Abdul-Mon’em Mahmoud, a journalist for the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan), is against imprisoning Kareem, despite his disagreement with his views. (Hat tip: Yaman).

He writes in his Ana Ikhwan journal (translated to English):

I disagree with Abdul Kareem Amer’s views. However, I do not disagree, at all, that the his security treatment and punishment for his personal opinions… I do not disagree at all that this security practice is unjust towards a youth in the prime of his life. Punishing him, or punishing others having their opinions, will not succeed in changing their ideas.

[…]

The regime does not care about religion to rise up in defense of it. Rather, it cares about shutting up any person who tries to speak or express his opinions.

Bravo!

You can join the debate at his comments section, or at our forum.

Egypt’s Foreign Minister (who previously said he rejects criticism from anyone, “whoever he may be”, over jailing Kareem) is “angry” that the U.S. State Department’s 2006 human rights report mentions the “poor” respect the Egyptian government has for human rights: Egypt anger over US rights report by the BBC. (Hat tip: Rami)

Egypt anger over US rights report

PHOTO: Abdel Kareem was among several bloggers detained in the last year

Egypt has reacted angrily to criticism of its human rights record by the United States – one of its main allies.

Foreign Minister Ahmad Aboul-Gheit accused the US of interfering in its affairs in the state department’s annual human rights report.

The report mentioned several cases in Egypt including torture of prisoners and allegations of arbitrary arrests.

Mr Aboul-Gheit told the BBC that Egypt had a strong commitment to respecting human rights.

He accused some Western governments of trying to persuade Egyptians to make false allegations.

The state department report also detailed restrictions on the judiciary and on civil liberties.

“The government’s respect for human rights remained poor, and serious abuses continued in many areas,” the report said.

Egypt was one of several other countries friendly to the US where there were poor human rights conditions, the report said, others being China, Pakistan, Russia and Saudi Arabia.

Excerpts of the Internet Freedom section of the 2006 Report on Human Rights Practices in Egypt, which also mentions the indefinite detention of Kareem at the end of the year:

On October 30, RSF published a list of 13 countries it labeled as “enemies of the Internet,” a list which included Egypt due to the recent imprisonment of pro-democracy bloggers.

[...]

On June 15, Hala Helmy Boutros, a blogger based in the Upper Egypt city of Qena who had written about Egypt’s Christians, reported that airport security personnel in Cairo prevented her from traveling to the United States to attend a conference on Coptic Christian issues. The authorities ordered Boutros, who had blogged under the name “Hala Al Masry,” to appear in a Cairo State Security Court on June 25. At her June 25 hearing, Boutros faced charges of spreading false news and disrupting Christian-Muslim relations. She was released after paying bail of $525 (LE 3000). After her release, she ceased her blogging and other public activism. She did not appear in court again before year’s end.

On November 6, Alexandria security forces arrested 22-year old student blogger Abdel Karim Nabil Suleiman, whose blog entries had contained strongly-worded critiques of Islam and Al-Azhar’s Sunni Muslim orthodoxy. (Abdel Karim had previously been detained for his writings for 18 days in October 2005.) Abdel Karim had been expelled and reported to the authorities by Al-Azhar University for criticizing Islamic authority. At year’s end, Abdel Karim remained in detention, under a series of renewed detention orders “pending investigation.”

Elaph is a leading Arab liberal Web site that has more than 300,000 readers per day. Dr. Abu Khoula recently published an opinion article on Kareem Amer: محاكمة أزهرية للمدون عبد الكريم (English: ‘An Azharite Sentence to Blogger Abdul Kareem’).

Extensively quoting and analyzing Kareem’s final blog post prior to his arrest (available in English here), the Dr. Abu Khoula makes the following important points:

- It is tragic that Kareem joined Al-Azhar against his will, for the personality of a student cannot develop under an educational system he rejects. Modern schools around the world do not impose their teachings on a student, but rather assist him in expanding his talents by giving him a large space of freedom, such as in choosing educational subjects and activities like art and music.

- Kareem’s tragedy could have been avoided completely were it not for the failures of Egypt in fixing the religious educational curricula.

- Attempting to eliminate an opinion is futile unless it is faced by a disagreeing opinion. For example, we cannot break down an old scientific theory unless a new theory is developed that exposes the old one’s faults.

- This case will tarnish the reputation of Al-Azhar University, as well as Egypt’s educational system and judicial branch.

- The Islamic world today lives in an age of inquisition, which Europe suffered from five centuries ago.

Finally, Dr. Abu Khaoula urges all intellectual and educated Egyptians, particularly Dr. Saad Eddin Ibrahim, to adopt the case of Abdul Kareem, to demand his immediate release, and to denounce the injustice that he faced from both Al-Azhar and Egypt’s judicial branch.

We also urge them, and every person who believes in free speech, to adopt his case and stand up for Kareem’s basic human rights.

Shortly after Kareem was sentenced to prison on February 22, the Foreign Minister of Egypt told the world he doesn’t care about the global outrage caused by chasing a harmless blogger: القاهرة تستنكر ردود الأفعال على الحكم بسجن مدون. (Hat tip: Ahmed)

We’ve translated the Arabic Al-Jazeera article:

Cairo Condemns Reactions to Sentencing Blogger to Prison

PHOTO: Ahmed Abul-Gheit considers criticism of Abdul Kareem Suleiman’s sentence as interference in the judiciary system.

Egypt strongly criticized the reactions to condemning an Egyptian blogger, who owns a Web site, on charges of attacking Islam and President Hosni Mubarak, and to imprisoning him for four years.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit issued a statement rejecting the intervention of anyone, “whoever he may be”, in the work of the Egyptian judiciary, or anyone commenting on its provisions.

Abul-Gheit also said that Egypt rejects the positions of “some media outlets and non-governmental organizations abroad”, expressing Egypt’s “strong displeasure and dismay” for that.

A court in Alexandria, in northern Egypt, sentenced Abdul Kareem Suleiman to four years in prison under the charges of contempt of the Islamic religion and insulting President Mubarak.

The Moharram Bek Misdemeanor Court sentenced the defendant to three years in prison under the charge of contempt of Islam, and one year under the charge of insulting the President. Suleiman was a student at Al-Azhar University, which expelled him last year and demanded having him tried. He is the first Egyptian blogger to be issued a prison sentence.

U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey said he is “very concerned” about the prison sentence that was imposed on blogger Abdul Kareem Suleiman for expressing his opinions. In addition, foreign human rights organizations, as well as Egyptian organizations, such as the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists and the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, have denounced the sentence.

Eight Articles

Suleiman wrote his articles under the pen name Kareem Amer. He was tried because of eight articles that he published on his blog, in which he strongly criticized Al-Azhar University, which he described as a “university of terrorism and spreading extremist ideas”.

Furthermore, in one of these articles, he strongly criticized Mubarak, equating him with “pharaonic dictators”. In another article entitled “The Naked Truth of Islam as I Saw It”, Suleiman talked about the sectarian confrontations that occurred in Alexandria in 2005, accusing it of inciting sedition and tarnishing the image of Muslims.

Held since last November, Suleiman did not deny writing these articles, but he said that they only reflected his personal opinions. The defense team asserted that he would appeal against the sentence, describing the trial as unjust.

Mr. Abul-Gheit is wondering why the outside world seems to be so concerned about the judicial branch of sovereign Egypt.

Albeit being anachronistic, an eloquent response was written by Kareem Amer himself, shortly before his arrest:

I hereby declare, in all frankness and clarity, my rejection and repudiation of any law, any legislation, and any regime that does not respect the individual’s rights and personal freedom, and does not acknowledge the absolute freedom of the individual in doing anything – as long as he does not affect anyone around him in a physical way –, and does not acknowledge the individuals’ absolute freedom in expressing their opinions, whatever they may be and whatever they cover, as long as this opinion is merely an opinion or words coming from a person, and is not coupled with any physical action that harms others. At the same time, I declare, in all clarity, that such laws do not obligate me in any way, and I do not acknowledge them or their existence. I detest, from the depths of my soul, whoever works on implementing them, whoever uses them as a guide, and whoever is satisfied with their existence or benefits from them. And if these laws are forced upon us, and we have no power or strength in changing them because that is in the hands of those in power with agendas, who are more than satisfied for the existence of such laws and are making use of it: Nevertheless, all of this will not push me into submission, or into waiting for relief and appeasement.

I hereby declare that I do not acknowledge the legitimacy of my summons to investigate a matter like this, which is within the realm of my freedom to express my opinions. This freedom was stipulated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Egypt has supposedly signed. Moreover, setting this declaration aside, and even if it did not exist, and even if Egypt did not sign it, human rights are very self-evident matters that do not require legislations or laws to regulate them or to define their essence.

UPDATE: (April 11, 2007)
An Italian translation of the article is now available here!

Notes:
• The article below is an English translation of the final entry Abdul Kareem Nabeel Suleiman (alias: Kareem Amer) published on his blog on October 28, 2006, prior to his arrest.
• Kareem was interrogated two days later, and was arrested on November 6, 2006.
• The original text can be found below, or at his blog.
• This translation was produced by the Free Kareem Coalition, an interfaith alliance of young bloggers and college students committed to the principles of freedom of thought and freedom of speech.
• Distribution of this translation is encouraged.

An Adobe PDF file of this translation is available for distribution: Get PDF version here.

Your Blessings, O Azhar!

By Abdul Kareem Nabeel Suleiman (Kareem Amer)
Saturday, October 28, 2006

The human being might be forced to be connected to something, and he would find himself incapable of getting rid of it in spite of his rejection and hatred of it. However, a defining moment might come when he will be granted the opportunity to get rid of this heavy connection forever, without any results or side effects to follow.

It is rare for the separation from this thing to be accompanied with quasi-harsh or undesirable results. Nevertheless, it is a matter that may occur, and an example of that is what is happening with me and what I am facing these days.

I joined Al-Azhar to study in accordance with my parents’ desires. In spite of my complete rejection of Al-Azhar and religious thought (at a subsequent time), and despite my writings that strongly criticize religion’s infiltration into the public life, its control over human beings’ behavior and dealings with each other, and its directing them in conduct, getting rid of these fetters, which were in the form of my (formerly) being a student at Al-Azhar University, was not something easy or trivial as I had envisioned it would be.

When I obtained my freedom in the form of a final expulsion paper from the university last March, I had envisioned that these issues had ended at this point, and that obtaining this document was tantamount to my liberation from Al-Azhar University’s capture and its authoritarianism, first on its students’ lives, then on society members and on life in our country in varying degrees. I ignored what the Al-Gomhuria newspaper published regarding a copy of the investigation papers from my disciplinary board session – which I did not sign for reasons personal to me – being sent to the Public Prosecutor. I also ignored the university administration’s unpublicized refusal of handing me my file. I let life run as it is without engrossing myself in thinking of what might happen after that; this impression was in light of the fact that they had expelled me and hence that gave rest to all of us. I had thought that this was the end of my relationship with them, and I said: Let them keep my file with them. And indeed, I proceeded to apply for new original documents from these on my file, which I was in great need of.

However, it seems that the ‘blessings’ of Al-Azhar to its students cannot be easily erased. They keep pursuing students like a shadow. For instance, a student who obtained the Azharite Secondary Certificate cannot hand in paperwork requesting to study at any public university. I have repeatedly tried to do it this year, and in years before my expulsion, but all my endeavors yielded failure. The mere fact that you have obtained this notorious certificate disqualifies you from studying like other citizens in this country, who differ from you by carrying the General Secondary Certificate!

It also seems that the ‘blessings’ of Al-Azhar to its students are not limited to depriving them of completing their studies far away from it. What had happened, and what will happen to me in the coming days, seriously prove to me that these Azharite ‘blessings’ do not leave a student who tries to rebel against the university, and who attempts to reject what he is forced to study in it – from things that are inconsistent with logic, and that incite to violence against people who differ in creed – until he faces the edge of the grave (just as what was about to happen to me by impetuous students of the Sharia & Law Faculty, who were close to having me killed with their white weapons [knives] in jealousy for the religion of Allah – as one of the higher-level students justified to me at a later time – during last May in front of the faculty. Nevertheless, predestination, which I do not believe in, had written for me a new lease on life, and I managed to escape from their hands), or until he enters the gates of prison. And it seems that this is what I will be facing in the coming days, despite my dislike of rushing to predict future events and to foretell of what is unknown, but I always expect everything that is bad so the truth does not strike me at once.

Several hours ago, a summons reached my house, demanding my presence to appear for an investigation next Monday at the Moharram Bek Prosecutor Office. This is due to the investigations that the Prosecutor is initiating in the case that Al-Azhar raised with me by its intervention in what I write and publish outside its walls, on the free cyberspace that does not acknowledge any authority on what its users publish on it. It seems that the ‘blessings’ of Al-Azhar, which I vainly imagined that I had gotten rid of after I had obtained my liberation document from it, still follow me to this day. The summons by the Prosecutor to investigate me on this matter is one of the manifestations of these ‘blessings’, which do not leave their companion until he is in a situation similar to that of Dr. Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, whose Al-Azhar blessings resulted in a court ruling that separated him from his wife; or in a similar situation to that of Dr. Ahmed Sobhi Mansour, whose Al-Azhar blessings resulted in him going to jail and then being forced to permanently emigrate from the country; or, at best, they leave him in a situation similar to that of Dr. Nawal Al-Saadawi, Ahmed Al-Shahawy, and others whom Al-Azhar has always recommended and recommends the confiscation of their writings, and the prevention of their distribution in the market.

I’m not afraid at all. My happiness that the enemies of free thought deal with me by employing such methods – which only the intellectually bankrupt excel at – make me more confident of myself, more steadfast in my principles, and on readiness to face anything for the sake of expressing my free opinion, without any restrictions imposed on me by governments, religious institutions, or even the totalitarian society, whose continuation serves these vile methods that the enemies of thought and the hobbyists of drugging, either by religion or by drugs, are no good at employing.

The mere existence of legal provisions that criminalize freedom of thought, and punish to prison whoever criticizes religion in any way, is considered to be a grave defect in the law. The law was supposed to be founded to regulate the relationships of the individuals in the society, not for suppressing their freedom for the benefit of religion, the law itself, or the social order. The human being – the individual – is the first, and his existence preceded everything. On that basis, criminalizing the human being for criticizing the social order, religion, or authority – which are things that came following the appearance of the first human being – is considered to be a grave defect in these laws. Such laws greatly transgress their powers to intervene in matters pertaining to the freedom of the personal individual, which is the sanctified area that no human being, regardless of who he is, has the right to transgress.

I hereby declare, in all frankness and clarity, my rejection and repudiation of any law, any legislation, and any regime that does not respect the individual’s rights and personal freedom, and does not acknowledge the absolute freedom of the individual in doing anything – as long as he does not affect anyone around him in a physical way –, and does not acknowledge the individuals’ absolute freedom in expressing their opinions, whatever they may be and whatever they cover, as long as this opinion is merely an opinion or words coming from a person, and is not coupled with any physical action that harms others. At the same time, I declare, in all clarity, that such laws do not obligate me in any way, and I do not acknowledge them or their existence. I detest, from the depths of my soul, whoever works on implementing them, whoever uses them as a guide, and whoever is satisfied with their existence or benefits from them. And if these laws are forced upon us, and we have no power or strength in changing them because that is in the hands of those in power with agendas, who are more than satisfied for the existence of such laws and are making use of it: Nevertheless, all of this will not push me into submission, or into waiting for relief and appeasement.

I hereby declare that I do not acknowledge the legitimacy of my summons to investigate a matter like this, which is within the realm of my freedom to express my opinions. This freedom was stipulated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Egypt has supposedly signed. Moreover, setting this declaration aside, and even if it did not exist, and even if Egypt did not sign it, human rights are very self-evident matters that do not require legislations or laws to regulate them or to define their essence.

To every gloating and spiteful person among those who envision that the likes of these primitive measures might change my positions, affect me, or force me to stray from walking in the path that I have set for myself, I say: Die in your rage and hide in your burrows. I shall not recant, not even by an inch, from any word I have written. These restrictions will not preclude my dream of obtaining my freedom, for that has been my wish ever since I was a child, and it will continue to run in my imagination in endlessness.

And to Al-Azhar University, its professors, and its Islamic scholars, who stood and are still standing against anyone who thinks in a free manner, far away from their metaphysical aspects and superstitions, I say: You will end up in the junkyard of history, and when that time comes, you will not find anyone to cry over you. Rest assured that your grasp will disappear as has happened with others like you. Happy is he who took advice from others!

Original (Arabic) text:

Previous translation: Kareem Amer: “There Is No Deity but the Human Being”.

UPDATE: (April 15, 2007)
Italian translation available: Italian Translation of Kareem’s Final Blog Post.

From the USINFO site, which is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Information Programs: Free Speech on Internet a Basic Human Right, United States Says.

Free Speech on Internet a Basic Human Right, United States Says
State Department “very concerned” over sentencing of Egyptian blogger

By Stephen Kaufman
USINFO Staff Writer

Washington — The U.S. State Department expressed concern over the conviction and sentencing of an Egyptian blogger to four years in prison due to his comments posted online, and said the freedom of expression on the Internet is “part of general, basic human rights.”

State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey said February 22 that 22-year-old Abdel Karim Suleiman is “the first Egyptian blogger to be prosecuted for the contents of his remarks.”

Suleiman was convicted by an Alexandria court in connection with eight articles he had written since 2004. Egyptian authorities said the articles were insulting to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and the Islamic faith.

Casey expressed concern over the curtailment of free speech.

“[C]ertainly, while we have great respect for all religions, including certainly Islam, the role of freedom of expression is critical for the development of a democratic and prosperous society,” he said, adding that the right to express one’s opinions and views includes what one posts on the Internet.

“I think we view them as part of general, basic human rights,” he said.

The deputy spokesman said the Bush administration has discussed the issue in general terms with the Egyptian government and had mentioned Suleiman by name in its 2005 human rights report. (See related article.)

“I understand we’ll be discussing this specific action with them as well,” he said.

The State Department has increased its efforts to combat Internet censorship around the world, recently allocating $500,000 in support of Internet freedom projects and is expanding its section concerning online freedom of speech in its upcoming human rights report.

U.S. officials also held a January 30 conference on Internet freedom that brought U.S. officials together with human rights organizations and the corporate world, including leading companies involved in Internet communication, to address government restriction of the flow of information on the Web. (See related article.)

For more information, see Internet Freedom.

Yesterday’s Drudge Report linked to a Reuters story on Kareem, in which his situation is placed in the larger context of the crackdown on bloggers in Egypt: Egypt’s bloggers test state media control. (Hat tip: Andrew)

Excerpts:

Earlier this month, Abdel-Karim Suleiman, a 22-year-old former law student at al-Azhar Islamic university, became the first Egyptian jailed for his blogging when he was handed a four-year prison sentence.

“Despite their small number, the bloggers have established themselves as an alternative media outlet,” said Ehab el-Zalaky, a senior editor at the independent weekly newspaper al-Dustor, who has written extensively on bloggers.

Blogs also provide a platform for religious and social minorities whose issues rarely find space in traditional media.

Anti-Christian discrimination in Egypt is documented in one. Blogs by lesbians discussing their desires and feelings are new outlets for self-expression.

“In a society too conservative to accept these relationships, it was the first time for such explicit bold talk to appear in an Egyptian media outlet,” said Zalaky.

[…]

Bloggers and human rights organisations have condemned the conviction of Suleiman. They fear it sets a dangerous precedent for Internet censorship in Egypt, home to some 5,000 blogs across a population of more than 70 million people.

The Foreign Ministry has criticised the reactions to the verdict and said it was an internal matter and up to the judiciary to decide on.

Writing on his blog (http://karam903.blogspot.com) shortly before his detention in November, Suleiman was defiant.

“I am not scared at all … I will not back away one inch from what I wrote and handcuffs will not prevent me from dreaming of my freedom,” he blogged.

Since Suleiman’s arrest, said fellow blogger Wael Abbas, 32, Egypt’s blogosphere has changed. “I cannot say I am not afraid,” he told Reuters. “With this government one has to expect the worst.”

[…]

INTERNET BLACK HOLES

Botros, 42, says she was also persecuted by security authorities for reporting on a number of sectarian clashes between Muslims and the Christian minority in southern Egypt.

“They beat up my father at night on the street and told him: ‘This is a gift from your daughter’,” she said. “I was summoned to the police during the night and they treated me roughly. I was kept in solitary confinement for hours.”

UPDATE: It’s on The Washington Post!

UPDATE #2: It’s also on The Sydney Morning Herald .

Last week, Metro Holland published an article on the case of Kareem and on the fact that now, for Egyptians and many others throughout the Arab world, the Internet is not the free marketplace of ideas it once was.

The author, Christian Derlagen, has kindly sent us the original Dutch article, accompanied by his English translation. His article is the first major publication on Kareem Amer’s case in Dutch.

Metro Holland has a daily production of over 500,000 copies, reaching around one million readers. Thank you, Christian!

You can view the original article on the sixth page of the February 28 edition of Metro Holland: Bloggen is misdaad in Egypte (PDF file).

(There is also a reference to the article on the front page.)

A screen shot: (click here for full-scale image)

English translation:

Metro Holland
Wednesday, 28 February 2007

Blogging is a crime in Egypt

For millions of people around the world, the weblog is their podium to express their ideas and opinions to the broader public. But on the internet, the freedom to write what you think does not exist everywhere.

An Egyptian court last week convicted the blogger Abdelkareem Suleiman to four years in prison for ‘insulting the president’ and ‘contempting islam’. After censorship over newspapers, radio and television, now the internet seems to become the new victim of Arab regimes’ desire to exercise full control over the media.

Worried
Though human rights organizations worldwide are worried about further limitations to freedom of speech in the Arab world, Suleiman could not count on too much support in his own country: “Someone who openly speaks out against islam, his life is not safe here.’

The 22-year old blogger, better known under his nickname Kareem Amer, wrote on his blog that president Mubarak’s government is ‘the perfect example of a dictatorial regime’. He labelled the prestigious Islamic Al-Azhar University, where he studied law, as ‘racist’. Consequently, the blogger was not only expelled from university, but the institution also filed a complaint with the Egyptian authorities. Amer is imprisoned in the Alexandria jail since his arrest, last November.

Sharia
The court ruling came as a slap in the face of Dalia Ziada, a 26-year old blogger and human rights activist of the Arabic Network for Human Rights in Cairo. “This means that we are not free what we want to say on our websites”, says Ziada, who followed the case from the beginning. “The judge is not independent and is under full control of the government. It is a terrible time for freedom of speech in Egypt.”
The reaction of Amer’s dad has also shocked her. A few days before the court session, he said in an interview with an Egyptian newspaper that his son, in line with the sharia, should be killed now he had fallen off his faith. Amer has also received hundreds of death threats in his electronic mailbox, because he would have insulted the prophet Mohammed with his criticism on Islam.

Censorship
Freedom of speech is under serious pressure, and not only in Egypt. Other Arab states too, such as Tunisia, Syria and Saudi-Arabia, censor newspapers, radio and television. Information that is critical on the ruling governments is blocked even before it is printed or broadcasted. Because the internet seemed to offer more freedom, there is now a large community of young, critical webloggers in the Arab world. But out of fear for the regimes’ security authorities, these bloggers usually do not reveal their real names. Amer was the exception to this rule.

With Kareem Amer’s verdict, the Egyptian government seems to give a warning: Egyptian should be careful with what they say, also in cyberspace. But bloggers in Egypt seem more resilient than ever when it comes to defending freedom of speech. As a colleague of Amer said after the ruling: “The government should not think that it has won and that I will stop saying what I think. I will not stop to criticize the government of president Mubarak and his regime, and I will also continue to reveal all human rights violations in Egypt.”

Christian Derlagen
Metro-reporter

He looks exhausted, doesn’t he?

Tom Palmer points out that the presse attaché of the Egyptian Embassy in Washington, D.C., wrote a letter to The Washington Post editor. Mr. Haggag defended Kareem’s imprisonment, claimed that Kareem was sentenced under an impartial judicial process, and went on to insist that that criticism of the government by the media has been ‘liberalized’: Media Freedom in Egypt.

‘Liberalized’ enough to release a blogger? Seems not.

Media Freedom in Egypt
Monday, March 5, 2007; Page A14

Your Feb. 28 editorial “Blogger on Ice; Once again Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak shows zero tolerance for a secular democratic dissenter,” regarding the sentencing of Egyptian blogger Abdel Karim Soliman, provided a grossly misleading context to this incident.

First, contrary to your portrayal, freedom of speech is safeguarded in Egypt’s constitution and its legal framework. However, it is not an absolute right. It is superseded by values that Egyptian society holds sacred, including the sanctity of religion — not just Islam but all religions. A legal prohibition against defamation of religion is designed to prevent the bigotry and intolerance that Egyptian society does not accept.

Second, your suggestion that Mr. Soliman’s case was politically motivated could not be further from the truth. His sentence was the result of an impartial judicial process with due process, including the right of appeal. The assertion that the judicial process is subject to political control reflects a lack of familiarity with Egyptian law, under which government decisions regularly are overturned.

But perhaps the greatest distortion is the implication that Mr. Soliman’s case is but one example of the stifling of free speech in Egypt.

Criticism of the government, even the head of state, is now a staple diet of the media. The media sector — both print and broadcasting — has been liberalized to allow for greater independent ownership. Assertions that the government monopolizes the media cannot stand in the face of the expanding scope of freedom of expression in the print and broadcast media in Egypt.

KARIM HAGGAG

Press Attache

Embassy of Egypt

Washington

Tom Palmer responds: Pathetic Response from the Egyptian Embassy.

I hope that the Egyptian authorities will act to correct a clear mistake.

One year of Kareems sentence was for insulting the president, a little matter the irony of which Mr. Haggag does not address: jailing a college student for calling the president a dictator merely verifies the claim. One would think that the best way to rebut the claim would be to let him go. The authorities should correct that mistake immediately.

It’s not the only irony in this case, which started when Kareem was expelled from Al Azhar university for complaining that the university was suppressing thought. The university authorities not only verified the claim, but strengthened it by turning him over to the police and demanding that he be arrested.

With regard to criticism of religious extremism or of any religion per se, civilized people do not strike others or put them in cages when they don’t like what they say. The most dedicated supporters of Kareems case are devout and pious Muslims who do not fear criticism. They are secure in their dedication to their religion and respond to words with words, not with clubs. Kareem should not be punished for his online remarks with jail and beatings, especially when the original cause of Kareems prosecution was his documentation of the unpunished persecution of the christian minority in his home town of Alexandria.

I refer Mr. Haggag to the information available at www.freekareem.org. I hope that Mr. Haggag and others will visit the site for the facts and that they will encourage the authorities to correct the mistake that has been made.

Tom G. Palmer

Previously by The Washington Post:
Blogger on Ice
The ‘Crime’ Of Blogging In Egypt

Muslim blogger Yasmin Amin writes a brilliant (and I mean that in every sense) sequel to her first contribution to our campaign: The Crime of Obeying God! – Part 2.

The Crime of Obeying God! – Part 2

I received many responses and comments after publishing the first article about Kareem Amer and his blog. One of the comments inspired this article. The comment said amongst other things: “But Kareem did write some very explosive articles. In an ideal world that should not have landed him in jail, but by posting them on his blog, he took a huge risk in the current climate in Egypt, where radicalization is on the rise and the government is weak and trying to portray itself as the guardian of religion and morals. In one article he describes the University of Al Azhar – where he was enrolled as a student – as “the other face of Al Qaeda.”

Therefore today I would like to analyse this particular post, which as Kareem Amer’s title tells us was based on “Contents of a mail from another Azharite student – Al Azhar and Al Qaeda – two sides of the same coin.”

His post was about a debate on a discussion forum online between him and another fellow student of Al Azhar whom he sarcastically calls “enlightened”. The debate was about the gender segregation of students in Al Azhar, its effects on them, such as heightened sexual tension leading to violence, discrimination, hate and vindictiveness. The fellow Azharite declared him to be a non-believer or rather an apostate and threatened to kill him. Kareem Amer asks if Sheikh al-Tantawi knew that inside his own university were students adopting the very same line of thinking, which he himself condemned while performing the funeral prayers for the slain Egyptian Ambassador to Iraq. Ihab al-Sherif was killed, according to a statement released in the name of al-Qaeda in Iraq “because he was an apostate, who had betrayed his faith.” Kareem further writes that this line of thinking is not only advocated by many students, but also by a number of faculty members, especially in the departments of fiqh and sharia, using the same arguments like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Kareem concludes that when violence and threats replace logic and reasoning, a solution needs to be found very fast. For Kareem the similarity between Al Azhar and Al Qaeda comes from this fanaticism, parallels in behaviour and outlook, a comparable disregard of life and frankly very little concern towards basic kindness and compassion to other human beings.

Declaring another human to be a kafir or an apostate is an extremely serious theological charge and should never to be carried out lightly. Not only did Al Azhar itself condemn that practice, but a select group of Muslim scholars, representing all eight different mazhabs, of the Sunnis as well as the Shias, denounced the same thing at the end of the recent conference held in Oman.

Given the rather extreme reactions by the almost illiterate fanatics to these accusations (we have seen too many people killed in various Muslim countries after being accused of being apostates), it is surprising that we see this very same behaviour repeatedly coming from the eminent institution itself.

Al Azhar has not only figured as a major player, but has also continually declared many an intellectual as overstepping the lines by using examples of their art, literature, speech or other forms of expression.

In an article titled “Ban.. Ban..” published in French, Tunisian columnist Zyed Krichen condemns the censorship and denial of free speech implemented by most Arab states and Islamist groups since the introduction of printing. In the second part of his article, he lists examples of censorship and persecution in the name of Islam from various Muslim countries, including banned works and artists who have been imprisoned, flogged, and/or killed. He writes: “As for literature the list of banned books is so long that it would be easier to name the ones that are permitted and approved. This is true even in large countries like Egypt, and even for masterpieces of our cultural heritage, like the ‘One Thousand and One Nights’. Works by Abu Nawas, Bashar Ibn Bord, Al-Isfahani, Al-Madari, and hundreds of others were banned from bookstores in the 20th century.”

Sadly Al Azhar has participated in this heavily. In the Name of Islam many books have been banned. Starting in 1925 with ‘Islam and Principles of Government’ by Al Azhar’s very own Sheikh Ali Abdel Raziq, which was termed heretical, because it advocated the separation of religion and state as a principle of proper governance. Ali Abdel Raziq was then expelled from Al-Azhar University. Since then this has happened almost regularly. In 1926, Taha Hussein’s book ‘On Pre-Islamic Poetry’ was banned and he too was later expelled from the university for his rationalist interpretation of pre-Islamic literature and the Qur’an. In 1959 Naguib Mahfouz’s ‘Children of the Alley’ was condemned by Al-Azhar as blasphemous. In 1975 Al-Azhar censored books, including previously published works, by Tawfik Al Hakim and Youssef Idris. In 1981, ‘History of the Arabic Language’ by Fikri Al Aqad was also banned for claiming that certain words in the Qur’an are of Egyptian origin. Four years later in 1985, three thousand copies of ‘One Thousand and One Nights’ were destroyed and the publisher was sentenced to jail for corrupting the morals of the younger generation. In 1990, Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid proposed a reformist approach on reading and interpreting the Qur’an and later received death threats and was declared an apostate. He felt he had to flee the country and settled down in the Netherlands. In that same year Farag Foda’s book “To Be or Not to Be” was banned and he was prosecuted for offending religion.

Book banning increased and in 1992 Al-Azhar scholars demanded the banning of eight books on Islam. In the very same year Farag Foda was shot. Al Azhar’s Sheikh Muhammad al Ghazali had previously declared Foda an apostate and said that Islamic law would condone his killing. Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya accepted responsibility for the murder, saying “al-Azhar issued the sentence and we carried out the execution.” Though Al Azhar scholars later deplored the way in which Foda was murdered, they nevertheless still considered him an apostate who deserved a death sentence.

In 1994, Egyptian Nobel Laureate Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed in the neck and seriously wounded after Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, the spiritual leader of the fundamentalist group al-Gama’a al Islamiyya, issued a fatwa ‘excommunicating’ him. 196 books were to be banned on moral and religious grounds in 1997, according to a compilation by Al Azhar. However that same year saw the release of author Alaa Hamed after serving a year in prison for writing a novel that ‘insulted Islam’.

The year 2000 sees the writer Haydar Haydar being declared an apostate for writing ‘A Banquet for Seaweed’, in which a character says: ‘The divine Bedouin laws and the teaching of the Qur’ran are all shit.’ Al Azhar University called for a public burning of the book. A year later journalist Salaheddin Mohsen and female preacher Manal Manea are each sentenced to three years in prison for atheism and blasphemy. In 2004, al Azhar’s Islamic Research Council recommended banning Nawal el-Saadawi’s novel ‘The Fall of the Imam’, which had been on sale in Egypt since 1987.

Beginning with Law Number 102 of 1985, President Mubarak’s various governments gave Al Azhar’s Islamic Research Council (IRC) the power to advise on the banning or censoring of any book it judged as heretical. Minister of Culture Farouk Hosni later gave the increasingly potent body a boost when he was quoted as saying, “Al Azhar is the supreme authority; when it states an opinion, we must all fall silent.” Paradoxically Minister Farouk Hosni said recently that “the headscarf is a symbol of backwardness”, which caused him a lot of trouble in Egypt, yet he was not accused by Al Azhar of anything at all.

The IRC at Al Azhar University had the legal authority to censor, but not to confiscate any books, but unfortunately the Center was given the authority to confiscate books and audio and videotapes that they believe violate Islamic teachings by Minister of Justice Faruq Seif al-Nasr. The minister’s order led to the confiscation of hundreds of publications from bookstores.

Not only were books affected by that, but also the range of academic research was rigidly restricted. The case against Nasr Abu Zeid began as a response to his interpretation of the Qur’an and resulted in an implied decision in all Arab language and philosophy departments to ban registrations of any theses involving an interpretation of the Qur’an that might lead to the same problem. Any academic researcher thinking of a thesis on a religious subject no longer has complete freedom to decide the subject. Yet in 2006, Al Azhar not only allowed, but also granted, a doctorate to an obvious fanatic. The thesis listed who all he thought are apostates, with one of Egypt’s first female journalists, Rosa Al-Youssef, in the lead.

What I find very puzzling is that the government clamps down so very hard on Islamists and Muslim Brothers, yet allows their constant meddling in intellectual affairs. This is very strange, because it is exactly this intellectual backwardness disguised as religious zeal, which is the core challenge to President Mubarak’s ostensibly secular state. In the Human Rights Watch Report of 2005 it was noted: “The Egyptian government must create an environment where academic freedom is respected, i.e., restore autonomy to the universities and cease violating the rights of individual members of the community. Such steps would make it harder for those who challenge academic freedom to achieve their goals. The state should also actively oppose intolerant individuals or groups who carry out attacks against academic freedom. For example, it should reject calls to censor books and allow students to choose their own thesis topics. Rather than combating Islamists’ attempts to limit academic freedom, Egypt has allowed them to deprive others of their rights.”

In an explosive interview in September 2004 Nabil Abdel Fattah, a political analyst with Al Ahram Political and Strategic Studies Center wrote about how Politicians have used religion to gain legitimacy, how extremists have used it to condone murder and how religious institutions have been more than happy to play the power game to win some control of their own. Welcoming the reader to twenty five years of religious politics in Egypt, he said: “Al-Azhar has been censoring books and, worse, we’ve become accustomed to reading about one Islamist lawyer or another calling for movies to be banned because the posters were ‘suggestive’. Instead, the state over-used religion in its political war and it over-used Al-Azhar. We can’t ignore the fact that there are extremists inside Al-Azhar itself, which put additional burdens on people and society.” This was published in Egypt Today, a famous Magazine in Cairo. The words are not very much different from Kareem Amer’s conclusion now are they?

Islam is intrinsically a moderate religion. Yet, today the biggest problem it faces is the extremism of its advocates. Al Azhar, as one of the oldest universities and Islamic institutions should be the first to ensure that Muslims stay on the middle path. Islam neither teaches extremism nor rejection, neither arrogance nor ignorance. In fact, it condemns them all. My parents and teachers never taught me this. I do not recognise many aspects of this violent intolerant behaviour. What then does Islam teach? The Islam I learned teaches people to be kind and forgiving, to be open hearted and modest in behaviour. It teaches a beautiful middle way, a critical balance between two unhealthy and unworthy extremes. “And it is thus that We appointed you to be the community of the middle way, so that you might be witnesses before all mankind and the Messenger might be a witness before you.” (Qur’an 2:143)

You can read Part 1 here: The Crime of Obeying God!