Does the
Freedom of Expression allow us to desecrate what is sacred to other people?
ali gunes
Similar to the previous burning of the Muslim Holy
Book Qur’an carried out by Rasmus Paludan a short while ago, Salwan Momika, an
Iraqi refugee, burned and insulted the Qur’an during the recent Muslim feast of
sacrifice or Eid-al-Adha in front of Stockholm Central Mosque, Sweden, under
the police surveillance. Initially, the Swedish government defended the
incident under the guise of freedom of expression and thought. Yet, this
incident took severe criticism from almost every part of the world – Muslims
and non-Muslims. The harshest criticism has come from Turkey, which continues to
blockade Sweden’s NATO entry application because Sweden, Turkiye claims, not
only overtly supports and accommodates PKK terrorists but also uses them
against Turkey for its smear campaign of human rights abuse.
For example, Turkish
President Tayyip Erdogan harshly criticised Sweden for allowing Salwan Momika
to burn a copy of the Qur’an in Stockholm and said to his party members on the
Muslim holiday of Eid Al-Adha: “Turkey
would never bow down to a policy of provocation or threat. We will teach the
arrogant Western people that it is not freedom of expression to insult the
sacred values of Muslims."[1]
Also, Pope Francis, in
an interview published on Monday in the United Arab Emirates newspaper Al
Ittihad, slammed last week’s burning of the Qur’an in Sweden and said that he felt
“angry and disgusted” to see the
Muslim holy book dishonoured. He continued, “Any sacred book should be respected to respect those who believe in it.”[2]
Then, what is the freedom of expression and thought?
Freedom of speech is a very complex, controversial and
hot issue that is often on the lips of everyone. Freedom of expression and thought
is the indivisible right of individuals to express their opinions, exchange
information and access information. This concept is considered a fundamental
human right and value in democratic societies and is also guaranteed in articles
18 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[3]
In many ways, freedom of opinion is an essential, inseparable
and valuable principle in one’s life. The ability of people to express their
thoughts, share their views and make criticism forms the basis of democratic
debates and social progress in life. Freedom of opinion encourages diversity,
richness of opinion and multiple perspectives to explore different ideas and viewpoints
in a particular society. It also includes respect for others, their beliefs and
opinions; it means refined and civilised manners and attitudes by which we
treat each other daily. Thus, it is evident that the freedom of expression,
when appropriately used and allowed in a balanced way, not only helps society solve
the problems it faces but also helps advance different cultural, artistic and civilisational
values.
However, there are also some controversies and
discussions regarding freedom of expression because it is often subject to
abuse and misuse, as in the recent event in Sweden. Then questions come to
mind: is freedom of expression and
thought limitless? Where does it
start, and where does it end? There are cases that some people misunderstand
and thus misuse the freedom of expression and thought. Hence, there are mixed
feelings and opinions. For instance, some argue that it is necessary to set limits
for the freedom of thought. Others debate that harmful or illegal content such
as hate speech, incitement to violence, violation of privacy or fake news should
not be considered within the scope of freedom of opinion.
Freedom of opinion cannot be limitless because protecting
personal rights, honour, and liberties is paramount. Social cohesion and
harmony may disappear once these values are harmed and abused, leading to chaos,
disrespect, distrust and hate. Freedom of expression should not be used to
violate, harm the rights, defame human honour and degrade the sacredness of
others. In many countries, therefore, freedom of expression comes with
limitations to balancing it with various interests, such as the dignity,
reputation, moral values or religious beliefs of other people. These
restrictions may include hate speech, insults, and sedition. Such expressions
can often be restrained when they are considered to create the potential for
hostility or violence in a society or to cause emotional or psychological harm
to people in the case of the Qur’an burning in Sweden, or it could be any incidents
that harm and injure the feelings and psyche of others.
In Sweden's case of the Qur’an burning incident, no
one should hide behind the freedom of expression. Whether accepted or not, the
Qur’an is the sacred book of almost two billion people worldwide. It is also
odd that the Swedish government allows such incidents to occur under the guise
of freedom of expression. By allowing and protecting Salwan Momika to burn a
copy of the Muslim Holy Book Qur’an, the Swedish government has not only opened
a deep wound in the psyche of Muslims worldwide but also crippled the already
wavering trust between Muslims Countries and European countries. How could
peace be achieved if Muslims and Christians do not respect each other’s
sacredness? How could the wounds be healed? How could the misunderstanding and
biases be removed?
Finally, if we all want peace, respect comes first. It
should be known that action begets reaction, as Pope Francis said in the wake of the publication of the Prophet
Mohamed Cartoon by the French magazine Charlie
Hebdo in 2015: “There are limits to the freedom of
expression - and that anyone who swears at his mother deserves a punch.”[4]
Comments
Post a Comment