Right of Reply: Fuad Nahdi
The editor of an Islamic journal criticises our call for the lifting of the fatwa against Salman Rushdie
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.YOUR LEADING article urging pressure on Iran to lift the fatwa against Rushdie is based on a misapprehension of how Islamic law functions. Islam is a non-institutional religion where verdicts are the responsibility of their authors and not of the hierarchies to which they belong; there is no Muslim "church" with the power to work posthumous changes in Khomeini's mind. Subsequent Muslim authorities may dissent from Khomeini's views but those who remain loyal to his interpretation will always regard the fatwa as legitimate.
Islamophobic discourse of the type platformed by The Satanic Verses legitimises systematic discrimination against Muslims. A Jewish writer who aired anti- Semitic views and denied the Holocaust, would, I suspect, not command such enthusiasm on your part. And yet the degree of hurt to a despised community has been no less; indeed, the Muslim community is more vulnerable, poorer, and less represented than British Jewry.
A more worthy target for your campaigning zeal would be the blasphemy laws, which at present discriminate in favour of the established religion. In 1994, the European Court of Human Rights upheld a ban by the Austrian courts on the anti-Christian film Council in Heaven. In their verdict, the judges "did not consider that the film's merit as a work of art or as a contribution to public debate in Austrian society outweighed those features which made it essentially offensive to the general public".
If Britain could extend this principle to protect minority as well as majority faiths, Rushdie would undoubtedly be safe to emerge from the shadows. That is the only approach which respects the principle of human equality, as well as Mr Rushdie's right to life.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments