Passed

The Crimes Amendment Bill passed its third reading unanimously tonight. While the government is crowing about tougher penalties for livestock rustling (which in fact seem to be tougher penalties for exposing animal cruelty), the bill does something much more important than that piece of farmer bullshit: it repeals the archaic offence of blasphemous libel from New Zealand law. Meaning we no longer need fear prosecution (in these days, private prosecution) for offending bigots, and it will no longer arguably be a crime to publish Siegfried Sassoon's poetry. So, good riddance to theocratic colonial law. And now we can join the civilised world...

Ireland repeals blasphemy

While things seem to be going badly all over the world, with a murderous autocrat winning in Brazil, plus the ongoing retreat from democracy in the US, there is one place where things seem to be heading in the right direction: Ireland. In recent years, Irish voters have voted overwhelmingly for marriage equality and legal abortion. And now, the same liberal consensus has done it again, overturning the country's medieval blasphemy law:

Ireland has voted to remove blasphemy as an offence from the country’s constitution.

In a referendum, 64.8 per cent of voters were in favour of changing the law, with 35.1 per cent supporting the status quo.

The result was largely expected, as the article on blasphemy in the constitution is generally agreed to be outdated and obsolete.

The amendment finally needs to be brought into law and the outdated offences formally repealed, but its pretty much done.

If you're wondering, our government's bill to repeal blasphemy in New Zealand is currently waiting for its second reading.

Blasphemy repeal advances

Something I missed: the Justice Committee reported back on the Crimes Amendment Bill last Friday. The bill contains a few minor tweaks to the Crimes Act, including repeal of the archaic offence of "blasphemous libel", and the committee recommended unanimously that it be passed:

We heard concerns that the repeal would encourage hate speech against God, incite violence, and remove a safeguard for religious freedom. It was suggested that the repeal would disrupt the maintenance of wholesome boundaries in the media, and would insult God and the Christian foundations of New Zealand.

We consider it highly unlikely that the repeal of this little-known provision would result in any of these issues.

I'd also note that many of those issues are simply not the legitimate concern of government in a free and democratic society. what people think of other people's imaginary friends is simply no concern whatsoever of government.

Now that its back from committee, the bill should hopefully be passed by the end of the year.

No freedom of speech in Spain

How backwards is Spain? They don't just have a sedition law, but also a law against blasphemous libel:

A Spanish actor accused of ridiculing God and the Virgin Mary has been detained for questioning by a judge, police have said, in the latest high-profile case to raise freedom of speech fears in the country.

Willy Toledo, a cinema and television actor who is facing a complaint over a social media post last year criticising the blasphemy prosecution of three women, has twice failed to show up for questioning.

He will be questioned by a judge on Thursday, a police spokeswoman told AFP, adding that the police acted on the orders of a Madrid court.

This is simply medieval, and not the sort of thing which should happen in a supposedly modern democracy. And the natural conclusion to be drawn from Spain's continued use of these laws is that it is neither modern or democratic.

Repealing Blasphemous Libel

Last month, Angie Warren-Clark's Crimes (Offence of Blasphemous Libel) Amendment Bill was drawn from the ballot, and the bill is likely to have its second reading tomorrow. But that apparently isn't fast enough for Andrew little - he's included a provision to repeal blasphemous libel in the government's new Crimes Amendment Bill, which he introduced to the House yesterday:

New Zealand's archaic anti-blasphemy law is to be scrapped under the new government.

Justice Minister Andrew Little introduced legislation on Monday to repeal the decades-old law.

Blasphemous libel is listed in the Crimes Act and comes with a punishment of up to a year in prison but has not been prosecuted since 1922 - and even then was unsuccessful.

Labour sought to repeal the law when in opposition last year, but National blocked its attempt, saying the public should first have a say.

The government's Crimes Amendment Bill will be considered by MPs later this year and people will have a chance to make submissions when it goes before a select committee.

The repeal is part of an omnibus to repeal old and outdated laws, including the year-and-a-day rule for homicide. Using a government bill generally means faster progress, though it can't have a first reading until Thursday.

Its unclear yet whether Warren-Clark will pull her bill, or let it proceed in parallel as a spur to government action. But either way, its good to see politicians falling all over themselves to do this, after years of inaction.

Drawn

A ballot for four Member's Bills was held this morning, and the following bills were drawn:

• Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution) Amendment Bill (Simeon Brown)
  
• Employment Relations (Triangular Employment) Amendment Bill (Kieran McAnulty)
  
• Crimes (Offence of Blasphemous Libel) Amendment Bill (Angie Warren-Clark)
  
• Accident Compensation (Recent Migrants and Returning New Zealanders) Amendment Bill (Melissa Lee)
  

The repeal of blasphemous libel is something I've been pushing for for nearly as long as this blog has been around. I'm glad that it will finally make it to the House. The question is, will anyone actually oppose it?

Blasphemy abolished in Denmark

Denmark has abolished its blasphemy law:

Danish lawmakers have repealed a 334-year-old blasphemy law that forbids public insults of a religion, such as the burning of holy books.

Only a handful of blasphemy trials have taken place in the past 80 years, and several high-profile cases have been dropped, including one involving a caricature of the prophet Muhammad published in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005.

Denmark was the only Scandinavian country with a blasphemy law, which called for up to four months in prison upon conviction, although most people were fined instead.

It's a good step forward, and drags Denmark out of the dark ages. Meanwhile, we're still there - despite the Prime Minister joining other politicians in calling for the law to be repealed, his party voted against it. But hopefully someone will put a bill in the member's ballot so we can finally join the modern world.

English lied about blasphemy repeal

Earlier in the month, after Ireland investigated Stephen Fry for blasphemy, Prime Minister Bill English said that it was time for the law to go. So you would have expected that when Chris Hipkins' amendment to add Blasphemous Libel to the Statutes Repeal Bill came before the House last night, National would have voted for it and condemned this archaic law to the dustbin of history, right?

Wrong. They voted against it, along with the Maori Party - and as a result blasphemous libel is still illegal in New Zealand.

The Statutes Repeal Bill process was reportedly supported by both National and Labour, but it had been questioned by some who thought that the change should go to select committee. That's a perfectly defensible position, but its not why National opposed repeal. Instead, they reverted to the "let sleeping dogs lie" position and decided to leave the law on the books because it wasn't being used - despite the past example of sedition which showed that such laws could be revived in an instant by an over-enthusiastic police force. And in the process, they made a liar out of their Prime Minister.

Hopefully we'll see a member's bill on the subject in the next ballot (and if anyone needs one, there's a bill to do it here). But based on last night's performance, I'm not sure that National will support it. Which means that if we want to repeal this archaic, ridiculous, theocratic law, we need to change the government.

Drawn

A ballot for four Member's Bills was held today, and the following bills were drawn:

• Local Electoral (Equitable Process for Establishing Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill (Marama Davidson)
  
• Newborn Enrolment with General Practice Bill (Parmjeet Parmar)
  
• Employment Relations (Restoring Kiwis’ Right to a Break at Work) Amendment Bill (Sue Moroney)
  
• Education (Public Good not Profit from Charter Schools) Amendment Bill (David Clark)
  

Despite the big talk from earlier in the week, there was no bill to repeal blasphemy in the ballot today. Instead, Chris Hipkins has offered it as an amendment to the Statutes Amendment Repeal Bill. This isn't really constitutional - the Statutes Amendment Bill is designed for amendments which are technical, short, and non-controversial. While this is undoubtedly short, its not technical, and despite the widespread agreement I don't think its non-controversial either (in that there will be people who will object, strongly). OTOH, amendments to Statutes Amendment Bills require the unanimous support of the House, so if anyone disagrees it fails.

Correction: I didn't pay enough attention to the bill Hipkins is trying to amend. Using the Statutes Repeal Bill - a bill designed to get old laws off the books - is absolutely constitutional and requires simple majority support. Which I have no doubt they'll get. So, hopefully the "crime" of blasphemy will be rapidly consigned to the dustbin of history.

Good news from Ireland

The blasphemy investigation against Stephen Fry has been dropped:

An Irish police investigation into allegedly blasphemous comments made by Stephen Fry has been dropped after detectives decided there were not enough people who had been outraged by the remarks.

[...]

After initial inquiries, officers decided that not enough people had been outraged by Mr Fry's remarks to warrant further investigation, according to the Irish Independent.

A source told the paper: "This man was simply a witness and not an injured party. Gardaí (Irish police) were unable to find a substantial number of outraged people.

"For this reason the investigation has been concluded."

So much for that. But it could happen again, here as well as there. The sooner countries repeal their blasphemy laws, the better.

Scrapping blasphemy

Ireland's investigation of Stephen Fry for blasphemy has had at least one positive result: it has drawn attention to our own archaic blasphemy law, and resulted in politicians calling for it to be scrapped:

New Zealand still has an anti-blasphemy law, though neither the prime minister nor the Anglican archbishop was aware of the fact.

The law – which appears not to have been used since 1922 – came to light after reports British entertainer Stephen Fry faced police investigation in the Republic of Ireland for comments he made about "a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God".

New Zealand has laws covering crimes against religion, morality, and public welfare. And blasphemous libel – though vaguely defined – remains an offence punishable by up to 12 months' jail.

Now a range of people, including Prime Minister Bill English and Anglican Archbishop and Primate Philip Richardson, say it's time to get rid of the arbitrary and archaic law.

English said on Monday that he did not previously know the blasphemy laws existed, but "we could get rid of them".

Good. David Seymour will be trying to introduce a bill by leave at the start of Member's Day tomorrow, and I'd encourage all MPs to support it (or rather, not oppose it, because that's how leave works). Otherwise, it would be nice of National to replace one of its spam bills - bills enacting minor government policies - with something substantive and useful like this.

While this law is largely forgotten, it is still a threat. It crops up every decade or so when some domineering christian objects to a TV show or piece of art (in the only case to come to trial, in 1922, it was a poem). And as a law on our books, its effectively a statement about what sort of country we are. The message it sends is one of bigotry, intolerance, and fanaticism. If we want to change that message, we must repeal it.

No freedom of speech in Ireland

Just when we thought Ireland was getting better and dragging itself into the twentieth century, they're investigating Stephen Fry for "blasphemy":

Stephen Fry is being investigated by Irish police over blasphemy claims more than two years after his outspoken comments about God on RTE's The Meaning of Life went viral.

Mr Fry described a hypothetical creator as “stupid” and an “utter maniac” for designing a world filled with undue suffering.

Asked in 2015 by the programme's host, Gay Byrne, what he would say to God if he arrived at the pearly gates of heaven, the actor and author replied: “I’d say, bone cancer in children? What’s that about?”

The committed atheist added: “How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault? It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil.

And for saying this, Fry could face a fine of €25,000. But not under some archaic law still on the statute books from a bygone era - the law was updated in 2009!

But bfore we feel too mug, remember: "blasphemous libel" is still a criminal offence in New Zealand, and Fry could conceivably be prosecuted here for those words as well. He would be unlikely to, given the failure of the only prosecution and the environment set by the BORA, but as long as the law is on the books it is still a possibility. If any MP wants to repeal that obscenity, there's a bill to do it here.

Freedom of speech wins in Iceland

Iceland has repealed its blasphemy law:

Iceland has legalised blasphemy following a campaign started by the Pirate party after the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks in France. The move to repeal the 75-year-old law, under which blasphemers could be imprisoned for up to three months or fined, faced opposition from some church groups.

In a statement on its website, the party wrote that it was a victory for freedom of speech and showed the principle could not be defeated by terrorist attacks. The law, which was passed in 1940, had been an attack on “humorists and all the friends of freedom of expression”, the party added.

Good. Blasphemy is an archaic offence whose sole purpose is to protect religion from criticism and punsih those who do not subscribe to the popular orthodoxy. It has no place in a free and democratic society. But while Iceland has joined the free world, blasphemous libel is still on the books in New Zealand. Isn't it time we repealed it?

Blasphemy isn't just a crime in Myanmar

A court in Myanmar has jailed a kiwi for two and a half years for "blasphemy":

A Wellington man sentenced to two and a half years of hard labour in Myanmar faces a very tough life shackled to other prisoners, according to a fellow Kiwi who has witnessed the work gangs.

Philip Blackwood learned his grim fate on Tuesday in a Yangon court after he and two Burmese colleagues were found guilty of offending Buddhism by posting an online advertisement of a psychedelic Buddha wearing headphones to promote their VGastro bar.

Yes, jailed for a Buddha wearing headphones. That's how backwards they are in Myanmar.

But lest anyone think that we're better, its still a crime in New Zealand to insult Christians (and specifically, Anglicans). The best way to show our disapproval for Myanmar's backwardness is to repeal our own. There's a bill to do so here; does any MP want to take it up?

No freedom of speech in Pakistan

Veena Malik is a Pakistani actor. In May this year she played a role in a historical wedding scene based on the marriage of one of Muhammed's daughters. For this, she has been sentenced to 26 years in jail for blasphemy:

Veena Malik has expressed her anger and disbelief after she was handed a 26-year jail term by a Pakistani anti-terrorism court for ‘malicious acts’ of blasphemy.

Her crime? Appearing in a pretend wedding scene, staged on a daytime show broadcast by Geo TV and based on the marriage of the Prophet Mohamed’s daughter.

The programme sparked a wave of controversy in the Islamic country when it aired in May, despite the fact similar scenes had been aired in the past to little or no such public outrage. Some even apparently suspected that Pakistan’s military were behind the mock wedding, and that it was put on in a bid to wage a blasphemy war against the broadcaster.

Malik’s husband, Asad Bashir Khan, and Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, the chief executive of the biggest media group in the Asian country, were further sentenced to 26 years behind bars for the apparent religious offence. The host of the show Shaista Wahidi was also punished.

I'd suggest that the Pakistani courts are incapable of distinguishing between fiction and reality, but as this is a religious offence, that's a given.

No freedom of speech in Greece

Corpus Christi is an American play which depicts Jesus and his friends as gay men living in modern Texas. But when it opened in Greece, the premiere was disrupted by the fascist Golden Dawn party, who beat people while police stood by and watched. And now, its cast and crew have been charged with blasphemy:

Charges of "insulting religion" and "malicious blasphemy" have been filed after Bishop Seraphim of Piraeus lodged a lawsuit against those involved in the play, the officials said on Friday.

The play's director told Reuters he was stunned that prosecutors had chosen to go after him rather than pursue tax evaders and others blamed for driving Greece to near-bankruptcy.

"What I see is that there are people who have robbed the country blind who are not in jail and the prosecutor turns against art," Albanian-born Laertis Vasiliou said.

If found guilty, Mr Vasiliou and the other defendants could face several months in prison. A trial date has not been set yet.

Greece is a party to the European Convention on Human Rights, which affirms both freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Prosecuting people for criticising religion is obviously incompatible with either. But thanks to austerity-induced fascism, Greece is fast turning away from those values, and towards something rather frightening. And the Orthodox church, who previously backed the quasi-fascist, theocratic LAOS party, seems to be going along with it.

No freedom of religion in Indonesia

Alexander Aan is an Indonesian civil servant. In January, he created a page on Facebook on which he declared himself an atheist and said that he did not believe in angels, devils, heaven and hell or other myths. As a result, he was arrested for "blasphemy", and has just been sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment and a US$10,000 fine.

Freedom of religion? Freedom of speech? There's no such thing in theocratic Indonesia.

The insanity of blasphemy laws

I've previously criticised Pakistan's outdated blasphemy law as a tool of religious persecution. But its worse than that. In addition to punishing those who fail to adhere to the prevailing religious orthodoxy, it can also be used to punish trivial behaviour with no religious component whatsoever - such as throwing away a pushy salesman's business card:

A doctor has been arrested on suspicion of violating Pakistan's contentious blasphemy law by discarding a business card of a man who shared the name of Islam's prophet, Muhammad, police say.

[...]

The case began when Muhammad Faizan, a pharmaceutical company representative, visited Dr Valiyani's clinic and handed out his business card. He said when the doctor threw the card away, he went to police and filed a complaint that noted his name was the same as the prophet's. Mr Shah said police were investigating whether the doctor should be charged with blasphemy.

"Buy my drugs or I'll have you arrested!" It would be funny, if someone wasn't facing a potential death penalty (whether legal, or extrajudicial) for it. But its also a perfect example of how blasphemy laws are abused by self-interested believers, and why countries should not have such laws.

No freedom of religion in Pakistan

Asia Bibi is a Pakistani Christian. Last June she got into a fight with some women in her village. In retaliation, they accused her of desecrating the Koran. As a result, she has now been sentenced to death for blasphemy.

She's not the only one. Pakistan's blasphemy laws are routinely used against non-Muslims as a tool of religious oppression. According to Human Rights Watch, that is exactly how they are intended to be used:

"The laws are discriminatory and intended as such and are used for precisely that purpose. So, the issue is not of their misuse but of the laws being on the statute books at all. Vague all-encompassing wording allows the laws to be used as an instrument of political and social coercion, legal discrimination and persecution."

Even where cases result in acquittal, defendants and judges have been murdered for their "offence" against religious values. While the government is reportedly considering reform, they have been sitting on the issue for years, too afraid of the fanatics to act to protect people from discrimination. As a result, there is no real freedom of religion in Pakistan.

But its not just Pakistan's problem. New Zealand still has a blasphemy law on the books, which outlaws any offence to Christians (and specifically Anglicans). And while the government doesn't use it anymore, religious fanatics occasionally do in an effort to punish speech they deem "disrespectful" of their imaginary friends.

Pakistan shows where such legislation leads, and what its purpose is. Such laws have no place in a modern, secular, liberal society. Our blasphemy law must be repealed.

Ireland goes medieval

Last year, the UK abolished the archaic offence of blasphemous libel, and New Zealand will almost certainly follow suit if anybody has the courage to actually bring a bill on it. Meanwhile, Ireland is moving in the opposite direction, with the Dail passing a new defamation bill which included the following:

36. Publication or utterance of blasphemous matter.

(1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000. [This has now been amended to €25,000 - I/S]

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

(3) It shall be a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section for the defendant to prove that a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value in the matter to which the offence relates

So, in Ireland, the easily outraged religious now get a veto on free speech. Say that "god doesn't exist", make a great TV comedy mocking the Catholic church, tell those people worshipping the latest slightly Virgin Mary-shaped object that they're credulous fools, and get a whopping fine. Because their right not to be offended apparently outweighs your right to express the blatantly obvious.

This is a medieval law. And by passing it, the Dail have marked Ireland as a medieval country, on a par with Afghanistan, Iran and similar backwards places.