By Rachel Morarjee
Financial Times, 06 April 2006
The politically charged case of an Afghan man who had faced the death penalty for converting to Christianity could imperil western efforts to encourage the appointment of a reformist panel of judges to Afghanistan’s Supreme Court.
Abdul Rahman, 40, was granted asylum in Italy last week after prosecutors declared him mentally unfit for trial, sidestepping a direct clash between Sharia law and the human rights declarations enshrined in the Afghan constitution.
The case came ahead of a battle for control of the Supreme Court to be fought between reformists and Islamic hardliners in Afghanistan’s parliament, which will debate President Hamid Karzai’s nine nominations for the bench in coming weeks. Western governments have pushed Mr Karzai to change the line-up of the Supreme Court, which functions not only as the court of final appeal but also interprets the constitution and appoints all judges.
“We don’t necessarily need a secular Supreme Court, but if we don’t get a professional and clean court passed by parliament, it will imperil reform at every level,” said a western diplomat.
It is unclear when MPs will vote on the issue, but diplomats say the controversy over Mr Rahman’s case has clearly raised the stakes of the debate.
Legislators have already passed a resolution declaring that allowing Mr Rahman to leave the country was unconstitutional and illegal.
The case has also strengthened the hands of Islamic conservatives who argue that Mr Karzai has bowed to western pressure.
Although Mr Rahman’s police and medical records had painted a picture of an unstable man with a history of mental illness, sustained criticism expressed by western nations was seen as the main reason the case was eventually dismissed.
In his first public comments on the controversy this week, Mr Karzai said the judiciary had acted correctly.
“We are very happy that our court, thank God, was not influenced by sentiments, nor was its ruling based on sentiments,” Reuters quoted the president as telling judges and clerics at a religious gathering in Kabul.
With anti-western feelings rising in parliament, Mr Karzai may have to sacrifice some of his most reformist candidates for the Supreme Court in order to get his line-up for the 26-member cabinet passed by the house, observers say.
“There will be quite a bit of horse-trading and Karzai may sacrifice the most reformist judges as a negotiating tool to get his cabinet nominations through,” said a western lawyer working on judicial reform.
Bahaudin Baha and Mohammad Qasem Hashemzai were seen as the two most forward-thinking judges on Mr Karzai’s list, and a failure to get the pair of them approved by parliament would signal troubled waters ahead, diplomats said.
“We are like wheat kernels being ground between the millstones of Sharia law and international human rights conventions because we have pledged to uphold both,” said Abdul Malik Kamawi, a Supreme Court spokesman.
Sharia law can be interpreted as calling for the death penalty in cases of apostasy, heresy and adultery.
Afghanistan’s Supreme Court has been a bastion of conservatism. Ali Mohaqeq Nasab was jailed for three months last year for an article in which he questioned the interpretation of Sharia law on adultery and apostasy. He was released after western pressure.
-----------------------
Citation: Rachel Morarjee. "Convert case threatens Afghan reforms," Financial Times, 06 April 2006.
Original URL: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/4b2f1296-c4ff-11da-b7c1-0000779e2340,s01=1.html
-----------------------