Four years after cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) set off violent protests across the Muslim world, Islamic nations are mounting a campaign for an international treaty to protect religious symbols and beliefs from mockery _ essentially a ban on blasphemy that would put them on a collision course with free speech laws in the West. Documents show that Algeria and Pakistan have taken the lead in lobbying to eventually bring the proposal to a vote in the UN General Assembly.

If ratified in countries that enshrine freedom of expression as a fundamental right, such a treaty would require them to limit free speech if it risks seriously offending religious believers. The process, though, will take years and no showdown is imminent. The proposal faces stiff resistance from Western countries, including the United States, which in the past has brushed aside other UN treaties, such as one on the protection of migrant workers.

The move would be a first step toward drafting an international protocol that would eventually be put before the General Assembly _ a process that could take a decade or more. The proposal may have some support in the General Assembly. For several years the Islamic Conference has successfully passed a nonbinding resolution at the General Assembly condemning “defamation of religions.” If the treaty was approved, any of the UN’s 192 member states that ratified it would be bound by its provisions.    »»» Muslim countries seek ban on blasphemy » Kuwait Times

With the exception of the U.S., where free speech is almost absolute regardless of the consequences, there is no real reason why most Western nations could not accept an anti-blasphemy treaty if it were carefully drafted. Although it has not often been enforced (the last successful prosecution was 70 years ago) Canada has an anti-blasphemy law.

From the Canada Criminal Code:

296. (1) Every one who publishes a blasphemous libel is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

(2) It is a question of fact whether or not any matter that is published is a blasphemous libel.

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section for expressing in good faith and in decent language, or attempting to establish by argument used in good faith and conveyed in decent language, an opinion on a religious subject.

Go to article…