Asia Bibi carry specified punishments according to “…….Section 295 C of the Pakistan Penal Code…..”, Bryant (2009). The penal code provides for 3 years imprisonment for making any sound or uttering of any word or making any gesture with deliberate intent of hurting the religious feelings of other persons. In addition, mandatory Death sentence and fine are provided in section 295C for any person who uses derogatory remarks, written, spoken, indirectly, or directly defiles or blasphemes the name of Muhammad.

Furthermore, the section affirms that the presiding judge in this matter should be a Muslim faithful and the witness presented by non-Muslims will carry less weight in such proceedings. Deductive persuasion from the ancient and modern declarationsIn this case, Asia Bibi was legally and properly convicted of the blasphemy charges and hence the death sentence issued and the fine imposed was done according to the provision of the law, constitution and penal codes. It is viable to defend that Asia Bibi’s utterances were fundamentally protected by the constitution.

However, the presiding judge guided that the fundamental freedom of speech is not unlimited where it infringes religious, political and consciousness among other freedoms for other people.In many countries, the freedom of speech is guaranteed and properly anchored in constitutions and other supreme laws. This allows people to express their feelings and opinions on different platforms. However, the freedom does not cross the boundaries when rights for other people are under attack. In this case, Asia Bibi’s case indicates that a lot of responsibility is needed when enjoying various freedoms enshrined in the law.

Reference Bryant, T. (2009). Stress and strong feelings management. : NY Scholars Press.Kinyua, D. (2009). Lessons from Asia Bibi”s case: no freedom without responsibility. : Boston. Print