VIOLATING RIGHTS

ENFORCING THE WORLD’S 

BLASPHEMY LAWS

UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

USCIRF’S MISSION

To advance international freedom of religion or belief, by 

independently assessing and unflinchingly confronting threats 

to this fundamental right.

chair Gayle Manchin

vice chair Tony Perkins

vice chair Anurima Bhargava

commissioners Gary Bauer

James W. Carr

Frederick A. Davie

Nadine Maenza

Johnnie Moore

Nury Turkel

executive director Erin D. Singshinsuk
CONTENTS

3 About The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

3 Who We Are 3 What Religious Freedom Is

5 Overview

7 Summary of Findings 

7 General

7 Blasphemy Laws

8 Criminal Blasphemy Law 

State Enforcement

8 State-Sponsored Violence

8 Human Rights Due Process Violations

9 Mob Violence or Threats of Mob Violence 

9 Social Media

11 Introduction

11 Definition of State Enforcement

13 Study Design & Methodology 

13 Study Design

17 Findings

17 Blasphemy Crimes Enforcement: 

Global Trends

19 Countries with the Highest Reported 

Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement

21 Other Laws Employed to 

Enforce Blasphemy Crimes

23 Accused Persons

25 Extrajudicial State Violence 

against Accused Blasphemers

30 Official State Religions and Criminal 

Blasphemy Enforcement

31 Blasphemy and Social Media

39 Limitations

39 Study and Research Challenges

41 Country-Specific Challenges

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 1
43 Conclusion

45 About the Authors 

47 About The Benjamin B. Ferencz Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic 

49 Acknowledgments

51 Annex 1: Changes in Blasphemy Laws Since 2014

55 Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

93 Annex 3: Research Questions

2 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ABOUT THE UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON 

INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

WHO WE ARE

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom 

(USCIRF) is an independent, bipartisan U.S. federal 

government commission created by the 1998 International 

Religious Freedom Act (IRFA). USCIRF uses international 

standards to monitor violations of religious freedom or belief 

abroad and makes policy recommendations to the President, 

the Secretary of State, and Congress. USCIRF Commissioners 

are appointed by the President and Congressional leaders of 

both political parties. The Commission’s work is supported 

by a professional, nonpartisan staff of regional subject matter 

experts. USCIRF is separate from the State Department, 

although the Department’s Ambassador-at-Large for 

International Religious Freedom is a non-voting, ex officio 

Commissioner.

WHAT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS

Inherent in religious freedom is the right to believe or not 

believe as one’s conscience leads, and to live out one’s beliefs 

openly, peacefully, and without fear. Freedom of religion 

or belief is an expansive right that includes the freedoms of 

thought, conscience, expression, association, and assembly. 

While religious freedom is America’s first freedom, it also is a 

core human right that international law and treaty recognize; 

a necessary component of U.S. foreign policy and America’s 

commitment to defending democracy and freedom globally; 

and a vital element of national security, critical to ensuring a 

more peaceful, prosperous, and stable world.

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 3
This page intentionally left blank.

4 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
OVERVIEW

In this report, the authors examine and compare state implementation and enforcement of criminal laws 

prohibiting blasphemy (“blasphemy laws”) worldwide over the five-year period between January 2014 and 

December 2018. The criminal cases this study analyzes represent states’ enforcement of laws that sanction 

the expression of opinions or actions deemed “blasphemous,” or counter to majority views or religious 

belief systems. Many such laws impose serious penalties, including prison, forced labor, or death, upon 

those convicted. 

1 Joelle Fiss & Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws 2 (2017).

2 For example, in Pakistan individuals often take justice into their own hands and murder alleged blasphemers. See Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger 

Violence, Free Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistans-blasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/ (last visited Sept. 21, 2020).

Countries throughout the world have and continue to 

enforce criminal blasphemy laws, often justifying them as 

necessary to promote intergroup religious harmony.1 In some 

states, however, civilians enforce blasphemy prohibitions 

extrajudicially, committing acts of violence in the name 

of protecting God, religion, and “the sacred.”2 Analyzing 

the ways in which states and private, non-state actors 

enforce these laws may assist the public policy community 

in developing clear, tailored recommendations for areas 

of criminal legal reform, especially in states with vague 

laws, harsh penalties, and high levels of enforcement. An 

analysis of criminal blasphemy cases reported in the news 

and adjudicated in courts identifies the contexts in which 

blasphemy laws may increase the risk of human rights abuses, 

through state acts or omissions, indicating the places and 

ways in which targeted law reform could lower that risk. 

Part I is an introduction, defining blasphemy and criminal 

blasphemy law enforcement for the purposes of this 

study. It also explores the risks of potential abuse in the 

implementation and enforcement of these laws. 

Part II describes the study’s methodology, including the 

systematic collection of cases. It also explains the creation 

of indicators and questions to measure blasphemy law 

enforcement, the coding and decision-making process, and 

the data analysis. 

Part III examines the study results and highlights select 

findings within the political, cultural, and legal contexts that 

shape how criminal blasphemy laws are implemented and 

enforced globally. 

Part IV concludes the study, noting some of the study’s 

limitations, while also providing a template for future studies 

of blasphemy laws and enforcement. 

The report also includes three annexes. Annex 1 reviews 

recent legislative changes to criminal blasphemy provisions, 

including reforms and repeals in countries globally since 

2014. Annex 2 compiles the blasphemy laws with criminal 

sanctions in force as of 2020. Finally, Annex 3 includes the 

study tool with the questions/indicators developed to measure 

enforcement across country contexts.

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 5
This page intentionally left blank.

6 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 

GENERAL

• Criminal blasphemy cases often occur in the context of 

broader religious freedom violations, such as bombings 

and assaults on places of worship,1 desecration of religious 

sites or symbols,2 hate crimes against individuals of a 

minority belief group,3 and other types of physical assaults, 

verbal attacks, or harassment.4

• States also criminalize blasphemous acts through the 

enforcement of other criminal laws, such as apostasy 

laws, anti-conversion laws, incitement to religious hatred 

laws (also often referred to as “hate speech” laws), antiextremism laws, and even anti-witchcraft laws.

• Mob activity, threats, and/or violence around blasphemy 

allegations occur both at times when the state enforces the law 

as well as when the state does not act. In some cases, mobs are 

stirred by non-state actor groups or individuals. In other cases, 

public officials tolerate civil unrest. In both cases, mobs can 

provoke violence, property destruction, injuries and death,

either through intentional targeting or against bystanders.

BLASPHEMY LAWS

• New or amended blasphemy laws have entered into 

force in Kazakhstan (2014), Nepal (2017), Oman (2018), 

Mauritania (2018), Morocco (2018), and Brunei (2019).5 In 

addition, Germany’s blasphemy provision was referenced in 

a new German technology law (2018).

• A series of repeals have occurred in Iceland (2015),6

Norway (2015),7 a province of France (Alsace-Moselle) 

(2016),8 Malta (2016),9 Denmark (2017),10 Ireland (2018),11

Canada (2018),12 New Zealand (2019),13 Greece (2019),14 and 

Scotland (2020).15

• Despite numerous blasphemy law repeals since 2017, 

researchers identified 13 additional criminal blasphemy law 

provisions that had not been included in Respecting Rights? 

Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws. Not counting 

repealed laws, researchers identified 84 countries across 

the globe with criminal blasphemy laws on the books as of 

2020.16 (See the following map and Annex 2.) 

84 Countries with Criminal Blasphemy Laws on the Books

ANDORRA

USA

USA

CANADA

MEXICO

GREENLAND

CHINA

MONGOLIA

ARGENTINA

SOUTH

AFRICA

JAPAN

CUBA

VENEZUELA

PERU

NIGER

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

MALI

CONGO

CHILE

CHAD

ECUADOR

NAMIBIA

ANGOLA

NICARAGUA

MADAGASCAR

VIETNAM

FRANCE

IRELAND

ROMANIA

UNITED

KINGDOM

GREECE

NORWAY

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS

QUEEN ELISABETH ISLANDS

PUERTO RICO

HAITI

DOMINICAN

REPUBLIC

COSTA RICA

PANAMA

HONDURAS

BELIZE

EL SALVADOR

GUATEMALA

FRENCH 

GUIANA

PARAGUAY

URUGUAY

MALVINAS

GALAPAGOS

ISLANDS

ICELAND

MALTA

PORTUGAL SARDINIA

 SICILY 

DENMARK

BELGIUM

NETH.

SWEDEN

BELARUS

CZECH REP.

AUSTRIA

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY

CROATIA

SERBIA

BULGARIA

MACEDONIA

ESTONIA

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

GEORGIA

AZERBAIJAN

BHUTAN

NORTH

KOREA

SOUTH

KOREA

LAOS

CAMBODIA

NEW

ZEALAND

FUJI

WESTER

SAHARA

SENEGAL

GUINEA

GUINEA-BISSAU

SIERRA

LEONE

LIBERIA

COTE

D’IVOIRE

BURKINA

FASO

GHANA

BENIN

TOGO

CENTRAL

AFRICAN REP.

GABON

REP. OF THE

CONGO

MOZAMBIQUE

BURUNDI

UGANDA

DJIBUTI

ARMENIA

ALBANIA

RUSSIA

INDIA

AUSTRALIA

OMAN

NEPAL

EGYPT

LIBYA

TUNISIA

SUDAN

ALGERIA

MAURITANIA

NIGERIA

IRAN

KUWAIT

BAHRAIN

UNITED ARAB

EMIRATES

PAKISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

KAZAKHSTAN

GERMANY POLAND

SPAIN

INDONESIA

YEMEN

SAUDI

ARABIA

JORDAN

TURKEY

ITALY

BANGLADESH

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE

SRI LANKA

LEBANON

BURMA

IRAQ

MALDIVES

THAILAND

KYRGYZSTAN

MALAWI

ZAMBIA

PHILIPPINES

ZIMBABWE

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

BOTSWANA

BRAZIL

BRUNEI

CAMEROON

CAPE VERDE

COMOROS

MAURITIUS

CYPRUS

ERITREA

ETHIOPIA

FINLAND

GRENADA GAMBIA

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

GUYANA SURINAME

ISRAEL

JAMAICA

KENYA

LIECHTENSTEIN

SAN MARINO

MONTENEGRO

MOLDOVA

NORTHERN IRELAND

MOROCCO

PAPUA

NEW GUINEA

QATAR

RWANDA

SAINT LUCIA

SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

SCOTLAND

SEYCHELLES

SOMALIA

SOUTH 

SUDAN

SWITZ

SYRIA

TAJIKISTAN

TANZANIA

TURKMENISTAN

UKRAINE

UZBEKISTAN

VANUATU

 Gray: Countries without criminal blasphemy laws

 Green: Countries with criminal blasphemy laws, but with no reported cases

 Blue: Countries with criminal blasphemy laws and reported cases

Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burma, Cameroon, Cape 

Verde, Comoros, Cyprus, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Grenada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, 

Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Moldova, 

Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Rwanda, Russia, San Marino, Saudi 

Arabia, Seychelles, Singapore, Somalia, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Switzerland, 

Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Yemen, 

Zambia, Zimbabwe

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 7
• Mauritania has joined Brunei, Iran, and Pakistan as 

the countries in the world with the death penalty as 

punishment for insult to religion.

17

CRIMINAL BLASPHEMY LAW STATE ENFORCEMENT

• In nearly half (41, or 49%) of the 84 countries with 

criminal blasphemy laws on the books, researchers found 

cases of state enforcement against alleged blasphemers 

during the five-year period reviewed (2014–2018).

Researchers identified 674 cases of state criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement across those 41 countries.

• In 43, or 51%, of these 84 countries, researchers did not 

find a single case of enforcement of criminal blasphemy 

laws or enforcement against blasphemous conduct, 

suggesting that enforcement is extremely low—if it exists at 

all—in these contexts.

• Ten (10) countries account for more than four-fifths 

(81%) of all reported cases of state criminal blasphemy 

enforcement. From January 2014 through December 2018, 

the top 10 countries that have enforced blasphemy (or 

other) laws against alleged blasphemers most frequently are: 

Pakistan (184), Iran (96), Russia (58), India (51), Egypt (44), 

Indonesia (39), Yemen (24), Bangladesh (19), Saudi Arabia 

(16), and Kuwait (15). Of these states, 70% declare Islam the 

official state religion.

18

• The three (3) countries without an official state religion 

that have the highest state enforcement of blasphemy 

laws are Russia, India, and Indonesia. In these states, 

the governments favor certain religions (Christianity for 

Russia, Hinduism for India, and six recognized faiths for 

Indonesia).19

• Together, the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions 

accounted for 84% of the world’s enforcement of blasphemy 

(or other) laws from January 2014 through December 2018. 

• Although Latin American and Caribbean countries 

have criminal blasphemy laws on the books, researchers 

found no reported cases of state enforcement of criminal 

blasphemy (or other) laws in Latin America and the 

Caribbean from January 2014 through December 2018.

• In 66% of cases of enforcement, reports identified the law 

that state officials applied to enforce against blasphemous 

acts. Where information was available, 81% of those cases 

identified a blasphemy law. Nineteen percent (19%) of 

those cases used another criminal law to enforce against 

blasphemous conduct.

• Where reported, states enforced criminal blasphemy 

laws against men more frequently than against women.

Of the 674 reported cases found, 482 (71%) indicated the 

gender of the accused blasphemers. In an overwhelming 

majority—406 of those 482 cases, or 84%—the state accused 

men of criminal blasphemy, while in only 76 cases, or 16%, 

the state accused women. 

• In just over half (51%) of cases found, news reports 

identified the religion or belief of the accused. Of those 

cases, Muslims accounted for more than half (56%) of the 

persons arrested, prosecuted, and/or punished for alleged 

blasphemy crimes. Of accused Muslims, Shia were the 

largest Muslim group identified (51%), followed by Sunni 

(8%), Gafatar (6%), Tijaniyya (5%), Ahmadi (5%), and 

Salafists (2%). Christians accounted for 25% of accused 

persons. Other groups frequently targeted for criminal 

blasphemy law enforcement, where identified, included: 

Atheists (7%), Baha’is (7%), and Hindus (3%).

• Professions accused of blasphemy most frequently reported 

are lawyers; academics; media professionals; religious 

figures; artists; political actors, including government 

officials; and human rights activists or political dissidents. 

• Although not enough data exist to show trends, of the 

674 cases of criminal blasphemy enforcement around the 

globe during the study period, 11 accused persons were 

reported to have had physical or mental disabilities, 

10 were illiterate, and 18 were reported to have converted. 

The 18 conversion cases were charged with blasphemy 

crimes in Yemen, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, and

Sri Lanka. 

STATE-SPONSORED VIOLENCE

• Researchers noted incidents in which state officials 

allegedly committed acts of violence, including torture or 

cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment, 

against accused blasphemers in Pakistan, Iran, Algeria,

and Egypt.

• In addition to torture, state officials reportedly subjected 

accused individuals to cruel, inhuman, and degrading 

treatment while in custody in Iran, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, 

Oman, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Sri Lanka.

HUMAN RIGHTS DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS

• In addition to state-sponsored violence against alleged 

blasphemers, researchers found several criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement cases with reported state due process 

violations. At least one due process violation was reported 

in each of the following countries: Bangladesh, Egypt, 

India, Iran, Mauritania, Oman, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi 

Arabia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Yemen.

Summary of Findings 

8 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
MOB VIOLENCE OR THREATS OF MOB VIOLENCE 

• Of the 674 cases of state enforcement, researchers found 78 

cases in which mob activity, threats, and/or violence

around blasphemy allegations coincided with state

enforcement of blasphemy laws. Such cases occurred in

Pakistan, Egypt, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Jordan,

Russia, Algeria, Malaysia, Kuwait, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, 

and Sudan.

• Researchers also identified 58 incidents when mob activity, 

mob violence, and/or threats of violence occurred around 

rumors or allegations of blasphemy, without state 

enforcement of the criminal blasphemy law. These

incidences were reported in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria,

Egypt, Russia, Afghanistan, India, Lebanon, and Maldives.

• Four (4) countries—Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria and

Egypt—account for nearly 80% of all reported incidents of

mob activity, mob violence, and/or threats of violence, with

or without state blasphemy or other law enforcement.

SOCIAL MEDIA

• More than one-quarter (27%) of reported cases implicated

alleged blasphemous speech posted on social media

platforms.

• The ten (10) countries with the highest number of reported

cases implicating social media during the study period

were: Russia, Iran, Egypt, India, Pakistan, Indonesia,

Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Bahrain.

• Of social media-related cases, the platforms most implicated

are Facebook (47%), followed by Twitter, Vkontakte,

YouTube, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Telegram.

Summary of Findings 

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 9
NOTES

1 Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Factsheet: 

Protecting Places of Worship and Holy Sites 1 (2019), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/

default/files/2019%20Protecting%20Places%20of%20Worship%20and%20Holy%20

Sites%20Factsheet.pdf (last visited Sept. 20, 2020).

2 See, e.g., Ayaz Gul, Mob Vandalizes Hindu Temples in Pakistan over Blasphemy 

Charges, Voice of America (Sept. 15, 2019), https://www.voanews.com/south-centralasia/mob-vandalizes-hindu-temples-pakistan-over-blasphemy-charges (last visited 

Sept. 20, 2020). See also U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 

The Destruction of Cultural and Religious Sites: A Violation of Human Rights, Sept. 

24, 2012, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DestructionShrines.aspx (last 

visited Sept. 20, 2020).

3 In 2015 in Egypt, there were attacks on Coptic property after individuals in the 

community were accused of blasphemy. See EIPR Condemns Five-Year Prison Sentence 

for Children on Blasphemy Charges: 12 Defendants Convicted in 9 Cases Since January 

2015; 11 Cases Pending before Courts and More Cases Pending before Disciplinary 

Bodies, Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (Feb. 25, 2016), https://eipr.org/en/

press/2016/02/eipr-condemns-five-year-prison-sentence-children-blasphemy-charges-12-

defendants (last visited Sept. 20, 2020).

4 In Egypt, for example, atheists Ahmed Harqan and his wife Nada Mandour were 

chased by a mob for their atheism. They were arrested, and following their release, 

they continued to face threats. See, e.g., Heather Murdock, Defying Taboo, Middle East 

Atheists Launch TV Channel, Voice of America (April 30, 2015), https://www.voanews.

com/middle-east/defying-taboo-middle-east-atheists-launch-tv-channel (last visited 

Sept. 20, 2020).

5 The authors also updated the blasphemy laws mentioned in Respecting Rights? 

Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws to their most recent versions. Though some 

criminal blasphemy laws had been amended prior to 2017, their more recent versions 

had not been included in Respecting Rights. That is the case for Andorra, Brunei, Iran, 

Italy, Kazakhstan, Nepal, and the United Arab Emirates. The researchers included 

these updated laws in Annex 2.

6 Iceland Makes Blasphemy Legal, BBC News (July 3, 2015), https://www.bbc.com/news/

world-europe-33378778. 

7 Eugene Volokh, Norway Repeals Blasphemy Law, In Response to Charlie Hebdo 

Murders, Washington Post (May 9, 2015), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/

volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/08/norway-repeals-blasphemy-law-in-response-tocharlie-hebdo-murders/. 

8 Blasphemy Law Abolished in Alsace-Moselle Region of France, End Blasphemy Laws 

(Oct. 31, 2016), https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/2016/10/blasphemy-law-abolished-inalsace-moselle-region-of-france/. 

9 Repealing Blasphemy Law a Victory for Freedom of Speech, Says Humanist Association, 

Times of Malta (Jul. 14, 2016), https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/repealingblasphemy-law-a-victory-for-freedom-of-speech-says-humanist.618859. 

10 Denmark Scraps 334-year-old Blasphemy Laws, Guardian (June 2, 2017), https://www.

theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/02/denmark-scraps-334-year-old-blasphemy-law. 

11 Emma Graham-Harrison, Ireland Votes to Oust ‘Medieval’ Blasphemy Law, Guardian 

(Oct. 27, 2018), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/27/ireland-votes-to-oustblasphemy-ban-from-constitution. 

12 Canada Repeals Blasphemy Law, British Columbia Humanist Association (Dec. 11, 

2018), https://www.bchumanist.ca/canada_repeals_blasphemy_law. 

13 Blasphemous Libel Law Repealed, Beehive.govt.nz (Mar. 5, 2019), https://www.beehive.

govt.nz/release/blasphemous-libel-law-repealed. 

14 Blasphemy Law to Be Abolished in Greece under New Criminal Code, Humanists U.K. 

(June 17, 2019), https://humanism.org.uk/2019/06/17/blasphemy-to-be-abolished-ingreece-under-new-criminal-code/. 

15 Fraser Sutherland. Humanist Society Campaign Success as Government Confirm the 

Scrapping of Blasphemy Law, Humanist Society of Scotland (Apr. 2020), https://www.

humanism.scot/what-we-do/news/humanist-society-campaign-success-as-governmentconfirm-the-scrapping-of-blasphemy-law/.

16 Annex 2 includes countries and laws originally identified by the U.S. Commission 

on International Religious Freedom in their 2017 report entitled Respecting Rights? 

Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, plus additional countries identified since 

2017 as having blasphemy laws. If, however, a previously identified blasphemy law has 

been repealed, researchers did not evaluate enforcement of that law or include it in 

Annex 2.

17 See Annex 2, Brunei Syariah Penal Code, Articles 110-111; Iran Penal Code, Article 

262; Pakistan Penal Code, Article 295 C. In addition, Saudi Arabia enforces unwritten 

Shari’a laws, and punishments may include the death. See Annex 2, Saudi Arabia. 

18 These states are Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, Egypt, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. 

19 This research is based on the categorization of the Pew Research Center. See Appendix 

A: Relationships between Religion and Government by Country, PEW Research Center 

(2015), https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2017/09/29162845/

Appendix-A.pdf. As of 2015, the Pew Research Center classified relationships 

between religion and government into several categories by country: 1. Official state 

religion (43 states); 2. Preferred or favored state religions (40 states); 3. No official or 

preferred religion (106 states); 4. Hostile relationship with religious institutions (10 

states). Id. Indonesia recognizes Islam, Christianity (Protestantism, under the label 

of “Kristen,” and Roman Catholicism are treated separately), Hinduism, Buddhism,

and Confucianism. See, e.g., Paul Marshall, The Ambiguities of Religious Freedom in 

Indonesia, 16 Rev. Faith & Int’l Affairs 85–96 (2018).

Summary of Findings 

10 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
INTRODUCTION

Blasphemy is the “act of expressing contempt or a lack of reverence for God or sacred things.”1 For the 

purposes of this study, laws prohibiting blasphemy (“blasphemy laws”) include provisions of country laws 

that criminally sanction defamation of religion and seek to punish individuals for allegedly offending, 

insulting, or denigrating religious doctrines, deities, symbols, or “the sacred,” and for wounding or 

insulting religious feelings.2 Blasphemy laws are located throughout states’ legal texts, including inter alia 

constitutions, criminal codes, and media laws.3

Blasphemy laws generally are deemed to be inconsistent 

with international human rights standards, violating 

international standards of the rights to freedom of expression 

(FoE) and freedom of religion or belief (FoRB). The authors’ 

previous study for the U.S. Commission on International 

Religious Freedom (USCIRF), the 2017 report Respecting 

Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, found that 

blasphemy laws existed in at least 71 countries globally4

and analyzed these laws’ texts against international human 

rights principles.5 That report’s coding and evaluation 

tool confirmed that all blasphemy laws analyzed deviated 

from one or more internationally recognized human rights 

principles.6 Most laws, even those with criminal sanctions, 

were vaguely worded, did not specify intent, and carried 

unduly harsh penalties for violators.7 That innovative project 

contributed to advocacy efforts to confront the risks of 

abuse of such laws. Indeed, it has served as an important 

tool for human rights defenders, governments, civil society, 

academics, social media providers, and legal experts.8

The severity of a blasphemy law on paper, however, tells 

only half of the story. Whether and how states implement 

and enforce such laws are of equal importance to assessing 

the impact of blasphemy laws on FoE and FoRB rights. This 

question was not answered in the 2017 report. 

In order to capture the full extent of the human rights 

abuses related to blasphemy laws and identify patterns 

connected with their implementation, this study builds 

upon the previous report by mapping publicly reported 

criminal blasphemy cases over the five-year period from 

January 2014 through December 2018. Of the 84 countries 

we identified in the world with criminal blasphemy laws, 

researchers found 674 cases of state criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement and 58 additional incidents of mob violence or 

threats of mob violence for a total of 732 cases in 41 countries. 

We also developed key indicators to understand the context 

surrounding their implementation and enforcement. This 

report identifies factors and trends in enforcement of criminal 

blasphemy laws to support future advocacy and policy 

analysis related to blasphemy law reform.

The authors chose a conservative approach to define, identify, 

and examine cases of blasphemy enforcement, focusing on 

publicly reported legal cases. The authors also included, but 

analyzed separately, incidents of mob violence and threats of 

mob violence to understand the way in which enforcement 

happens through private action or state omission. Aside from 

these issues, blasphemy is also implicated in political protests, 

individual complaints, public condemnations of allegedly 

blasphemous speech, censoring publications of personalities 

(e.g., authors, artists, journalists) accused of blasphemy, and 

the least traceable element of self-censorship, but these were 

not the focus of this study.

DEFINITION OF STATE ENFORCEMENT

For the purposes of this study, state enforcement of criminal 

blasphemy laws is defined as any affirmative action initiated 

by government officials, including, but not limited to, law 

enforcement officers (e.g., police, security agents, prison 

officials) or judicial authorities (e.g., prosecutors, judges) 

seeking to compel compliance with laws and regulations 

targeting blasphemous speech or conduct. The study defines 

“affirmative action” as any reported action by officials 

that could have resulted in criminal sanctions regardless 

of whether it led to an investigation, arrest, prosecution, 

and/or punishment of the alleged blasphemer. Preliminary 

investigations and/or dropped charges also are considered 

affirmative state actions. Thus, a “case” of blasphemy law 

enforcement corresponds to government officials’ efforts 

directed against an individual alleged to have engaged in 

blasphemous speech or conduct and may or may not include 

a state-led legal criminal action against a defendant in a 

court of law. 

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 11
For the data collection phase of this study, the researchers identified three categories that constituted a “case” of state criminal 

blasphemy law enforcement. Incidents that fell into one of these three categories were recorded as “cases of criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement.” The following box describes these three categories:

Categories of State Enforcement Cases Explained

Category 1: Government officials act to enforce one or more of the criminal blasphemy laws identified (and included in 

Annex 2). Government officials include, but are not limited to, law enforcement officers (e.g., police, security agents, prison 

officials) or judicial authorities (e.g., prosecutors, judges). 

Category 2: Government officials act to enforce what is deemed blasphemous speech or conduct using other penal code 

provisions not identified as traditional blasphemy laws by the researchers (and therefore not included in Annex 2). Examples 

of laws that can be used to target allegedly blasphemous conduct include, but are not limited to: telecommunications9 and 

press laws,10 anti-extremism laws,11 incitement to hatred laws,12 anti-conversion laws,13 and apostasy laws.14 In order to 

document these incidents as Category 2 “cases of enforcement,” researchers examined the nature of the underlying act(s) to 

determine whether the act was blasphemous according to the study’s definition of blasphemy.15

Category 3: Government officials or other state employees retaliate against an individual accused of engaging in blasphemous 

conduct through perpetrating illegal, extrajudicial punitive measures (e.g., extrajudicial killings,16 enforced disappearances,17

acts of torture) against the alleged blasphemer. This category of state enforcement is usually accompanied by physical violence 

that results in the death or serious injury of the accused. These cases are less frequent but are common enough to justify their 

inclusion as a separate category. 

NOTES

1 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Policy Brief, Prisoners of Belief: 

Individuals Jailed Under Blasphemy Laws 1 (2014).

2 This definition is the same definition the authors used in the first study looking at the 

content of the laws. U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting 

Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws 5 (2017). 

3 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 5 (2017). 

4 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 3 (2017).

5 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 8 (2017).

6 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 1 (2017). The indicators developed included the 

following: freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of religion or belief, vagueness 

of the law, severity of the penalty, discrimination against groups, state religion 

protections, speech and forum limitations, and hierarchy of the law.

7 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 1 (2017).

8 Unique in scope, size, and ambition, the compilation and evaluation of antiblasphemy laws worldwide was made possible through the authors’ partnership with 

USCIRF and built on their previous research in partnership with Human Rights First. 

9 See, e.g., UAE Federal Law, Law No 2 of 2015 on Preventing Discrimination and 

Hatred (the “Law”).

10 See, e.g., Article 45 Law on Mass Media, 2009 (Afghanistan), https://www.refworld.

org/docid/5ddce5604.html (last visited Sept. 1, 2020); Iran Press Law, http://www.

parstimes.com/law/press_law.html (last visited Oct. 29, 2020); Douglas Griffin, 

Introduction to News Media Law and Policy in Jordan at 35, http://global.asc.upenn.

edu/fileLibrary/PDFs/JMSPprimer_english.pdf (last visited April 22, 2013).

11 See Annex 2, Russia, Article 282 of Criminal Code. 

12 See Annex 2, Uzbekistan, Article 156 of Criminal Code. 

13 See Annex 2, Section 158 of Nepal’s Criminal Code, http://www.moljpa.gov.np/en/

wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Penal-Code-English-Revised-1.pdf.

14 See Annex 2, Mauritania, Article 306 of Criminal Code. 

15 See Introduction, supra. In some situations, it proved difficult to determine the law 

being used because secondary sources did not include that information. In such cases, 

the researcher assessed the nature of the underlying act and made an independent 

determination as to whether it was blasphemous conduct or not. If the researcher 

determined the nature of the act to be blasphemous, the incident was recorded as a 

case of state enforcement of a blasphemy prohibition. See Part V. Limitations, infra. 

16 For example, Pakistani Policeman Kills Blasphemy Suspect with Axe, Bangkok Post 

(Nov. 6, 2014), https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/441830/pakistani-policeman-killsblasphemy-suspect-with-axe. 

17 For example, Iran: Arrest Followed by an Enforced Disappearance of Poet, PEN 

America (Mar. 29, 2018), https://pen.org/rapid-action/iran-arrest-followed-enforceddisappearance-poet/. 

Introduction

12 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
STUDY DESIGN & METHODOLOGY 

STUDY DESIGN

Blasphemy Laws Included

Researchers identified criminal blasphemy law provisions 

in force from January 2014 through December 2018 in 

84 countries across the globe.1 (See Annex 2.) This number 

does not include the nine (9) countries that have repealed 

their national blasphemy prohibitions since 2015. The 

collection of laws focuses on provisions that impose criminal 

sanctions, such as fines or imprisonment, including 

administrative offenses when such laws carry criminal 

sanctions.2 Laws, such as media laws containing language that 

sanctions blasphemy, were excluded when these laws did not 

include criminal penalties.3

As just discussed, blasphemy laws were distinguished from 

other criminal prohibitions (e.g., anti-conversion, apostasy, 

incitement to hatred, anti-extremism, destruction of religious 

symbols, and witchcraft laws).4 To determine whether the law 

was a “blasphemy law” according to this study’s definition 

of blasphemy, researchers engaged in textual analysis. While 

researchers distinguished between blasphemy laws and other 

criminal prohibitions, in some of the cases found during the 

research process reports suggested that other criminal laws 

were also used to prosecute blasphemy allegations. Given this 

overlap, the study team decided to include cases that involved 

blasphemy but were not charged under a state’s blasphemy 

law. This required the researchers to make judgment calls 

based on contextual and fact-based analyses. 

Moreover, researchers met to discuss the cases, endeavoring 

to disentangle state criminal blasphemy enforcement from 

broader violations of freedom of religion or belief, which 

were not included as cases of enforcement. For example, in 

2016 in Turkey, researchers did not find reports of threats of 

violence against Jews, Alevi and Sunni Muslims, as well as 

vandalism to Protestant, Catholic, and Alevi places of worship 

to be linked to blasphemy allegations or enforcement.5

Furthermore, while state prohibitions of religious minorities, 

such as a 2017 ban on Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia, are 

problematic, such state enforcement is not based in blasphemy 

allegations.6 Finally, incidents of violence linked to religious 

discrimination, such as suicide bombings in three churches 

in Surabaya, Indonesia in 2018, did not occur as a result of 

blasphemy allegations.7

Regional Distribution

The researchers grouped countries and territories by regions 

based upon the Pew Research Center’s global classification.8

Furthermore, autonomous regions and local governments 

within states were assessed as an integral part of the state. 

Thus, the study includes regional and local governments’ 

enforcement of criminal blasphemy laws in addition to 

national criminal law enforcement.9

Study Period

The research undertaken in this study represents a “snapshot 

in time” to capture and understand national, regional, and 

global trends, recording cases of state criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement globally. Researchers recorded all official 

government actions reported to compel compliance with 

or enforce criminal blasphemy laws in each country from 

January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2018. When the 

researchers did not have the exact date of the inciting 

incident, they used the date as reported in the media or 

another reliable information source. 

If the initial incident or state action occurred prior to January 

1, 2014, an instance of enforcement was still recorded if 

the state continued to enforce the criminal blasphemy law 

against the individual during the study period. For example, 

an individual who was arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced 

to prison on blasphemy charges in 2013, but was still in 

prison on January 1, 2014, would be logged as a case of state 

enforcement in the mapping database. An individual who was 

arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to prison on blasphemy 

charges in 2018 but released on January 1, 2019 also would be 

logged as a case of state enforcement in the mapping database. 

If no reliable source reported that the individual was released, 

or the case closed, researchers recorded the case as “ongoing.”

In some instances, news sources reported conflicting dates of 

state enforcement acts. In these cases, researchers chose the 

year from the source or sources deemed most reliable. State 

enforcement may have extended beyond the study period, but 

at least one act of enforcement (i.e., arrest, trial, conviction, 

sentencing, etc.) occurred between January 2014 and 

December 2018.

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 13
Cases of State Enforcement

Researchers recorded incidents as cases of state enforcement 

when incidents fell into one of three categories, explained 

supra, in Part I: (1) actions by government officials10 to enforce 

a state’s criminal blasphemy laws; (2) actions by government 

officials to enforce other laws against allegedly blasphemous 

conduct; and (3) retaliation by government officials against 

alleged blasphemers by perpetrating extrajudicial, punitive 

measures against them. 

Mob Violence or Threats of Violence 

Blasphemy allegations and enforcement often are coupled 

with extrajudicial violence, imminent threats to violence 

or even intimidation tactics, including mob presence. 

In addition to recording state criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement, researchers recorded incidents in which 

perpetrators committed acts of violence and/or threatened 

violence: (1) against the alleged blasphemer;11 (2) against 

individuals associated with the alleged blasphemer (i.e.,

lawyers, family members, or members of the same religious 

or belief community);12 or (3) in a generalized manner 

in contexts arising from rumors or threats linked to the 

blasphemy allegations. Researchers excluded blasphemyrelated political protests.13

Imminent threats, mob activity, and violence at the hands 

of private, non-state actors was a recurring phenomenon, 

even when states did not enforce their criminal blasphemy 

laws. Like state enforcement, extrajudicial violence aimed at 

upholding blasphemy laws legitimizes the laws. Consequently, 

private, non-state actor violence, and state acquiescence to 

such violence, is integral to understanding the consequences 

of criminal blasphemy laws in country-specific contexts.

Researchers struggled to be consistent in tracking mob 

intimidation and violence. For the sake of clarity and 

reliability, the following decisions were made. To capture 

the sense of insecurity caused by mobs and threats of 

mob violence, researchers recorded “mob presence” in the 

mapping database’s category of mob violence. Researchers 

also recorded the types of mob violence linked to blasphemy 

allegations when possible. If there was mob violence or the 

threat of mob violence, the researchers sought to determine 

whether people were injured and/or killed or if any property 

(e.g., private homes, places of worship) was destroyed. If the 

type of mob activity was not coded in the database, that could 

signify that either the type of mob activity was not recorded 

in reliable sources or there was no mob activity but merely 

mob presence. 

In contrast to the methodology employed in tracking 

incidents of state enforcement, which recorded each 

individual accused of blasphemy as a separate case, 

researchers did not code individual victims of mob violence as 

separate cases, given the difficulty of determining the precise 

number killed or injured by violent crowds. Depending 

on press reports covering an event, numbers could vary 

significantly. Similarly, researchers did not record the number 

of individuals killed or injured in protests,14 including those 

organized by Islamist groups or political parties, against 

blasphemy, even if they attracted mobilized crowds.15 While 

such crowds and protests frequently triggered threats of 

violence or actual mob violence against an alleged blasphemer 

or associated individuals or groups, it was often difficult 

to discern the number of casualties or deaths during these 

events. Therefore, researchers recorded deaths and casualties 

where they were reported to the best of their abilities. 

Nevertheless, in instances of mob violence, their tracking 

of casualties may not always fully capture the destruction 

that occurred.

Mapping Database

Researchers developed a set of indicators and methodology 

for systematic data collection and analysis. For each country 

identified as having a criminal blasphemy law in force during 

the study period, researchers gathered information on the 

country’s legal system using databases such as Globalex16 and 

World LII.17 Next, in order to understand general contexts, 

trends, and high-profile cases of criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement in each country, researchers examined academic 

scholarship and civil society reports related to blasphemy in 

that state.

To identify specific cases of criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement, researchers engaged in several steps. First, 

researchers conducted an initial “Google sweep,” searching 

multiple key terms through phrase searching,18 Boolean 

searching,19 and, where available, truncation searching20 on 

Google. Researchers examined the names of statutes and 

penal code provisions criminalizing blasphemy, as well as 

specific phrases within the blasphemy laws themselves that 

indicate language states use to define blasphemy.21 After 

the initial search, researchers conducted a more targeted 

search, examining reports from reputable organizations 

and databases of national and local news sources to identify 

incidents of blasphemy and criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement. The goal was to locate primary law sources 

(court cases). Where primary documents were found or 

provided, they were analyzed and downloaded. However, 

access to primary sources was difficult in nearly every 

country context.22 Thus, collecting and analyzing secondary 

sources (i.e., newspaper, journal, and other media reports) 

became a critical source of information.23 Secondary sources 

were downloaded and Permalinked24 to ensure continued 

access to the data. 

Study Design & Methodology 

14 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Researchers identified and examined indicators that cover 

a range of information relevant to state criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement across several categories: (1) general 

information; (2) identity information of the person accused of 

blasphemy; (3) religious or belief identity information of the 

person accused of blasphemy; (4) the state and religions; (5) 

inciting incident facts; (6) mob presence, mob activity, mob 

violence, and/or threats of violence; (7) use of social media; 

(8) executive enforcement actions; (9) judicial enforcement 

actions; (10) penalties; and (11) identity information of the 

person who accused an individual of blasphemous speech. 

In addition, notes were included on specifics of each case 

to ensure that all relevant information was captured for the 

sake of data analysis and interpretation. For details on the 

questions examined, see Annex 3.

Notes and Fact-Checking

Finally, researchers included extensive notes for any and all 

information about a case of state enforcement that did not 

fit into a precise question. These notes were used to factcheck the data entered multiple times, in order to ensure data 

consistency. 

Multiple Individuals Affected by a Single 

Inciting Incident of Enforcement

Researchers entered each case of state enforcement as a 

separate row in an excel file database (“mapping database”). 

If one case implied legal consequences for several individuals, 

each person was recorded in a separate row as a separate case 

of enforcement. The researchers made every attempt to verify 

the accuracy of the information related to a case via at least 

two independent secondary sources (or primary source, if 

available). Countries with governments that repealed their 

blasphemy laws either before or during the relevant period 

of study were not included in the mapping database or in 

Annex 2, even if they had active cases of state enforcement 

during the study period. 

Data Analysis

The researchers developed and populated a database using 

Google Sheets. To permit constant updating and evolving 

data, researchers worked with a data analyst who chose the 

Microsoft Power BI software tool for data analysis. Microsoft 

Power BI allows automatic data processing, groups of values, 

and recalculated columns. 

The columns containing descriptive information were 

transformed into calculable values. An example of this work 

was the treatment of dates which can be presented in different 

national formats, in full form, or simply one month and one 

year, or one year only. Some uncertain dates were presented 

as a range of dates. A reference date had to be redefined with 

the participation of the researchers. All dates were translated 

into a reference year. The number of different dates attributed 

to a case sometimes made it difficult to define a clear 

reference year.

Columns intended to receive binary data (e.g., yes/no) were 

completed with remarks intended for research purposes. Here 

again, in collaboration with the researchers it was necessary 

to decide on binary values: yes/no/unknown. In the binary 

values, researchers chose to treat the “no,” “no answer,” or 

empty rows differently from each other. The gaps are treated 

as “unknown” and separated so that the error rate on positive 

responses and the overall validity of the expressed data can 

be calculated. Many categories were manually defined so that 

sub-categories (e.g., regions, professions) could be included for 

the sake of identifying trends. 

Study Design & Methodology 

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 15
NOTES

1 Annex 2 includes countries and laws originally identified by the U.S. Commission 

on International Religious Freedom in their 2017 report titled Respecting Rights? 

Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws and additional countries that have since 

been identified as having blasphemy laws. If, however, the law has been repealed, 

researchers did not evaluate enforcement of that law or include it in Annex 2.

2 See Annex 2, Turkmenistan Code on Administrative Offenses, Article 75: Violation of 

the right to freedom of religious confession and association in religious organizations 

(including punishment for a violation as monetary fine or “administrative arrest for a 

period of up to 15 days”).

3 When researchers could not confirm whether the law included criminal sanctions, 

the law was excluded from the study. In five countries—Jamaica, Moldova, Tajikistan, 

Russia, and Turkmenistan—however, researchers were uncertain whether the laws 

included criminal sanctions. The researchers included them in Annex 2 because they 

were previously defined as blasphemy laws of concern by the U.S. Commission on 

International Religious Freedom. Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International 

Religious Freedom, Legislation Factsheet: Blasphemy (2020), https://www.uscirf.gov/

sites/default/files/2020%20Legislation%20Factsheet%20-%20Blasphemy%20April%20

2020.pdf.

4 See Part II, supra for a detailed description of the ways in which these laws interact 

with the enforcement against acts of blasphemy.

5 U.S. Department of State, 2016 Report on International Religious Freedom: Turkey

(2016), https://www.refworld.org/docid/59b7d82a13.html (last visited Oct. 7, 2020).

6 Russia Detains Jehovah’s Witness ‘Elders,’ Moscow Times (July 10, 2020), https://www.

themoscowtimes.com/2020/07/10/russia-detains-jehovahs-witness-elders-a70840.

7 Kate Lamb, Indonesia Church Bombings: Police Say One Family and Their Children 

behind Attacks, Guardian (May 13, 2018), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/

may/13/deaths-bomb-attacks-churches-indonesia-surabaya.

8 These world regional groupings are derived from the regional groupings of the 

Pew Research Center’s report entitled Number of Foreign College Students Staying 

and Working in U.S. After Graduation Surges; see Neil G. Ruiz and Abby Budiman, 

Appendix E: Countries and Territories by Regional Classification, Number of Foreign 

College Students Staying and Working in U.S. after Graduation Surges, Pew Research 

Center (May 10, 2018), https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2018/05/10/appendix-ecountries-and-territories-by-regional-classification-foreign-graduate-workers/.

9 For example, the researchers included laws from the province of Aceh in the category 

of Indonesia, Kurdish laws in the category of Iraq, Shari’a laws and cases as part of the 

country’s laws (e.g., Nigeria, Malaysia), Zanzibar laws and cases as part of Tanzania, 

Punjabi laws from the Indian side as part of India, etc. Regional laws were part of the 

national package and were included as state enforcement cases. 

10 As previously mentioned, but crucial to recall, government officials include, but are 

not limited to, law enforcement officers (e.g., police, security agents, prison officials) 

or judicial authorities (e.g., prosecutors, judges). 

11 In May 2016, in Nigeria, Methodus Chimaije Emmanuel and three others were killed 

by a mob after Methodus posted “blasphemous” comments on Facebook. In addition 

to these murders, the mob violence led to the burning of a church and looting of 

stores. See Four Killed in Riots in Niger over Alleged Blasphemy, Guardian (May 31, 

2016), http://guardian.ng/news/four-killed-in-riots-in-niger-over-alleged-blasphemy.

12 Four Killed in Riots in Niger over Alleged Blasphemy, Guardian (May 31, 2016), http://

guardian.ng/news/four-killed-in-riots-in-niger-over-alleged-blasphemy.

13 Notably, in multiple political gatherings and/or protests across some Muslim-majority 

states (for example, in Indonesia and Pakistan), allegations of blasphemy remain a key 

driving force among political parties and politicians that encourages mob violence 

or riots. While deaths, as well as multiple injuries within the crowds, are reported in 

the press, it proved impossible through desk research to quantify these casualties as 

well as the impact that “anti-blasphemy” motives had on driving the mob violence or 

threats of violence.

14 In 2017, for instance, protestors accused minister Zahid Hamid of blasphemy, 

causing a three-week demonstration in Islamabad in which at least six people were 

killed and 200 injured when protests turned violent and police tried to intervene. 

Pakistan Islamists Call Off Protests After Minister Resigns, BBC News (Nov. 27, 2017), 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42133413; Sana Jamal, Law Minister Zahid 

Hamid Resigns After Three-Week Protest by Religious Parties, Gulf News (Nov. 27, 

2017), https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/pakistan/law-minister-zahid-hamid-resignsafter-three-week-protest-by-religious-parties-1.2131494. The army then facilitated 

an agreement between the Islamist demonstrators and the government, resulting in 

Hamid’s resignation. Salman Masood, Pakistan Strikes Deal with Islamist Protestors in 

Islamabad, New York Times (Nov. 27, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/

world/asia/islamabad-protesters-blasphemy-deal.html.

15 Euan McKirdy, Indonesian President Cancels Australia Trip after Violent Protests, CNN 

(Nov. 5, 2016), https://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/03/asia/jakarta-islamist-governorprotest/index.html.

16 GlobaLex, Hauser Global Law School Program, https://www.nyulawglobal.org/

globalex/. 

17 WorldLII, World Legal Information Institute, http://www.worldlii.org. 

18 The typical method of searching, for example, included “blasphemy enforcement in 

[X Country].”

19 Combining keywords with modifiers to produce more relevant results. For instance: 

(Enforcement OR Arrest OR Charge) AND (Blasphemy OR Contempt of Religion)

20 Truncation: identifying the use of multiple endings to expand the scope of your 

search, e.g.: instead of having to search “blasphemy or blaspheme or blasphemer,” you 

can search “blasphem*.” If the engine reads truncation, it will search for all the words 

that begin with “blasphem” regardless of the tense / ending of the word.

21 Often, blasphemy laws do not use the term “blasphemy” even when the criminalized 

conduct is blasphemous. For example, see Annex 2: Egypt’s Penal Code 98(f) uses 

language such as contempt of religion; disdain of religion; “instigating sedition” 

through religion; exploitation of religion.

22 Researchers examined legal research databases, court websites, prosecutors’ websites, 

or any websites that may provide primary sources. In addition, where available, 

researchers contacted and interviewed local experts to locate primary sources or legal 

cases of criminal blasphemy law enforcement.

23 Databases for secondary sources included InfoTrac, ProQuest, Lexis.

24 “When a user creates a Perma.cc link, Perma.cc archives the referenced content and 

generates a link to an archived record of the page. Regardless of what may happen to 

the original source, the archived record will always be available through the Perma.cc

link.” Perma.cc, https://perma.cc/about. 

Study Design & Methodology 

16 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
FINDINGS

BLASPHEMY CRIMES ENFORCEMENT: GLOBAL TRENDS

Figure 1. Total Number of Incidents of Mob Activity, Mob Violence, and/or Threats of Mob 

Violence and State Enforced Criminal Blasphemy Cases, by Country, 2014–2018

 SICILY 

ANDORRA

USA

USA

CANADA

MEXICO

GREENLAND

CHINA

MONGOLIA

ARGENTINA

SOUTH

AFRICA

JAPAN

CUBA

VENEZUELA

PERU

NIGER

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

MALI

CONGO

CHILE

CHAD

ECUADOR

NAMIBIA

ANGOLA

NICARAGUA

MADAGASCAR

VIETNAM

FRANCE

IRELAND

ROMANIA

UNITED

KINGDOM

GREECE

NORWAY

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS

QUEEN ELISABETH ISLANDS

PUERTO RICO

HAITI

DOMINICAN

REPUBLIC

COSTA RICA

PANAMA

HONDURAS

BELIZE

EL SALVADOR

GUATEMALA

FRENCH 

GUIANA

PARAGUAY

URUGUAY

MALVINAS

GALAPAGOS

ISLANDS

ICELAND

MALTA

PORTUGAL SARDINIA

DENMARK

BELGIUM

NETH.

SWEDEN

BELARUS

CZECH REP.

AUSTRIA

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY

CROATIA

SERBIA

BULGARIA

MACEDONIA

ESTONIA

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

GEORGIA

AZERBAIJAN

BHUTAN

NORTH

KOREA

SOUTH

KOREA

LAOS

CAMBODIA

NEW

ZEALAND

FUJI

WESTER

SAHARA

SENEGAL

GUINEA

GUINEA-BISSAU

SIERRA

LEONE

LIBERIA

COTE

D’IVOIRE

BURKINA

FASO

GHANA

BENIN

TOGO

CENTRAL

AFRICAN REP.

GABON

REP. OF THE

CONGO

MOZAMBIQUE

BURUNDI

UGANDA

DJIBUTI

ARMENIA

ALBANIA

11

RUSSIA

INDIA

AUSTRALIA

OMAN

NEPAL

EGYPT

LIBYA

TUNISIA

SUDAN

ALGERIA

MAURITANIA

NIGERIA

KUWAIT IRAN

BAHRAIN

UNITED ARAB

EMIRATES

PAKISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

KAZAKHSTAN

GERMANY POLAND

SPAIN

INDONESIA

YEMEN

SAUDI

ARABIA

JORDAN

TURKEY

ITALY

BANGLADESH

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE

SRI LANKA

LEBANON

BURMA

IRAQ

MALDIVES

THAILAND

KYRGYZSTAN

MALAWI

ZAMBIA

PHILIPPINES

ZIMBABWE

586160

212 28

5228

282 3628

1828

286

283

11

24 4

8

5860

9696

77

5151

183 182 4444

11 99

24

1616

1313

1515

33

22

22

11

11

11

11

11

21

11

11

22

55

44

44

44

4

55

77 8

88

22 77

22

22

1919

3939

77

11

24 4

8

5860

9696

77

5151

183 182 4544

11 99

24

1616

1313

1515

33

22

22

11

11

11

11

11

21

11

11

22

55

44

44

54

4

55

77 8

88

22 77

22

22

1919

3939

77

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

BOTSWANA

BRAZIL

BRUNEI

CAMEROON

CAPE VERDE

COMOROS

MAURITIUS

CYPRUS

ERITREA

ETHIOPIA

FINLAND

GRENADA GAMBIA

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

GUYANA SURINAME

ISRAEL

JAMAICA

KENYA

LIECHTENSTEIN

SAN MARINO

MONTENEGRO

MOLDOVA

NORTHERN IRELAND

MOROCCO

PAPUA

NEW GUINEA

QATAR

RWANDA

SAINT LUCIA

SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

SCOTLAND

SEYCHELLES

SOMALIA

SOUTH 

SUDAN

SWITZ

SYRIA

TAJIKISTAN

TANZANIA

TURKMENISTAN

UKRAINE

UZBEKISTAN

VANUATU

Orange circles represent the total number of incidents, including cases of state enforcement and incidents of mob activity, mob violence, 

and/or threats of mob violence.

From January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2018, researchers found 732 reported blasphemy-related incidents across 

41 countries with criminal blasphemy laws on the books.1 Of those 732 incidents, 674 were reported cases of state criminal 

blasphemy law enforcement and 58 were incidents of mob violence or threats of mob violence. 

Figure 2. Reported Incidents of Mob Activity, Mob Violence, and/or Threats of Mob Violence 

Related to State Law Enforcement of Criminal Blasphemy Cases, 2014–2018

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

Pakistan

Iran

Russia

India

Egypt

Indonesia

Yemen

Bangladesh

Saudi Arabia

Kuwait

Nigeria

Turkey

Italy

Bahrain

UAE

Algeria

Jordan

Malaysia

Sri Lanka

Afghanistan

Kazakhstan

Lebanon

Poland

Spain

Sudan

Burma

Iraq

Libya

Maldives

Nepal

Oman

Thailand

Tunisia

Austria

Germany

Kyrgyzstan

Malawi

Mauritania

Philippines

Singapore

Zimbabwe

• Reported cases of state criminal blasphemy (or other) law enforcement. 

• Reported incidents of mob activity, mob violence, and/or threats of mob violence without state enforcement.

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 17
Reported cases likely are an underestimate of the true number of cases of state criminal blasphemy law enforcement given that 

many blasphemy cases go unreported in the media or are publicly reported in local news sources in languages other than those 

of the research team, which included English, French, Persian/Dari, Russian, and Spanish.

The number of cases across each country with criminal blasphemy laws on the books varied greatly, ranging from zero 

reported cases to 184 cases, during the study period. In 43, or 51%, of these 84 countries, researchers did not find a single 

case of enforcement of criminal blasphemy laws or enforcement against blasphemous conduct, suggesting that it is extremely 

low—if it exists at all—in these contexts.2 During the study period, no reported cases of state enforcement were found in Latin 

America and the Caribbean. In the 41 countries across Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, Europe, and Africa, researchers found that 

enforcement exists to varying degrees, from 1 reported case in 8 different countries3 to 184 reported cases in Pakistan during the 

study period. 

Figure 3. Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement Cases by State, 2014–2018

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

Pakistan

Iran

Russia

India

Egypt

Indonesia

Yemen

Bangladesh

Saudi Arabia

Kuwait

Nigeria

Turkey

Italy

Bahrain

UAE

Algeria

Jordan

Malaysia

Sri Lanka

Afghanistan

Kazakhstan

Lebanon

Poland

Spain

Sudan

Burma

Iraq

Libya

Maldives

Nepal

Oman

Thailand

Tunisia

Austria

Germany

Kyrgyzstan

Malawi

Mauritania

Philippines

Singapore

Zimbabwe

• The highest number of cases of state enforcement occurred in Asia Pacific (49%), 

the Middle East (35%), Europe (11%), and Africa (5%).

Table 1. Reported Criminal Blasphemy Law Enforcement Cases by State and Region, 2014–2018

Regions States with Reported Criminal Blasphemy Law Enforcement Cases

Asia-Pacific Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Kazakhstan, Burma, Maldives, Nepal, 

Thailand, Philippines, Singapore, Kyrgyzstan 

Middle East Iran, Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Algeria, Jordan, 

Afghanistan, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Oman

Europe Russia, Turkey, Italy, Poland, Spain, Austria, Germany

Africa Nigeria, Sudan, Tunisia, Malawi, Mauritania, Zimbabwe

Latin America & the Caribbean None

Findings

18 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Figure 4. Reported Cases of Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement by Region, 2014–2018

• Asia-Pacific • Middle East • Europe • Africa

• Latin America and the Caribbean

49% 35%

11%

5%

Figure 5. Reported Cases of Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement by State, 2014–2018

 SICILY 

ANDORRA

USA

USA

CANADA

MEXICO

GREENLAND

CHINA

MONGOLIA

ARGENTINA

SOUTH

AFRICA

JAPAN

CUBA

VENEZUELA

PERU

NIGER

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

MALI

CONGO

CHILE

CHAD

ECUADOR

NAMIBIA

ANGOLA

NICARAGUA

MADAGASCAR

VIETNAM

FRANCE

IRELAND

ROMANIA

UNITED

KINGDOM

GREECE

NORWAY

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS

QUEEN ELISABETH ISLANDS

PUERTO RICO

HAITI

DOMINICAN

REPUBLIC

COSTA RICA

PANAMA

HONDURAS

BELIZE

EL SALVADOR

GUATEMALA

FRENCH 

GUIANA

PARAGUAY

URUGUAY

MALVINAS

GALAPAGOS

ISLANDS

ICELAND

MALTA

PORTUGAL SARDINIA

DENMARK

BELGIUM

NETH.

SWEDEN

BELARUS

CZECH REP.

AUSTRIA

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY

CROATIA

SERBIA

BULGARIA

MACEDONIA

ESTONIA

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

GEORGIA

AZERBAIJAN

BHUTAN

NORTH

KOREA

SOUTH

KOREA

LAOS

CAMBODIA

NEW

ZEALAND

FUJI

WESTER

SAHARA

SENEGAL

GUINEA

GUINEA-BISSAU

SIERRA

LEONE

LIBERIA

COTE

D’IVOIRE

BURKINA

FASO

GHANA

BENIN

TOGO

CENTRAL

AFRICAN REP.

GABON

REP. OF THE

CONGO

MOZAMBIQUE

BURUNDI

UGANDA

DJIBUTI

ARMENIA

ALBANIA

11

RUSSIA

INDIA

AUSTRALIA

OMAN

NEPAL

EGYPT

LIBYA

TUNISIA

SUDAN

ALGERIA

MAURITANIA

NIGERIA

KUWAIT IRAN

BAHRAIN

UNITED ARAB

EMIRATES

PAKISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

KAZAKHSTAN

GERMANY POLAND

SPAIN

INDONESIA

YEMEN

SAUDI

ARABIA

JORDAN

TURKEY

ITALY

BANGLADESH

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE

SRI LANKA

LEBANON

BURMA

IRAQ

MALDIVES

THAILAND

KYRGYZSTAN

MALAWI

ZAMBIA

PHILIPPINES

ZIMBABWE

44

11

24

13

4

8 19

5860

9696

77

5151

184 182 44

11 99

24

1616

13

1515

33

22

22

11

11

11

11

11

21

11

11

22

55

44

44

44

4

55

77 8

88

22 77

22

22

19

3939

77

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

BOTSWANA

BRAZIL

BRUNEI

CAMEROON

CAPE VERDE

COMOROS

MAURITIUS

CYPRUS

ERITREA

ETHIOPIA

FINLAND

GRENADA GAMBIA

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

GUYANA SURINAME

ISRAEL

JAMAICA

KENYA

LIECHTENSTEIN

SAN MARINO

MONTENEGRO

MOLDOVA

NORTHERN IRELAND

MOROCCO

PAPUA

NEW GUINEA

QATAR

RWANDA

SAINT LUCIA

SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

SCOTLAND

SEYCHELLES

SOMALIA

SOUTH 

SUDAN

SWITZ

SYRIA

TAJIKISTAN

TANZANIA

TURKMENISTAN

UKRAINE

UZBEKISTAN

VANUATU

Yellow circles correspond to the number of reported state criminal blasphemy (or other) law enforcement cases found in each country. 

COUNTRIES WITH THE HIGHEST REPORTED CRIMINAL BLASPHEMY ENFORCEMENT

Based upon the cases researchers identified, 10 countries 

account for 81% of all reported cases of state criminal 

blasphemy enforcement from 2014 through 2018. More than 

one quarter (27%, or 184) of those 674 reported cases were 

enforced by Pakistan, followed by 96 (14%) cases enforced 

by Iran, 58 (9%) by Russia, 51 (8%) by India, 44 (6.5%) by 

Egypt, 39 (6%) by Indonesia, 24 (3.5%) by Yemen, 19 (3%) by 

Bangladesh, 16 (2%) by Saudi Arabia, and 15 (2%) by Kuwait. 

Four countries account for nearly 80% of all reported 

incidents of mob activity, mob violence, and/or threats of mob 

violence as a result of alleged blasphemous acts in countries 

with criminal blasphemy laws. Nearly half of those incidents 

(52) occurred in Pakistan, while significant numbers also 

occurred in Bangladesh (26), Nigeria (16), and Egypt

(13). 

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 19
Case Study: Pakistan

Threats and Violence from Accusations to Detentions to Post-Acquittals 

Pakistan’s laws are vague, impose severe punishments, including the death penalty, and are frequently applied through both 

state and private enforcement. Although the state has not yet executed a convicted blasphemer, violence against alleged 

blasphemers may occur at any point—from a rumor of blasphemy, to the accused’s arrest, trial, conviction, or even acquittal. 

Violence is not solely directed against the accused, but is often exacted against lawyers, family, and faith-based community 

members as well. When allegations are made, violent mobs frequently form and demand punishment.4

In 2014, for instance, gunmen murdered Pakistani lawyer Rachid Rehman in his office in Multan for defending Junaid 

Hafeez, an academic charged with blaspheming and making derogatory comments against the Prophet. Hafeez had been in 

prison without being able to find a lawyer until Rehman agreed to take up his case.5

In 2015, Christians Rhuksana, Awais, and Rehana were accused of blasphemy, dragged from their homes, and beaten by a 

mob. Members of the mob shaved Awais’ head, painted each of the victims’ faces black, and then paraded them through the 

streets of their village on donkeys.6

In 2018, Patras Masih shared an allegedly blasphemous image—a person stepping on a mosque—on his Facebook messenger 

account. Mobs accusing him of blasphemy demanded he be hanged for his crimes and threatened to burn down his village. 

When cans of petrol were thrown into the village, 800 Christians fled their homes.7

Alleged blasphemers have been attacked in jail and even assassinated while in state custody by prison guards and other 

inmates.8 Accused persons, their families, and larger faith or belief communities face constant risks associated with 

a blasphemy allegation.9 By the time convicted blasphemers appeal, they often have spent years in jail—sometimes in 

isolation—due to the slow administration of justice in Pakistani courts.10

In recent years, Pakistan enforced possibly the most infamous blasphemy crime case globally: the case of Asia Bibi. The 

Lahore High Court convicted and sentenced Bibi to death for drinking water from the same cup as her Muslim co-workers.11

The judgment was eventually overturned on appeal by the Pakistani Supreme Court.12 The case was so controversial within 

Pakistan that public declarations of support for Asia Bibi led to two high-profile murders. Shahbaz Bhatti, a cabinet member, 

and Salman Taseer, the then Governor of Punjab, were murdered in 2011 for speaking in defense of Bibi.13 Following her 

acquittal, Bibi remained in custody until she could secure a path to exile, as she would have been murdered had she set foot 

outside of state custody. Her lawyer also fled the country, and the Supreme Court justices who overturned her death sentence 

faced death threats.14

Social Pressure and Self-Imposed Punishment

In another illustrative—yet extreme—case, a 15-year-old boy cut off his right hand to atone for his blasphemous act, after he 

accidentally raised his hand when a cleric asked a group at a celebration: “Who among you doesn’t believe in the teaching of 

the Holy Prophet?”15

Following the incident, the boy said:

When I raised my right hand unwittingly, I realised I had committed blasphemy and needed to atone for this. I came 

back home and went to the grass-cutting machine, but found the place dark so I took my uncle’s phone to point some 

light at my hand. I placed it under the machine and chopped it off in a single swirl.16

According to reports, villagers and the teenage boy himself revere his actions of self-mutilation as righteous.17 His selfpunishment may have prevented his murder at the hands of the mob.18

Findings

20 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
OTHER LAWS EMPLOYED TO ENFORCE BLASPHEMY CRIMES

In 443 (66%) of the 674 cases of state criminal blasphemy enforcement, reports identified the law that state officials applied to 

enforce against blasphemous acts. Where information was available, 81%, or 361, of those cases, identified a blasphemy law. 

Nineteen percent (19%), or 82, of those cases used another criminal law to enforce against blasphemous conduct. Thus, while 

most individuals accused of blasphemy were charged under states’ criminal blasphemy laws, a significant number of alleged 

blasphemers were charged under related criminal laws.

Case Study: Iran 

Charging Individuals for Multiple Crimes, including Blasphemy

Based upon the enforcement cases examined, Iran frequently charges blasphemous conduct as crimes under Article 262, the 

criminal blasphemy law, in addition to charges for other crimes. For instance, in 2018, intelligence agents arrested a Kurdish 

poet in Malakhashi, Ilam on several charges, including “acting against national security” and “insulting the sanctity of 

the regime.”19

Apostasy Laws

Apostasy is the act of abandoning one’s faith, including by 

conversion to another religion. Punishments for apostasy 

violate Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and 

Political Rights (ICCPR).20 For the purpose of this study, the 

researchers did not include cases of apostasy. However, in 

many incidents in which blasphemy was alleged, the facts 

constituted the offense of apostasy.21 Additionally, in several 

cases in which apostasy was alleged, the facts resembled 

blasphemous acts.22 Generally, these acts are interrelated: 

persons accused of leaving their faith and deemed apostates 

have often acted in a way perceived as blasphemous due to 

their questioning of religion.23 Thus, these concepts may 

be conflated and erroneously confused in laws and their 

enforcement. Whereas blasphemy laws aim to protect the 

integrity/image of a religion, apostasy laws intend to retain 

the membership of a religious group and punish those who 

renounce it.24

For example, Sudan recently repealed a criminal apostasy 

law that had been amended in 201525 to include blasphemy as 

apostasy.26 This illustrates the ways in which states conflate 

apostasy and blasphemy prohibitions. In Sudan’s now 

repealed law (art. 126), “whoever questions the credibility of, 

or insults, Mohammed the Messenger of God, peace be upon 

him, publicly by any conclusive act” was deemed an apostate.27

While Sudan did not repeal its blasphemy law (art. 125), it did 

amend it to remove the penalty of flogging.28

Anti-Conversion Laws

Conversion, or the act of changing one’s religion, is sometimes 

regulated by anti-conversion laws, which “penalize changing 

one’s religion or seeking to persuade someone else to do so.”29

This regulation is a fundamental violation of FoRB, which 

includes the rights to question and to change one’s beliefs and 

to seek to peacefully persuade someone else to change their 

beliefs voluntarily. In states with anti-conversion laws, the 

mere act of questioning religious tenets and debating religion 

or beliefs can be equated with insulting religion.30 While 

these laws go beyond the scope of this study, it must be noted 

that there is a risk that those charged with conversion may be 

subject to allegations of “hurting religious sentiment” insofar 

as changing religion may be perceived as an insult to a state 

religion.31

The researchers took a conservative approach, excluding cases 

of state enforcement based on violations of anti-conversion or 

destruction of property laws even when the laws themselves 

can conflate these crimes with insult to religion or blasphemy. 

For example, in the wake of Nepal’s new anti-conversion 

law, individuals have been accused of both attempting to 

convert other individuals and “destroying Hindu idols” 

or “encouraging the destruction of Hindu idols.”32 This 

enforcement may be in response to the destruction of 

property per se, or may imply an act of blasphemy. Given that 

many states sanction the destruction of property separately 

from blasphemy, researchers generally excluded these laws 

due to lack of information on enforcement in such contexts.33

Incitement to Religious Hatred (“Hate Speech”) Laws 

As the authors reported in Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws, many criminal blasphemy 

law supporters argue that those laws deter incitement to 

discrimination and violence as enumerated in the ICCPR 

under article 20(2) and that they protect freedom of religion 

or belief under article 18.34 These arguments lead to the 

conflation of blasphemy and incitement to religious hatred. 

As an example of such conflation, the United Arab Emirates’ 

Law No. 2 of 2015 on Combating Discrimination and Hatred 

criminalizes blasphemy through prohibiting inter alia acts of 

insulting religion and religious figures.35 Article 3 of the law 

states that “no words or action which may incite to commit 

the crime of blasphemy or defamation of religions contrary to 

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 21
the provisions of the present Decree Law may be debated on 

the right of freedom and expression.”36

Blasphemy (“insult to religion”) and incitement to religious 

hatred (discrimination and violence against human beings 

based on their religion or belief) should not be confused or 

conflated in legal texts or their enforcement. Questioning the 

validity of ideas—even religious ideas—does not constitute 

incitement to religious hatred.37 The international human 

rights system protects individuals, not religions, religious 

ideas,38 or “the sacred.” Human rights protections, including 

the rights to freedom of religion or belief and freedom of 

expression and opinion, ensure the free flow of ideas and 

discussions around faith.39

Often, however, acts deemed blasphemous—such as 

questioning religious ideas— are conflated with and 

punished as acts of incitement to religious hatred contrary to 

international law. Thus, to uphold international human rights 

standards, violations must not extend to “insults to religion,” 

generally understood as blasphemy. Protecting individuals

from violence or other acts of hatred based on religious 

discrimination is a separate issue and should be upheld 

through narrowly defined state enforcement of incitement 

to religious hatred laws that meet the strict requirements of 

ICCPR Article 20(2) rather than through criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement. 

Anti-Extremism Laws

Like incitement to religious hatred laws,40 anti-extremism 

laws are criminal code provisions that states have marshaled 

against alleged blasphemers. Notably, in Russia and other 

post-Soviet Union country contexts, acts of blasphemy are 

enforced through, or in conjunction with, these criminal laws, 

often carrying more severe punishments than the blasphemy 

law itself.41

Case Study: Russia 

Criminalizing Alleged Blasphemers as Extremists

Researchers identified 58 reported criminal blasphemy cases in Russia during the study period. While the majority of 

cases were charged under Russia’s blasphemy law (Art. 148)—enacted in 2013 after the “Pussy Riot” case42—11 blasphemy 

enforcement cases, or 19%, also referenced another law that uses “incitement to hatred” language, which is also commonly 

known as Russia’s anti-extremism law (Art. 282). Furthermore, five blasphemous acts that researchers counted as enforcement 

cases were charged exclusively under Art. 282.43 In several cases, citizens’ reports led to state enforcement under these laws.44

Many of the cases included did not proceed beyond the investigation phase, but even in this preliminary phase, the accused 

were often subject to searches and confiscations of personal belongings such as cell phones and computers.45

Under the use of Art. 282, the state subjects alleged blasphemers to harsher enforcement and penalties than they would 

receive under the blasphemy law alone.46 The state freezes the accused’s bank accounts and automatically adds them to a list of 

extremists after the initiation of a case, but prior to trial.47 Additionally, the content at issue, be it a Facebook post, an article 

or image, can be added to a list of extremist material if a court determines the material to be “extremist.”48 Thus, anyone who 

continues to circulate the material risks prosecution under Art. 20.29 (Production and Dissemination of Extremist Materials) 

of Russia’s Administrative Code.49

Blasphemy cases involving Art. 148 and Art. 282 can be reported to “centers against extremism.” In small provinces, these 

centers maintain connections with local religious figures, who may report the person or content to the centers or act as 

witnesses in cases.50 Though Russia is formally a secular state,51 authorities consult religious leaders in some blasphemy cases 

to analyze the content of the material at issue to determine whether the material is blasphemous.52 Further, the state may send 

blasphemous content to “linguistic centers” for analysis during an investigation; these decisions carry significant weight in 

enforcement cases, and lawyers have difficulty obtaining independent analyses of content for clients.53

In late 2018, Russia amended Art. 282 to decriminalize some aspects, in part due to its over-enforcement, which is 

commendable and a recognition of the law’s abuse.54

Findings

22 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Witchcraft Laws

Researchers analyzed cases of attacks and extrajudicial 

killings of individuals suspected of practicing witchcraft in 

Saudi Arabia,55 Trinidad,56 and Zambia.57 Within the context 

of Saudi Arabia, allegations of blasphemy and witchcraft may 

be interlinked at times for those who view magic as “a serious 

affront to the pure and exclusive relationship one is supposed 

to share with Allah.”58 The researchers concluded, however, 

in the cases they encountered that rather than being linked 

to the “insult of religion” or blasphemy, these restrictions 

more broadly limited the right to manifest one’s freedom of 

religion or belief—and, in some cases, the right to practice 

witchcraft. Consequently, these cases were excluded from the 

study findings.

ACCUSED PERSONS

Gender

In reported cases, states enforced criminal blasphemy 

laws against men more frequently than against women. 

Of the 674 reported cases found, 482 (71%) indicated the 

gender of the accused blasphemers. In an overwhelming 

majority—406 of those 482 cases, or 84%—the state accused 

men of criminal blasphemy, while in only 76 cases, or 16%, 

the state accused women. 

Figure 6. Percentage of Reported Cases of Criminal 

Blasphemy Enforcement, by Gender, 2014–2018

• Male • Female

674 192

Unknown

76

(15.77%)

406

(84.23%)

Professions

In 412 (61%) of the 674 cases of state criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement identified, reporters determined the accused 

person’s profession. While accused blasphemers’ professions 

varied widely, from academics to artists, business owners to 

construction workers, and farmers to housewives, certain 

professions seemed to be targeted for state enforcement of 

blasphemy crimes more frequently. The most commonly 

reported professions of accused blasphemers were: lawyers; 

academics or intellectuals, and students; religious figures; 

media professionals, including journalists and bloggers; 

artists, including musicians, actors, directors, and poets; 

politicians and government officials; and human rights 

activists. These accused persons’ professions accounted 

for nearly half (49%) of all reported cases of blasphemy 

enforcement. Professions where no pattern emerged were 

categorized as “other”.

Figure 7. Percentage of Reported Cases of Criminal 

Blasphemy Enforcement, by Profession, 2014–2018

• Lawyer • Academia or Intellectual Pursuits

• Media • Religious Figure • Artist

• Government Role/Political Position

• Human Rights Activist/Political Dissident • Other 

Cases per Professional Group

674 262

Unknown

79

(19.17%)

69

(16.75%)

62

(15.05%)

59

(14.32%)

53

(12.86%)

49

(11.89%)

22

(5.34%)

19

(4.61%)

Furthermore, although not enough data exist to show trends, 

of the 674 cases of criminal blasphemy enforcement around 

the globe during the study period, 11 persons were reported to 

have had physical or mental disabilities, 10 were illiterate, and 

18 were reported to have converted. The 18 conversion cases 

were charged with blasphemy crimes in Yemen, Egypt, Iran, 

Saudi Arabia, Algeria, and Sri Lanka. 

Religious or Belief Identities

In identifying the religious or belief identities of the accused, 

the researchers’ goal was to document as many details on 

the accused’s and the majority’s religions to identify possible 

trends of interreligious vs. intra-religious conflict. In half 

of the reported cases, researchers could not identify the 

religion or belief of the person accused of blasphemy crimes. 

When that information was available, however, most accused 

persons were Muslim, representing 56% (192 of 343) of 

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 23
those reported cases. Researchers identified this trend despite the likelihood that news sources underreport blasphemy cases 

against Muslims.

Of accused Muslims, Shia are the largest Muslim group identified (51%), followed by Sunni (8%), Gafatar (6%), Tijaniyya (5%), 

Ahmadi (5%), and Salafists (2%). Christians accounted for 25% of accused persons, and, where specific denominations were 

reported, included Copts (14%), Catholics (6%), Protestants (5%), Adventists (2%), Jehovah’s Witnesses (2%), Pentecostals (2%), 

and Evangelicals (1%). Other groups frequently targeted for enforcement, where identified, included Atheists (7%), Baha’is (7%), 

and Hindus (3%).

Figure 8. Percentage of Reported Cases of Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement, by Belief Identity, 2014–2018

• Islam • Christianity • Atheism • Baha’i Faith 

• Hinduism • Buddhism • Other

674 331

Unknown

192

(55.98%) 85

(25.07%)

25

(7.29%)

24

(7.00%)

10

(2.92%)

3

(1.00%) 3

(1.00%)

Note: The three “other” religions and belief systems accused of blasphemy are inter-universal Mysticism (known in Persian as 

Erfan-e-Halgheh), neo-Paganism, and Voodooism.

Figure 9. Percentage of Reported Cases of Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement, by Muslim Sect, 2014–2018

192 47

Unknown

0 20 40 60 80 100

Shia

Sunni

Milah Abraham (Gafatar)

Tinjaniyya

Ahmadi

Salaafism

 97

 15

 11

 10

 9

3

Findings

24 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Figure 10. Percentage of Reported Cases of Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement, by Christian Sect, 2014–2018

674 331

Unknown

86

Christian

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Christian

Coptic

Catholic

Protestant

Adventist

Jehovah’s Witness

Pentecostalist

Evangelical

 58

 12

 5

 4

 2

 2

 2

1

Accusers

Although the researchers did not find enough data to 

distinguish trends, secondary sources most often reported 

that private citizens, state actors, political figures, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) or associations, and 

religious leaders accused individuals of blasphemy crimes 

during the study period. 

EXTRAJUDICIAL STATE VIOLENCE 

AGAINST ACCUSED BLASPHEMERS

Researchers noted incidents in which state officials 

allegedly committed acts of violence, including torture or 

cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment, 

against accused blasphemers in Pakistan,59 Iran,60 Algeria,61

and Egypt.62

In addition to torture, state officials reportedly subjected 

accused individuals to cruel, inhuman and degrading 

treatment while in custody in Iran,63 Kazakhstan,64 Kuwait,65

Oman, Pakistan,66 Russia,67 Saudi Arabia68 and Sri Lanka.69

Alleged blasphemers were subjected to threats or actual 

forced psychiatric evaluations;70 forced confessions;71 and 

bribes, threats, and sexual harassment.72 In other cases, the 

state detained accused persons in harsh conditions, including 

prolonged solitary confinement73 and confinement past 

the completion of a prison sentence.74 State officials also 

reportedly denied medical care, such as first aid,75 to persons 

accused of blasphemy crimes.

Human Rights Due Process Violations

In addition to state-sponsored violence against alleged 

blasphemers, researchers found several criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement cases with reported state due process 

violations, such as no access to counsel,76 illegal detentions,77

including detentions without charges or trial,78 and unfair 

trials.79 At least one due process violation was reported in 

Bangladesh,80 Egypt,81 India,82 Iran,83 Mauritania,84 Oman, 

Pakistan, Russia,85 Saudi Arabia,86 Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan,87

and Yemen.88

State Enforcement and Mob Violence

When states enforce their laws, situations of mob activity, 

threats, and violence can also occur. Mob violence 

accompanied state enforcement in 78 cases against alleged 

blasphemers. Such incidents took place in Pakistan (24), 

Egypt (12), Nigeria (11), Bangladesh (9), Indonesia (7), Jordan 

(5), Russia (2), Algeria (2), Malaysia (2), and one incident in 

Kuwait (1), Mauritania (1), Saudi Arabia (1), and Sudan (1).

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 25
Figure 11. Reported Incidents of Mob Activity, Mob Violence and/or Threats of Mob Violence 

with State Law Enforcement of Criminal Blasphemy Cases, by Percentage, 2014–2018 

• Killed/Injured 

• Mob activity and/or violence 

• Property Destruction

674 596

34

(43.59%)

26

(33.33%)

18

(23.08%)

In a significant number of cases, news sources reported that additional harms—including deaths, injuries, destruction of 

property (e.g., homes or places of worship)—accompanied reported cases of criminal blasphemy enforcement.

Figure 12. Reported Incidents of Mob Activity, Mob Violence and/or Threats of Mob Violence, by Country, 2014–2018

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pakistan

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Egypt

Indonesia

Jordan

Russia

Algeria

Malaysia

Afghanistan

India

Kuwait

Lebanon

Maldives

Mauritania

Saudi Arabia

Sudan

• Reported mob activity, mob violence and/or threats of violence with state enforcement. 

• Reported incidences of mob activity, mob violence and/or threats of mob violence without state enforcement.

Findings

26 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Table 2. Incidents with Mob Activity, Mob Violence, and/or Threats of Violence, by Country

State

Mob activity, mob violence, and/or threats of 

violence when state enforced the law

Mob activity, mob violence, and/or threats of 

violence when state did not enforce the law Total 

Pakistan 24 28 52

Bangladesh 9 17 26

Nigeria 11 5 16

Egypt 12 1 13

Indonesia 7 0 7

Jordan 5 0 5

Russia 2 3 5

Algeria 2 0 2

Malaysia 2 0 2

Afghanistan 0 1 1

India 0 1 1

Kuwait 1 0 1

Lebanon 0 1 1

Maldives 0 1 1

Mauritania 1 0 1

Saudi Arabia 1 0 1

Sudan 1 0 1

Total Incidents 78 58 136

In 136 reported incidents found from 2014 through 2018, mob violence or the threat of mob violence accompanied criminal 

blasphemy accusations. In 78 (or 12%) of total reported cases of state enforcement, mob activity, mob violence, and/or the threat 

of mob violence accompanied enforcement against the alleged blasphemers. The remaining 58 reported incidents—involving 

one or more victims—were not technically cases of state enforcement of criminal laws against alleged blasphemers. Rather, these 

incidents were acts of private, non-state actor enforcement through mob violence or imminent threats of mob violence without 

state intervention. 

Figure 13. Reported Incidents of Mob Activity, Mob Violence and/or Threats of Mob Violence 

without State Criminal Blasphemy Law Enforcement, by Country, 2014–2018

ANDORRA

USA

USA

CANADA

MEXICO

GREENLAND

CHINA

MONGOLIA

ARGENTINA

SOUTH

AFRICA

JAPAN

CUBA

VENEZUELA

PERU

NIGER

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

MALI

CONGO

CHILE

CHAD

ECUADOR

NAMIBIA

ANGOLA

NICARAGUA

MADAGASCAR

VIETNAM

FRANCE

IRELAND

ROMANIA

UNITED

KINGDOM

GREECE

NORWAY

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS

QUEEN ELISABETH ISLANDS

PUERTO RICO

HAITI

DOMINICAN

REPUBLIC

COSTA RICA

PANAMA

HONDURAS

BELIZE

EL SALVADOR

GUATEMALA

FRENCH 

GUIANA

PARAGUAY

URUGUAY

MALVINAS

GALAPAGOS

ISLANDS

ICELAND

MALTA

PORTUGAL SARDINIA

 SICILY 

DENMARK

BELGIUM

NETH.

SWEDEN

BELARUS

CZECH REP.

AUSTRIA

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY

CROATIA

SERBIA

BULGARIA

MACEDONIA

ESTONIA

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

GEORGIA

AZERBAIJAN

BHUTAN

NORTH

KOREA

SOUTH

KOREA

LAOS

CAMBODIA

NEW

ZEALAND

FUJI

WESTER

SAHARA

SENEGAL

GUINEA

GUINEA-BISSAU

SIERRA

LEONE

LIBERIA

COTE

D’IVOIRE

BURKINA

FASO

GHANA

BENIN

TOGO

CENTRAL

AFRICAN REP.

GABON

REP. OF THE

CONGO

MOZAMBIQUE

BURUNDI

UGANDA

DJIBUTI

ARMENIA

ALBANIA

8

AUSTRALIA

OMAN

LIBYA NEPAL

TUNISIA

SUDAN

ALGERIA

MAURITANIA

IRAN

KUWAIT

BAHRAIN

UNITED ARAB

EMIRATES

KAZAKHSTAN

GERMANY POLAND

SPAIN

INDONESIA

YEMEN

SAUDI

ARABIA

JORDAN

TURKEY

ITALY

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE

SRI LANKA

BURMA

IRAQ

THAILAND

KYRGYZSTAN

MALAWI

ZAMBIA

PHILIPPINES

RUSSIA

EGYPT INDIA

NIGERIA

PAKISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

BANGLADESH

LEBANON

MALDIVES

ZIMBABWE

19

2828

55

35

11

11

11

11

11

17

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

BOTSWANA

BRAZIL

BRUNEI

CAMEROON

CAPE VERDE

COMOROS

MAURITIUS

CYPRUS

ERITREA

ETHIOPIA

FINLAND

GRENADA GAMBIA

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

GUYANA SURINAME

ISRAEL

JAMAICA

KENYA

LIECHTENSTEIN

SAN MARINO

MONTENEGRO

MOLDOVA

NORTHERN IRELAND

MOROCCO

PAPUA

NEW GUINEA

QATAR

RWANDA

SAINT LUCIA

SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

SCOTLAND

SEYCHELLES

SOMALIA

SOUTH 

SUDAN

SWITZ

SYRIA

TAJIKISTAN

TANZANIA

TURKMENISTAN

UKRAINE

UZBEKISTAN

VANUATU

Pink circles represent mob activity, mob violence, and/or threats of mob violence without state enforcement.

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 27
Mob Activity/violence and/or threats 

without enforcement of the law

• Asia-Pacific • Africa • Europe • Middle East 

• Latin America and the Caribbean

83%

9%

5% 3%

Recognizing that such threats were a recurring pattern in some 

states during blasphemy-related incidents, researchers included 

such cases in the study to demonstrate the extrajudicial forms 

of enforcement commonly used against alleged blasphemers, 

even if not technically state enforcement. These cases support 

the idea that state enforcement of a criminal blasphemy law 

on the books can embolden individuals or communities to 

take the law into their own hands against alleged blasphemers. 

Often, the state acquiesced to acts or threats of mob violence, 

reinforcing and legitimizing extrajudicial violence against 

alleged blasphemers. 

Case Study: Mauritania

States Detaining to “Protect” Alleged Blasphemers

States sometimes exploit mob violence, or the threat of 

it, as an argument to defend robust criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement. For example, Mauritanian President 

Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz claimed to detain blogger 

Mohamed Ould Cheikh Mkhaitir for “security purposes” 

to protect him from mob violence.89 The President argued 

that imprisonment was necessary to ensure citizen safety 

and public order. In June 2019, just before Mkhaitir’s 

release,90 President Abdel Aziz declared: “We know that 

from the point of the view of the law, he should be freed, 

but ... millions of Mauritanians took to the streets to 

demand his execution. His release would mean that chaos 

would be allowed to take root in the country.”91 Here, the 

individual accused of blasphemy bears the consequences 

of the state’s failure both to protect individual rights and to 

ensure public order against private (mob) violence. 

The very existence of criminal blasphemy laws may empower 

individuals and groups to feel justified in acting themselves 

to enforce them. Especially if the criminal justice system 

suffers from a credibility deficit, society may sympathize with 

those who take “justice” into their own hands.92 If the state is 

deemed ineffective, enacting justice according to one’s moral 

or religious belief is perceived as acceptable, even if done 

through illegal violence—and the state’s monopoly over the 

use of force is weakened. Such circumstances can undermine 

a coherent message from the state. 

State passivity during mob violence incidents can be 

explained in several ways. First, some state officials may 

well fear violent retaliation from mobs if they attempt to 

defuse tensions within crowds.93 Weakened, the state bodies 

can find themselves ill-equipped to handle these situations. 

Second, some state actors sympathize with mob protests and 

imminent threats of violence.94

Finally, in some tense contexts, state officials and lawyers 

can be wary of getting involved, as discussing the problem 

of blasphemy can lead to an accusation.95 Judges face 

intimidation, political pressures, and threats.96 High level state 

officials even have been executed. For example, in January 

2011, Punjab Governor Salman Taseer was shot dead by one 

of his bodyguards.97 Two months later, Pakistani Minorities 

Minister Shahbaz Bhatti also was assassinated.98 Both men 

had called for reform of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws and spoke 

out in defense of accused blasphemer Asia Bibi.99

Additionally, lawyers have been targets of threats and 

violence. In Pakistan, lawyers take great personal risks for 

defending individuals suspected of blasphemy and have 

been murdered for representing alleged blasphemers.100 For 

example, Bibi’s lawyer Saiful Malook received numerous 

death threats.101 In 2014, Junaid Hafeez, the lawyer of accused 

blasphemer Rashid Rehman was murdered in his office.102

Furthermore, opposing the state prosecution of blasphemy 

cases may be perceived as opposing state interests.103

Findings

28 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
First Information Reports 

Related to private threats or acts of violence against alleged blasphemers, in some countries private citizens can file complaints 

called “First Information Reports,” or “FIRs,” that can initiate criminal blasphemy law enforcement. Once an individual 

lodges an FIR, the police determine whether or not to initiate an investigation into an alleged blasphemous act. This process 

exists in several countries, including Bangladesh,104 Burma,105 India,106 Pakistan,107 and Singapore,108 but FIR cases involving 

blasphemy allegations were predominantly found in India. 

Given that any citizen can make such a complaint, blasphemy FIRs also can be used as a pretext to harass or threaten 

individuals, as well as to damage the reputations of celebrities and/or prominent media-personalities.109

Researchers found many FIRs alleging blasphemy in India but did not register these complaints as cases when the FIR did 

not lead to affirmative state action. Thus, cases in India are likely an undercount of instances where individuals in India were 

alleged to have committed blasphemy.

Case Study: Russia

Chilling Free Expression and State Intimidation in the Name of Christian Orthodoxy

Threats of blasphemy allegations and “Orthodox activist’” movements chill artistic and cultural expression in Russia.110

Not only do blasphemy laws curtail the free exchange of ideas among citizens in forums such as Vkontakte, Facebook, and 

Instagram, but larger media outlets and well-known purveyors of culture such as film directors and museum curators can 

find themselves facing the consequences of blasphemy law enforcement. 

In 2015, Dmitry Enteo and other “Orthodox activists” raided an art exhibit in Central Moscow. Citing Article 148, the 

activists smashed statues that they claimed offended religious feelings.111 The government reviewed the artwork to determine 

whether or not it violated the law.112 This vigilante act and the state’s subsequent review of the art—rather than prosecution of 

the destruction of the art—threaten the right to free expression in the country.

Further, in 2017, “Orthodox activists” protested the release of a movie, “Matilda,” about Tsar Nikolai II’s affair with a 

ballerina. Because the Tsar is canonized, some Russians perceived the movie’s content as offensive to religious feelings. In one 

instance, a man drove a car into a movie theater that was set to show the film.113 In another incident, “Orthodox activists” 

threw Molotov cocktails into the film director Aleksei Uchitel’s studio and later set cars in front of his lawyer’s office on 

fire.114 Natalya Poklonskaya, a Duma member, actively supported calls to ban the film, but other members of the Russian 

government actively spoke out against her and ensured the film’s release. President Vladimir Putin said that no one was 

trying to ban “Matilda” and “urge[d] everyone to have a dialogue within the framework of decency and, most importantly, 

within the law.”115

These violent incidents reveal that state enforcement and violence over blasphemy allegations can occur also in Christian 

majority states.

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 29
OFFICIAL STATE RELIGIONS AND CRIMINAL BLASPHEMY ENFORCEMENT

The researchers explored whether the existence of an official state religion led to increased criminal blasphemy enforcement. 

Notably, not all states with official state religions have laws criminalizing blasphemous conduct.

States with State Religions116 without Criminal Blasphemy Laws

Armenia, Bhutan, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Denmark (repealed), Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Greece (repealed), Iceland 

(repealed), Malta (repealed), Monaco, Norway (repealed), Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Western Sahara.

Of the 41 states in which researchers found reported cases of criminal blasphemy law enforcement, nearly half of those states 

(20 of 41) have official state religions. When it comes to enforcement, however, two-thirds, or 67%, of cases of enforcement are in 

states with official state religions, while only one-third, or 33%, are in states that do not have official state religions. Thus, states 

with official state religions and criminal blasphemy law enforcement tended, on average, to enforce against alleged blasphemers 

more than states that do not have official state religions during the study period. 

There were more reported cases of state enforcement and incidents of violence in states with criminal blasphemy laws and 

official state religions (503) as opposed to those with criminal blasphemy laws without official state religions (227). All countries 

with reported blasphemy law enforcement and incidents of violence are states with Islam as their official state religions. In other 

words, 503 of 674, or 75%, of all reported cases and incidents found were in countries where Islam is the official state religion.

Figure 14. Countries with Official State Religion, 2014–2018

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

Pakistan

Iran

Egypt

Bangladesh

Yemen

Saudi Arabia

Kuwait

Bahrain

UAE

Algeria

Jordan

Malaysia

Afghanistan

Sudan

Maldives

Iraq

Libya

Oman

Tunisia

Mauritania

Findings

30 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Figure 15. Countries without Official State Religion, 2014–2018

0

25

50

75

Russia

India

Indonesia

Nigeria

Turkey

Italy

Sri Lanka

Kazakhstan

Lebanon

Poland

Spain

Burma

Nepal

Thailand

Austria

Germany

Kyrgyzstan

Malawi

Philippines

Singapore

Zimbabwe

The top three (3) countries in which blasphemy laws are enforced, but where there is no official state religion, are Russia, India, 

and Indonesia.117

BLASPHEMY AND SOCIAL MEDIA

When examining the facts in social media-implicated cases, a few findings are notable. Social media platforms are widely 

accessible communications mechanisms that facilitate the dissemination and receipt of information. Thus, social media increases 

the possibility that an individual might have access to a “blasphemous” image to share, providing a platform for individuals to 

engage in conduct that may be deemed blasphemous. Due to functions on social media platforms such as “liking,”118 “sharing,”119

or “saving”120 images, a single “blasphemous” act, such as the posting of an image, can quickly multiply and implicate others who 

engage with the post. 

Social media’s amplification of alleged blasphemous acts facilitates the ability of state authorities—and in some cases private actors, 

such as religious leaders or community members—to identify, investigate, and otherwise enforce against blasphemous conduct. For 

private actors, these platforms also offer communication methods and amplification tools to organize, incite, and threaten mob 

violence against alleged blasphemers. Finally, social media blurs the distinction between the public and private spheres, permitting 

the state to enforce against conduct that may never have been intended for public consumption or widespread dissemination. 

Of the criminal blasphemy law enforcement cases identified, 184 (27%) reported that social media played a role in the case.121

Figure 16. Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement Cases Related to Social Media, by Percentage, 2014–2018

• Yes • No

674 363

Unknown

127

(40.84%)

184

(59.16%)

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 31
Figure 17. Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement Cases Related to Social Media, by Country, 2014–2018

674 363

Unknown

127

No

184

Yes

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Russia

Iran

Egypt

India

Pakistan

Indonesia

Bangladesh

Saudi Arabia

Turkey

Bahrain

Kuwait

Algeria

Burma

Jordan

Lebanon

UAE

Maldives

Thailand

Kazakhstan

Malaysia

Oman

Singapore

Spain

Sri Lanka

 28

 19

 18

 18

 15

 14

 13

 10

 9

 8

 6

 4

 3

 3

 3

 3

 2

 2

1

1

1

1

1

1

Of the enforcement cases and incidents in which social media was implicated, Facebook was involved in nearly half (87, or 47%) 

of the cases. Less frequently, but also implicated, were Twitter, Vkontakte, YouTube, Instagram, WhatsApp and Telegram.

Figure 18. Criminal Blasphemy Enforcement Cases Related to Social Media, by Platform, 2014–2018

0 20 40 60 80 100

Facebook

Twitter

Vkontakte

Youtube

Blogs, Online, Forums, 

Websites or Videos

Instagram

Whatsapp

Telegram

 87

 25

 19

 18

 16

 6

 5

2

Smart Pakem, a new Google Smartphone Application to Report Alleged Blasphemous Conduct in Indonesia:122

In Indonesia, recent trends indicate that blasphemy enforcement is often politically motivated against opponents.123

Enforcement along ethnic identity lines is frequent. In addition to Ahmadis, ethnic Chinese Indonesians have been targeted 

for allegedly committing blasphemy crimes.124

In 2018, the Indonesian government launched Smart Pakem, a smartphone app allowing individuals to report cases of 

“religious heresy,” which include acts deemed blasphemous, to the authorities.125 Google approved the app and permitted free 

downloads on Google Play.126 Public outcries ensued and the initiative was short lived. At the time of writing of this report, 

the application was no longer accessible for download in Indonesia.

Indonesia recognizes and protects six official sects and religions, including Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, 

Buddhism, and Confucianism. The Smart Pakem app described other religious groups such as Ahmadiyah, Shia, and Gafatar 

as having “deviant teachings.”127 This smartphone app, although short lived, was problematic because: (1) the Indonesian 

government facilitated private sector surveillance against its citizenry; and (2) private companies like Google facilitated state 

criminal law enforcement that leads to human rights violations.

Findings

32 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
NOTES

1 Researchers excluded from the study cases in countries that have repealed their 

criminal blasphemy laws during the study period, even if there was enforcement: 

Iceland (2015), Norway (2015), a province of France (Alsace-Moselle) (2016), Malta 

(2016), Denmark (2017), Ireland (2018), Canada (2018), New Zealand (2019), Greece 

(2019), and Scotland (2020).Thus, these numbers likely underestimate the actual 

reported cases of criminal blasphemy law enforcement globally.

2 Researchers searched primary and secondary sources, but did not find any cases of 

criminal blasphemy law enforcement in: Andorra, Antigua & Barbuda, Botswana, 

Brazil, Brunei, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Comoros, Cyprus, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, 

Gambia, Grenada, Guyana, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Mauritius, Moldova, 

Montenegro, Morocco, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint 

Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Scotland, Seychelles, Somalia, 

South Sudan, Suriname, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Trinidad & Tobago, 

Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, and Zambia.

3 One case was found in the following countries: Austria, Germany, Kyrgyzstan, 

Malawi, Mauritania, Philippines, Singapore, and Zimbabwe. See Figure 3.

4 In 2017, Mashal Khan, a student at Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan was 

beaten to death by an angry mob of students and staff who accused him of posting 

blasphemous content online. The incident was recorded by onlookers who posted the 

content on Facebook. See Shamil Shams, Pakistan Journalism Student Latest Victim 

of Blasphemy Vigilantes, Deutsche Welle (Apr. 15, 2017), https://www.dw.com/en/

pakistan-journalism-student-latest-victim-of-blasphemy-vigilantes/a-38433834.

5 Reuters Staff, Gunmen Kill Pakistani Lawyer Defending Blasphemy Case, 

Reuters (May 8, 2014), https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-blasphemyidUSBREA4709N20140508.

6 Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger Violence, Free 

Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistansblasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/.

7 Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger Violence, Free 

Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistansblasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/.

8 Muhammed Asghar was shot in his jail cell by a guard in 2014. See Waqar Gillani, 

Pakistani Guard Shoots Prisoner Convicted of Blasphemy, New York Times (Sept. 25, 

2014), https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/26/world/asia/pakistan-blasphemy-lawsprison-shooting-rawalpindi.html. In 2020, Tahir Ahmad Naseem was murdered in 

the courtroom during his trial. See Secunder Kermani, Pakistan Blasphemy: Gunman 

Shoots Accused Dead in Court, BBC (July 29, 2020), https://www.bbc.com/news/worldasia-53582578. 

9 In 2018, Patras Masih was accused of sharing a blasphemous image in a Facebook 

messenger group. A large mob came to his village and threatened to lynch Masih, 

causing more than 800 Christian residents to flee the village. The police arrested 

Masih and interrogated his cousin, Sajid. The police reportedly beat Sajid while in 

custody and attempted to force him to perform oral sex on Masih, but Sajid instead 

jumped out of a fourth-floor window, attempting suicide in response to the police 

threats of sexual violence. See Asif Aqeel, Pakistan Blasphemy Suspect Says He Jumped 

from Fourth Floor to Escape Forced Sex Act, World Watch Monitor (Feb. 26, 2018), 

https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2018/02/pakistan-blasphemy-suspect-says-hejumped-from-fourth-floor-to-escape-forced-sex-act/. 

10 Asia Bibi: Still A ‘Prisoner’ in Pakistan?, DW (April 5, 2019), https://www.dw.com/en/

asia-bibi-still-a-prisoner-in-pakistan/a-48228427. 

11 Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger Violence, Free 

Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistansblasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/.

12 Asia Bibi: Pakistani Court Upholds Acquittal Decision, DW (Jan. 29, 2019), https://

www.dw.com/en/asia-bibi-pakistani-court-upholds-acquittal-decision/a-47272482. 

13 Helen Haft, Shahbaz Bhatti’s Murder Cannot Remain Uninvestigated, The Nation 

(Mar. 4, 2020), https://www.thenation.com/article/world/shahbaz-bhattis-murderanniversary/. 

14 Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger Violence, Free 

Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistansblasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/. 

15 The Boy Accused of Blasphemy Who Cut off His Hand, BBC News (Jan. 19, 2016), 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35341256. 

16 Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger Violence, Free 

Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistansblasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/. 

17 The Boy Accused of Blasphemy Who Cut off His Hand, BBC (Jan. 19, 2016), https://

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35341256. 

18 Helen Haft & Joelle Fiss, How Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trigger Violence, Free 

Speech Debate (Dec. 10, 2019), https://freespeechdebate.com/2019/12/how-pakistansblasphemy-laws-trigger-violence/.

19 See Kurdistan Human Rights, Zhakan Baran Was Released on Bail, Kurdpa (Apr. 

10, 2019); see also Saeed Kamali Dehghan, Briton among Eight Jailed in Iran for Web 

Insults, Guardian (May 27, 2014), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/27/

briton-eight-jailed-iran-web-insults-facebook?CMP=twt_gu:.

20 G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Dec. 16, 

1966) https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr.pdf; https://treaties.

un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%20999/volume-999-i-14668-english.pdf Article 18 

of the ICCPR: “1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and 

religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his 

choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public 

or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and 

teaching. 2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to 

have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice. 3. Freedom to manifest one’s religion 

or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are 

necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights 

and freedoms of others. 4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to 

have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure 

the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own 

convictions.”

21 See, e.g., In the Maldives in 2018, Aishath Velezinee was arrested upon her return 

to the Maldives for “causing disregard for Islam.” The charges were based off of 

videos she posted. The Islamic Ministry declared her an apostate and her statements 

blasphemous. She was arrested under Article 617 of the penal code, which 

punishes blasphemy rather than apostasy. See Whistleblower Declared an Apostate 

Arrested on Return to Maldives, Maldives Independent (Nov. 14, 2018), https://

maldivesindependent.com/society/whistleblower-declared-an-apostate-arrested-onreturn-to-maldives-142644. 

22 Man “sentenced to death for atheism” in Saudi Arabia, Independent (Apr. 26, 2017), 

available at https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-mansentenced-death-atheism-ahmad-al-shamri-hafar-al-batin-appeal-denied-a7703161.

html (last visited Oct. 29, 2020).

23 Ferdaouis Bagga & Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International Religious 

Freedom, Apostasy, Blasphemy, and Hate Speech Laws in Africa 16 (2019), https://

www.uscirf.gov/reports-briefs/special-reports/apostasy-blasphemy-and-hate-speechlaws-in-africa.

24 See Ferdaouis Bagga & Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International Religious 

Freedom, Apostasy, Blasphemy, and Hate Speech Laws in Africa 7 (2019), https://www.

uscirf.gov/reports-briefs/special-reports/apostasy-blasphemy-and-hate-speech-laws-inafrica. See also, that in recent years, some very high-profile cases of apostasy were 

difficult to ignore for the researchers, even if such cases go beyond the subject of this 

report. The Library of Congress “surveys the apostasy laws of twenty-three countries 

in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia and primarily focuses on 

jurisdictions that make apostasy, or renouncing one’s religion, a capital offense.” Laws 

Criminalizing Apostasy, Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/

index.php#summary. 

25 In July 2020, Sudan’s transitional government repealed its apostasy law by adopting 

the Fundamental Rights and Freedoms Act and ending flogging, which was a 

punishment previously included in its blasphemy law. See USCIRF Applauds Sudan’s 

Repeal of Apostasy Law through Passage of New Fundamental Rights and Freedoms Act, 

U.S. Commission International Religious Freedom (July 15, 2020), https://www.uscirf.

gov/news-room/press-releases-statements/uscirf-applauds-sudan-s-repeal-apostasy-lawthrough-passage-new. 

26 See Ferdaouis Bagga & Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International Religious 

Freedom, Apostasy, Blasphemy, and Hate Speech Laws in Africa 7 (2019), https://www.

uscirf.gov/reports-briefs/special-reports/apostasy-blasphemy-and-hate-speech-lawsin-africa; see also USCIRF Applauds Sudan’s Repeal of Apostasy Law through Passage 

of New Fundamental Rights and Freedoms Act, U.S. Commission on International 

Religious Freedom (Jul. 15, 2020), https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/press-releasesstatements/uscirf-applauds-sudan-s-repeal-apostasy-law-through-passage-new.

27 See Ferdaouis Bagga & Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International Religious 

Freedom, Apostasy, Blasphemy, and Hate Speech Laws in Africa 31 (2019), https://

www.uscirf.gov/reports-briefs/special-reports/apostasy-blasphemy-and-hate-speechlaws-in-africa.

28 See Annex 2, Sudan Criminal Code, The Criminal Act of 1991 Part XIII [Offenses 

Relating to Religions] Art. 125 [Insulting Religious Creeds]. 

29 Kirsten Lavery, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Legislation 

Factsheet: Conversion Laws 1 (Dec. 2018), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/

Legislation%20Factsheet%20-%20Conversion%20Laws_0.pdf. 

30 See Annex 2, Nepal Penal Code, Article 158. 

31 See Annex 2, Nepal Penal Code, Art. 158. 

32 Nepal 2018 International Religious Freedom Report, Office of International Religious 

Freedom, Department of State 6 (2018), https://www.state.gov/reports/2018-report-oninternational-religious-freedom/nepal/. 

33 This could be a further area of study. For example, Nepal’s new anti-conversion laws 

are worded and enforced in such a way as to suggest that they may also be applied 

as anti-blasphemy enforcement measures. See Annex 2, Nepal Penal Code, Article 

158. See also Bhim Bahadur Pradhan and Nabin Kumar Mandal, who were arrested 

for preaching and thus “offending” religious feelings. Pressure on Christians Heats up 

in Nepal, Evangelical Focus (Jul. 16, 2018), https://evangelicalfocus.com/world/3670/

Pressure-on-Christians-heats-up-in-Nepal. 

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 33
34 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 6 (2017). See Article 18 of the ICCPR: “1. Everyone shall 

have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include 

freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either 

individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his 

religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. 2. No one shall be 

subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion 

or belief of his choice. 3. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject 

only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public 

safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. 4. 

The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty 

of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral 

education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.” See also

Article 20 (2) of the ICCPR: “Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that 

constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by 

law.” G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 

(Dec. 16, 1966) https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr.pdf. 

35 See Annex 2, United Arab Emirates, Federal Decree Law No. 2 of 2015, Article 

4: “Any person who commits any of the following acts shall be sentenced for the 

crime of blasphemy: 1- Offending, showing contempt or irreverence toward the 

Divine Entity. 2- Offending, insulting, challenging, defaming or disrespecting any 

religion or any of its rituals or sacred things, or disrupting or preventing licensed 

religious observances or ceremonies by violence or threat. 3- Distorting, destroying, 

desecrating or insulting, in any way, any of the holy books. 4- Insulting, disrespecting, 

offending or defaming one of the messengers or their spouses, family or companions. 

5- Destroying, damaging or desecrating the sanctity of places of worship, cemeteries 

or graves, appurtenances or any of their contents.”

36 UAE Law No. 2 of 2015, Article 3, http://ejustice.gov.ae/downloads/latest_laws2015/

FDL_2_2015_discrimination_hate_en.pdf.

37 Human Rights Council Res. 34/18, U.N. Doc. A/74/486, ¶ 10 (Oct. 9, 2019), https://

www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/A_74_486.pdf. 

38 Human Rights Council Res. 34/18, U.N. Doc. A/74/486, ¶ 21 (Oct. 9, 2019), https://

www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/A_74_486.pdf.

39 See Freedom of Religion or Belief, Art. 19, https://www.article19.org/issue/freedomof-religion-or-belief/, “The rights to freedom of expression and freedom of religion 

or belief are very closely related, both being “neighbours” in Articles 19 and 18 

of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, respectively. Despite a common 

misperception that these rights stand in opposition to one another, both rights are 

essential ingredients to free and democratic societies.” See also John Locke, Letter 

Concerning Toleration (1689), http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1651-1700/johnlocke-letter-concerning-toleration-1689.php. “Every man has commission to admonish, 

exhort, convince another of error, and, by reasoning, to draw him into truth; but to 

give laws, receive obedience, and compel with the sword, belongs to none but the 

magistrate. And, upon this ground, I affirm that the magistrate’s power extends not 

to the establishing of any articles of faith, or forms of worship, by the force of his 

laws. For laws are of no force at all without penalties, and penalties in this case are 

absolutely impertinent, because they are not proper to convince the mind. Neither the 

profession of any articles of faith, nor the conformity to any outward form of worship 

(as has been already said), can be available to the salvation of souls, unless the truth of 

the one and the acceptableness of the other unto God be thoroughly believed by those 

that so profess and practice. But penalties are no way capable of producing such belief. 

It is only light and evidence that can work a change in men’s opinions, which light can 

in no manner proceed from corporal sufferings, or any other outward penalties.” 

40 Commonly known in the United States as “hate speech laws,” even if this formulation 

is vague from a legal point of view. 

41 In 2018, Putin partially decriminalized Article 282 of Russia’s Criminal Code on the 

Incitement of Hatred or Enmity, relaxing the rules for first-time offenders. See Putin 

Softens Jail Terms for ‘Extremist’ Memes, Moscow Times (Dec. 28, 2018), https://

www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/12/28/putin-softens-jail-terms-for-posting-extremistmemes-a63989. However, prior to its decriminalization, many Russians were charged 

under the law for “blasphemous” activities and the possible sentence exceeds the 

sentence under Russia’s traditional blasphemy law Article 148. See Article 282 

Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, No. 63-FZ of June 13, 1996, https://www.

legislationline.org/documents/id/4028: “Article 282. Incitement of Hatred or Enmity, as 

Well as Abasement of Human Dignity, 1. Actions aimed at the incitement of hatred or 

enmity, as well as abasement of dignity of a person or a group of persons on the basis 

of sex, race, nationality, language, origin, attitude to religion, as well as affiliation to 

any social group, if these acts have been committed in public or with the use of mass 

media, shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of 100 to 300 minimum wages, 

or in the amount of the wage or salary, or any other income of the convicted person 

for a period of 1 to 2 years, or by deprivation of the right to hold specified offices or 

to engage in specified activities for a term of up to 3 years, or by compulsory works 

for a term of up to 180 hours, or by corrective works for a term of up to 1 year, or by 

deprivation of liberty for a term of up to 2 years. 2. The same deeds committed: a) 

with the use of violence or with the threat of its use; b) by a person through his official 

position; c) by an organized group, shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of 

100,000 to 500,000 rubles or in the amount of the wage or salary, or any other income 

of the convicted person for a period of 1 to 3 years, or by deprivation of the right to 

hold specified offices or to engage in specified activities for a term of up to 5 years, or 

by compulsory works for a term of 120 to 240 hours, or by corrective works for a term 

of 1 to 2 years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to 5 years.” 

42 See Annex 2, Russia, Federal Law No. 136-FZ dated 29 June 2013 of the Russian 

Federation Moscow, Article 148; Russia, End Blasphemy Laws (Sept. 2, 2020), https://

end-blasphemy-laws.org/countries/europe/russia/. 

43 Eleven cases were charged under Art. 5.26 of Russia’s administrative code. See 

Annex 2, Russia Art. 5.26 Administrative Code. 

44 For example, Danil Markin and Maria Motuznaya were charged under Article 148 

and Article 282 for posting religious memes after being reported on by two students, 

Daria Isaenko and Anastasya Bitner. See Voskreshenie Dzhona Snoa kak Oskorbleniya 

Chuvstv, Meduza (Jul. 30, 2018), https://meduza.io/feature/2018/07/30/dvuh-zhiteleybarnaula-obvinyayut-v-ekstremizme-iz-za-memov-vo-vkontakte-zayavleniya-na-nihpodali-odni-i-te-zhe-studentki-yurfaka. 

45 See Yulia Gorbunova and Anastasia Ovsyannikova, In Russia, Thou Shalt Not Disagree 

with the Orthodox Church, Human Rights Watch (Nov. 18, 2016), https://www.hrw.

org/news/2016/11/18/russia-thou-shalt-not-disagree-orthodox-church. 

46 The law from 2016 to 2018, allowed for between 2 and 5 years in prison as 

punishment. See Peter Roudik, Russia: Strengthening of Punishment for Extremism, 

Library of Congress (Jul. 18, 2016), https://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/

russia-strengthening-of-punishment-for-extremism/. 

47 Anastasia Gnedinskaya, Laiknul - v Tyurmu - shto stoit za ugolovnymy delamy po state 

282, RIA Novosti (Aug. 20, 2018), https://ria.ru/20180820/1526668130.html.

48 Ekstremistskie Materialy, Ministerstvo Iustitsii Rossiskoi Federatsii, https://minjust.gov.

ru/ru/extremist-materials/?page=47&.

49 Article 20.29 of Russia’s Administrative Code, http://www.kodap.ru/razdel-2/glava-20/

st-20-29-koap-rf. 

50 An Article 148 case against Victor Nochevnov, who posted religious caricatures on 

social media, was initiated by the head of a monastery, Lev Gryzun, who reported the 

incident to the investigative committee. The Center against Extremism then opened 

a case. Gryzun also served as a witness: See Dima Schvetz, Shakh i Dogmat, Ateisty! 

Opredelenie Vtorogo Nikeiskogo Sobora v Dele Inzhenera iz Sochi, Osuzhdennogo za 

Repost, Mediazona (Oct. 4, 2017), https://zona.media/article/2017/10/04/nochevnov. 

In 2019, a priest, Alexander Novopashin, who was against the showing of the opera 

Tangeizer due to offense of religious feelings, was awarded a medal for his work 

against extremism by the center against extremism. See Svyashennika, Vystupavshego 

protiv “Tangeizera,” Nagradili “za Protivodeistvie Ekstrimizmu,” ZNAK (June 3, 2019), 

https://www.znak.com/2019-06-03/svyachennika_vystupavshego_protiv_tangeyzera_

nagradili_za_protivodeystvie_ekstremizmu. 

51 It should be noted that in 2020 as a result of constitutional reforms, the word “God” 

was added to the Russian Constitution. See Putin Strongly Backed in Controversial 

Russian Reform Vote, BBC (July 2, 2020), https://www.bbc.com/news/worldeurope-53255964. 

52 See Delo Viktora Nochevnova o Reposte vo Vkontakte Karikatur na Khrista, Agora, 

(2017, updated in 2018), https://agora.legal/cases/Internet/Delo-Viktora-Nochevnova-oreposte-vo-VKontakte-karikutur-na-Hrista/189. 

53 Anastasia Gnedinskaya, Laiknul - v Tyurmu - shto stoit za ugolovnymy delamy po state 

282, RIA Novosti (Aug. 20, 2018), https://ria.ru/20180820/1526668130.html.

54 Aleksei Sivashenkov, K Chem Privedyot Dekriminalizatsia 282-i Stati, Forbes (Nov. 15, 

2018), https://www.forbes.ru/biznes/369241-k-chemu-privedet-dekriminalizaciya-282-

y-stati. 

55 Ryan Jacobs, Saudi Arabia’s War on Witchcraft, Atlantic (Aug. 19, 2013), https://

www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/saudi-arabias-war-onwitchcraft/278701/. 

56 Azard Ali, Woman, 56, in Court over Obeah Claims, Trinidad & Tobago Newsday 

(Feb. 9, 2019), https://newsday.co.tt/2019/02/09/woman-56-in-court-over-obeahclaims/. 

57 Nick Schager, Inside Zambia’s Horrifying Prosecution of Witches, Daily Beast (Sept. 

9, 2018), https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-zambias-horrifying-persecution-ofwitches.

58 Ryan Jacobs, Saudi Arabia’s War on Witchcraft, Atlantic (Aug. 19, 2013), https://

www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/saudi-arabias-war-onwitchcraft/278701/. 

59 The researchers noted several instances of reported state violence against alleged 

blasphemers in Pakistan. In 2014, for instance, police officer Faraz Naveed reportedly 

struck and killed Tufail Naqvi (also referred to as Syed Tufail Hyder) with an axe 

after Naqvi allegedly “blasphemed against companions of the Prophet Muhammad 

while in the police station.” Pakistan Police Officer Kills ‘Blasphemer’ with Axe, BBC 

(Nov. 6, 2014), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29933125; In 2015, a prison 

guard shot 70-year-old diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic Muhammad Asghar 

in the back and attempted to kill him while Asghar was in prison serving a death 

sentence for allegedly writing letters in which he stated he was “the prophet.” British 

Grandfather Mohammad Asghar Awaits Execution for Blasphemy in Pakistan, Amnesty 

International U.K. (Mar. 31, 2015), https://www.amnesty.org.uk/mohammad-asgharpakistan-blasphemy-death-row. 

In January 2017, Aasim Saeed was reported to be among five social media activists 

who went missing in Pakistan. Aasim asserts he was kidnapped and tortured by a 

state intelligence agency. It was only after he was allowed to go home that he found 

out that he had been accused of blasphemy. Pakistan Blogger Aasim Saeed Says He 

Was Tortured, BBC (Oct. 25, 2017), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41662595. 

In 2017, Mukhtar Masih was accused of writing a blasphemous letter or letters. 69 

Year Old Mukhtar Masih’s Bail for Blasphemy Charges Approved!, British Pakistani 

Christian Assoc. (May 22, 2017), https://www.britishpakistanichristians.org/blog/69-

year-old-mukhtar-masih-given-bail-from-blasphemy-charges; Morning Star/Pakistan 

Correspondent, Christian Charged with Blasphemy, 106 Muslims Acquitted, Baptist 

Press (Feb. 7, 2017), https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/christiancharged-with-blasphemy-106-muslims-acquitted/. During his arrest, police allegedly 

broke into his home and slapped him. They also tortured his son in front of him, see 

Blasphemy Case Closed after Death of Accused Christian Mukhtar Masih, Pakistan 

Christian Post (Nov. 22, 2017), http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/head-line-newsdetails/6690. 

Findings

34 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
60 On November 5, 2013, for instance, the Iranian police arrested music distributors 

Mehdi Rajabian, Yousef Emadi, and Hossein Rajabian and sentenced them for 

“insulting the sacred.” While in jail they were allegedly beaten and subjected to 

electric shocks. See Saeed Kamali Dehghan, Three Jailed in Iran for Distributing 

Underground Music, Guardian (June 6, 2017), https://www.theguardian.com/

world/2016/jun/06/iran-mehdi-hossein-rajabian-yousef-emadi-jailed-distributingunderground-music; Iranian Music Distributors Sentenced to Three Years in Prison, 

Center for Human Rights in Iran (Mar. 1, 2016), https://www.iranhumanrights.

org/2016/03/iranian-music-distributors-sentenced/. 

61 In 2016, in Algeria, Slimane Bouhafs was sentenced to five years in prison for 

“insulting the prophet Mohammed.” The charge came after he posted on Facebook 

about being Christian. Reports indicate that “he suffered attacks within the prison 

system as a result of standing up for his Christian faith.” Alex Anhalt, Algerian 

Believer Faces Blasphemy Charges, Mission Network News (June 5, 2017), https://

www.mnnonline.org/news/algerian-believer-faces-blasphemy-charges/; Blasphemy and 

Related Laws, Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/law/help/blasphemy/index.php.

62 In 2015, in Egypt, a mob attacked husband and wife, Ahmed and Saly Harqan (also 

referred to as Nada Mandour), days after Ahmed explained why he left Islam on TV. 

The couple ran to the police station to report the mob, but instead of helping, the 

police beat Mandour. The couple tried to escape the mob by going to a nearby police 

station. Instead of taking action to help the couple, the police officers assaulted and 

detained them. Atheist Egyptian Couple Escape a Lynch Mob, Only to be Beaten by the 

Police, YouTube (Dec. 8, 2014), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siHKC0tQNKI; 

Heather Murdock, Defying Taboo, Middle East Atheists Launch TV Channel, Voice of 

America (Apr. 30, 2015), https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/defying-taboo-middleeast-atheists-launch-tv-channel.

63 In Iran, metal musicians Nikan Siyanor Khosravi and Khosravi Arash Ilkhani, were 

held in solitary confinement after being accused of blasphemy. See Metal Band 

Confess Reportedly Jailed and Facing Execution for Blasphemy in Iran, Independent 

(Feb. 17, 2016, 4:41PM), https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/

metal-band-confess-reportedly-jailed-and-facing-execution-blasphemy-iran-a6879466.

html. 

64 In 2012 in Kazakhstan, the human rights activist Alexander Kharlamov was charged 

with Article 164(1) due to publications which expressed doubts about God. These 

publications were equated with inciting religious hatred. While the charges were 

eventually dropped in 2018, during the ordeal, Kharlamov was forced to spend a 

month under forced psychiatric evaluation. Kazis Toguzbaev, Prekrashenoe pervoe 

delo pravozashitnika iz Riddera Kharlamova, Radio Azatyk (May 5, 2018), https://

rus.azattyq.org/a/29209799.html; Kazakhstanskogo pravozashitnika sudyat za 

ateisticheskie vzglyadi, DW (Jul. 29, 2013), https://www.dw.com/ru/казахстанскогоправозащитника-судят-за-атеистические-взгляды/a-16985389; Kazakhstan, End 

Blasphemy Laws, https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/countries/asia-central-southern-andsouth-eastern/kazakhstan/. In Russia, in 2016, Ruslan Sokolovsky was charged with 

Articles 148 and 282 after posting a video on Youtube of himself playing Pokemon 

Go in a cathedral. While in custody, he was threatened by a psychiatrist that he 

would be sent for psychiatric evaluations where he would not have access to a lawyer. 

Ruslan Sokolovsky pozhalovalsya na ugrozy psychiatra SIZO i otkazalsya kayatsa pered 

RPTS, ZNAK (Sept. 7, 2016), https://www.znak.com/2016-09-07/ruslan_sokolovskiy_

pozhalovalsya_na_ugrozy_psihiatra_sizo_i_otkazalsya_kayatsya_pered_rpc; Maria 

Kravchenko, Inappropriate Enforcement of Anti-Extremist Legislation in Russia in 

2016, SOVA Ctr. Info. & Analysis (Apr. 21, 2017), https://www.sova-center.ru/en/

misuse/reports-analyses/2017/04/d36857/.

65 Campaign for Free Expression, Hamad Al-Naqi, https://centerforinquiry.org/cfe/

hamad-al-naqi/ (reporting that the accused was placed in solitary confinement 

in prison for his own safety after being attacked, suggesting that it was not an 

appropriate punishment for behavior of the person convicted of blasphemy crimes).

66 In 2018, Patras Masih was accused of sharing a blasphemous image in a Facebook 

messenger group. A large mob came to his village and threatened to lynch Masih, 

causing more than 800 Christian residents to flee the village. The police arrested 

Masih and interrogated his cousin, Sajid. The police reportedly beat Sajid while in 

custody and attempted to force him to perform oral sex on Masih, but Sajid instead 

jumped out of a fourth-floor window, attempting suicide in response to the police 

threats of sexual violence. See Asif Aqeel, Pakistan Blasphemy Suspect Says He Jumped 

from Fourth Floor to Escape Forced Sex Act, World Watch Monitor (Feb. 26, 2018), 

https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2018/02/pakistan-blasphemy-suspect-says-hejumped-from-fourth-floor-to-escape-forced-sex-act/. 

67 In Russia in 2018, Andrei Shasherin was charged under Articles 282 and 148, for 

memes posted to his media page that among other things parodied the Patriarch 

of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill. The caricature shows Patriarch Kirill with 

a reflection of an expensive watch (there was a scandal regarding this watch which 

was photoshopped out of an interview, but appeared in the reflection of a table), 

Jesus is standing behind him and asks him what time it is, and the Patriarch tells 

him to “Fuck off.” Shasherin claimed that he lost his Vkontakte password in 2012 

and had never seen the posts. He was threatened by the authorities to cooperate and 

told that he would go to jail if he did not sign a confession. He signed because of the 

pressure. Andrei Shasherin, Otkrytka Pravozashita, https://orpravo.org/case/andrejshasherin/; Natalya Zotova, Doshutilis do suda: kak v Barnaule zhivut obvinyaemye 

za reposty vo “Vkontake,” BBC News (Aug. 20, 2018), https://www.bbc.com/russian/

features-45221345; Memy iz dela Andreya Shasherina, Medium (Aug. 4, 2018), 

https://medium.com/fighting-russian-censorship/мемы-из-дела-андрея-шашерина5754005ddf04.

68 For example, Raif Badawi reportedly faced cruel treatment in prison. https://

humanists.international/2015/01/iheu-call-it-what-it-is-saudi-arabias-flogging-of-raifbadawi-is-barbarity-and-torture-plain-and-simple/.

69 A British national, Naomi Michelle Coleman, was arrested in Sri Lanka because she 

had a tattoo of Buddha. While in custody, a prison guard “made several lewd, obscene 

and disparaging remarks of a sexually-explicit nature.” “Buddha Tattoo Woman 

Naomi Coleman Wins Compensation,” BBC News (Nov. 15, 2017), https://www.bbc.

com/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-41995069; “Sri Lanka to Deport Buddha 

Tattoo British Woman,” BBC News (Apr. 22, 2014), https://www.bbc.com/news/worldasia-27107857. 

70 In 2012 in Kazakhstan, the human rights activist Alexander Kharlamov was charged 

with Article 164(1) due to publications which expressed doubts about God. These 

publications were equated with inciting religious hatred. While the charges were 

eventually dropped in 2018, during the ordeal, Kharlamov was forced to spend a 

month under forced psychiatric evaluation. Kazis Toguzbaev, Prekrashenoe pervoe 

delo pravozashitnika iz Riddera Kharlamova, Radio Azatyk (May 5, 2018), https://

rus.azattyq.org/a/29209799.html; Kazakhstanskogo pravozashitnika sudyat za 

ateisticheskie vzglyadi, DW (Jul. 29, 2013), https://www.dw.com/ru/казахстанскогоправозащитника-судят-за-атеистические-взгляды/a-16985389; Kazakhstan, End 

Blasphemy Laws, https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/countries/asia-central-southern-andsouth-eastern/kazakhstan/. In Russia, in 2016, Ruslan Sokolovsky was charged with 

Articles 148 and 282 after posting a video on Youtube of himself playing Pokemon 

Go in a cathedral. While in custody, he was threatened by a psychiatrist that he 

would be sent for psychiatric evaluations where he would not have access to a lawyer. 

Ruslan Sokolovsky pozhalovalsya na ugrozy psychiatra SIZO i otkazalsya kayatsa pered 

RPTS, ZNAK (Sept. 7, 2016), https://www.znak.com/2016-09-07/ruslan_sokolovskiy_

pozhalovalsya_na_ugrozy_psihiatra_sizo_i_otkazalsya_kayatsya_pered_rpc; Maria 

Kravchenko, Inappropriate Enforcement of Anti-Extremist Legislation in Russia in 

2016, SOVA Ctr. Info. & Analysis (Apr. 21, 2017), https://www.sova-center.ru/en/

misuse/reports-analyses/2017/04/d36857/.

71 In Russia, in 2018, Andrei Shasherin was charged under Articles 282 and 148, for 

memes posted to his media page that among other things parodied the Patriarch 

of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill. The caricature shows Patriarch Kirill with 

a reflection of an expensive watch (there was a scandal regarding this watch which 

was photoshopped out of an interview, but appeared in the reflection of a table), 

Jesus is standing behind him and asks him what time it is, and the Patriarch tells 

him to “Fuck off.” Shasherin claimed that he lost his Vkontakte password in 2012 

and had never seen the posts. He was threatened by the authorities to cooperate and 

told that he would go to jail if he did not sign a confession. He signed because of the 

pressure. Andrei Shasherin, Otkrytka Pravozashita, https://orpravo.org/case/andrejshasherin/; Natalya Zotova, Doshutilis do suda: kak v Barnaule zhivut obvinyaemye 

za reposty vo “Vkontake,” BBC News (Aug. 20, 2018), https://www.bbc.com/russian/

features-45221345; Memy iz dela Andreya Shasherina, Medium (Aug. 4, 2018), 

https://medium.com/fighting-russian-censorship/мемы-из-дела-андрея-шашерина5754005ddf04.

72 A British national, Naomi Michelle Coleman, was arrested in Sri Lanka because she 

had a tattoo of Buddha. While in custody, a prison guard “made several lewd, obscene 

and disparaging remarks of a sexually-explicit nature.” “Buddha Tattoo Woman 

Naomi Coleman Wins Compensation,” BBC News (Nov. 15, 2017), https://www.bbc.

com/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-41995069; “Sri Lanka to Deport Buddha 

Tattoo British Woman,” BBC News (Apr. 22, 2014), https://www.bbc.com/news/worldasia-27107857. 

73 In Iran, metal musicians Nikan Siyanor Khosravi and Khosravi Arash Ilkhani, were 

held in solitary confinement after being accused of blasphemy. See Metal Band 

Confess Reportedly Jailed and Facing Execution for Blasphemy in Iran, Independent 

(Feb.17, 2016, 4:41PM), https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/

metal-band-confess-reportedly-jailed-and-facing-execution-blasphemy-iran-a6879466.

html. 

74 In Iran in 2015, Mohammed Reza Pourshajeri was held in prison after completing 

his prison sentence. Blogger Still Held Behind Bars despite Completing Sentence as 

He Awaits Exile, Center for Human Rights in Iran (Oct. 12, 2015), https://www.

iranhumanrights.org/2015/10/mohammad-reza-pourshajari/; Iran: Free Writer, Repeal 

Internal Exile, Human Rights Watch (Nov. 2, 2015, 11:55PM EST), https://www.hrw.

org/news/2015/11/02/iran-free-writer-repeal-internal-exile#. 

75 In Oman in 2018, Hassan Al-Basham died in prison after not receiving first-aid 

after his blood-sugar levels dropped. He had been facing medical issues prior to this 

incident. Oman: Omani Coalition for Human Rights Mourns the Death of Internet 

Activist Hassan Al-Basham, Gulf Centre for Human Rights (May 2, 2018), https://

www.gc4hr.org/news/view/1843; World Report 2018: OMAN, Human Rights Watch, 

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/oman; Omani Rights Activist 

Dies in Jail after Court Dismissed Medical Warnings, Middle East Eye (May 1, 2018, 

1:58PM UTC), https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/omani-rights-activist-dies-jailafter-court-dismissed-medical-warnings.

76 In 2016 in Pakistan, a minor, Nabil Chohan (also spelled Nabeel Chohan) was 

arrested for blasphemy and according to Amnesty International, was denied “access 

to a lawyer of his choice.” See Rabia Mehmood, The Never-Ending Ordeal of Pakistan’s 

Minorities, Amnesty International (Oct. 16, 2018, 5:22PM UTC), https://www.

amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/10/the-never-ending-ordeal-of-pakistans-minorities; 

Lizzie Dearden, Teenage Christian Boy Arrested for Sharing “Blasphemous” Facebook 

Post in Pakistan, Independent (Sept. 21, 2016, 3:38PM), https://www.independent.

co.uk/news/world/asia/teenage-boy-christian-arrested-sharing-blasphemous-facebookpost-pakistan-nabeel-chohan-kaaba-punjab-a7321156.html;/. In Spain, Willy Toledo’s 

lawyer was not allowed to speak to him following his arrest on blasphemy charges. 

See Nicolas Pan-Montojo, Spanish Actor Willy Toledo Arrested over Religious Offense 

Complaint, El Pais (Sept. 13, 2018), https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2018/09/13/

inenglish/1536826207_551868.html. 

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 35
77 In 2015 in Pakistan, Mazhar Abbas and Abdul Shakoor were arrested and detained in 

an undisclosed location for “selling an Ahmadiyya commentary on the Qur’an.” Abdul 

Shakoor (Released), U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, https://

www.uscirf.gov/abdul-shakoor-released. In Iran, Mohammad Ali Taheri was held in 

prison even after completing his prison sentence. See Selected Blasphemy Cases, U.S. 

Commission on International Religious Freedom, (2017), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/

default/files/Selected%20Blasphemy%20Cases%20--%20September%202017.pdf.

78 Golrokh Ebrahimi Iraee, Iran Prison Atlas: United for Iran, https://ipa.united4iran.

org/en/prisoner/761/; Kaveh Taheri, Iran: Writer Golrokh Irraee Arrested in Violent 

Raid on Her House, BCR News (Oct. 25, 2016, 9:10AM), https://news.bcrgroup.

us/iran-writer-golrokh-iraee-arrested-in-violent-raid-on-her-h.html. For instance, 

Junaid Hafeez was detained in solitary confinement before his trial commenced for 

years. See, e.g., Human Rights Watch (2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/02/05/

pakistani-professors-endless-blasphemy-trial.

79 In Oman, Hassan al-Basham died in prison after his defense was not allowed to 

present evidence regarding his health during trial. Omani Rights Activist Dies in Jail 

After Court Dismissed Medical Warnings, Middle East Eye (May 1, 2018, 1:58PM 

UTC), https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/omani-rights-activist-dies-jail-aftercourt-dismissed-medical-warnings. In Sri Lanka, Naomi Michelle Coleman’s trial was 

conducted in Sinhalese, which she did not understand. See Ruwan Laknath Jayakody, 

Buddha Bar: An Analysis of Coleman vs. Attorney General & Others, Colombo 

Telegraph (Dec. 19, 2017). 

80 In Bangladesh, Mohon Kumar Mondal was denied bail. See Tom Porter, Mohon 

Kumar Mondal: Bangladesh Arrests Environmental Activist after He Criticizes Islam 

Online, International Business Times (Oct. 26, 2015), https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/

mohon-kumar-mondal-bangladesh-arrests-secularist-blogger-after-he-criticisesislam-1525243. 

81 In Egypt, Mohammed Hegazy’s lawyer was not granted access to him. See Barbara 

Baker, Bureaucratic Delays Put Egyptian Convert’s Appeal at Risk, World Watch 

Monitor (Jan. 29, 2015), https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2015/01/bureaucraticdelays-put-egyptian-converts-appeal-at-risk/. 

82 In India, Tirak Biswas was arrested without having been given the required notice. 

See Blogger Arrested in West Bengal for Allegedly Committing Blasphemy against Islam, 

Scroll (Sept. 22, 2016), https://scroll.in/latest/817148/freethinker-arrested-in-westbengal-for-allegedly-comitting-blasphemy-against-islam. 

83 In Iran, Mohammad Ali Taheri was held in prison even after completing his prison 

sentence. See Selected Blasphemy Cases, U.S. Commission on International Religious 

Freedom (2017), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/Selected%20Blasphemy%20

Cases%20--%20September%202017.pdf. 

84 In Mauritania, a blogger was detained even after completing his sentence. See

Mauritanian President Defends Continued Detention of Infidel Blogger,” Qantara.

de (June 26, 2019), https://en.qantara.de/content/mauritanian-president-defendscontinued-detention-of-infidel-blogger. 

85 In Russia, in the case against Anton Uschachev, a witness (who was also with him 

during the “blasphemous” incident and detained with him) was pressured by the 

police to confess, and was also allegedly beaten at the police station. See Svidetelnitsa 

po delu ob oskvernenii tserkvi zayavila o davlenii politsii, Chelny-biz.ru (Dec. 13, 2017), 

https://chelny-biz.ru/news/210081/.

86 In Saudi Arabia, Alaa Brinji was denied access to counsel. See Samuel Osborne, Saudi 

Arabia: Journalist Sentenced to 5 Years in Prison for Tweets ‘Ridiculing Islamic Religious 

Figures,’ Independent (Mar. 26, 2016), https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/

middle-east/saudi-arabia-journalist-sentenced-5-years-prison-tweets-ridiculing-islamicreligious-figures-a6953266.html. 

87 In Sudan, two pastors, Yat Michael Ruot and Peter Yein Reith, were held 

incommunicado. See European Parliament resolution of 9 July 2015 on the situation 

of two Christian pastors in Sudan (2015/2766(RSP) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/

doceo/document/TA-8-2015-0280_EN.pdf?redirect.

88 Yemen: 24 Baha’i People, Including a Child, Facing Possible Death Penalty, Amnesty 

International (Sept. 18, 2018), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/09/

yemen-24-bahai-people-including-a-child-facing-possible-death-penalty/. 

89 Mauritanian President Defends Continued Detention of Infidel Blogger, Qantara.

de (June 26, 2019), https://en.qantara.de/content/mauritanian-president-defendscontinued-detention-of-infidel-blogger. 

90 Mauritania Releases Facebook Blogger Convicted of Blasphemy, BBC (July 30, 2019), 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-49165640. 

91 Mauritanian President Defends Continued Detention of Infidel Blogger, Qantara.

de (June 26, 2019), https://en.qantara.de/content/mauritanian-president-defendscontinued-detention-of-infidel-blogger. 

92 See Joelle Fiss, Anti-Blasphemy Offensives in the Digital Age: When Hardliners Take 

Over 7-8 (2016), https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/brookingsanalysis-paper_joelle-fiss_web.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

93 Amnesty International, Pakistan: “As Good as Dead”: The Impact of Blasphemy Laws in 

Pakistan 12-14 (2016), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/12/pakistan-howthe-blasphemy-laws-enable-abuse/.

94 Pakistan Police Officer Kills ‘Blasphemer’ with an Axe, BBC News (Nov. 6, 2014) 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29933125.

95 See Amnesty International, Pakistan: “As Good as Dead”: The Impact of Blasphemy 

Laws in Pakistan 12-14 (2016), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/12/

pakistan-how-the-blasphemy-laws-enable-abuse/.

96 See, e.g., Joris Fioriti, Blasphemy Cases Intimidate Pakistan Judges, Asia Times (Feb. 27, 

2020), https://asiatimes.com/2020/02/blasphemy-cases-intimidate-pakistan-judges/.

97 Helen Haft, Shahbaz Bhatti’s Murder Cannot Remain Uninvestigated, The Nation 

(Mar. 4, 2020), https://www.thenation.com/article/world/shahbaz-bhattis-murderanniversary/.

98 Helen Haft, Shahbaz Bhatti’s Murder Cannot Remain Uninvestigated, The Nation 

(Mar. 4, 2020), https://www.thenation.com/article/world/shahbaz-bhattis-murderanniversary/. 

99 For additional details on Bibi’s case, see Case Study on Pakistan, supra. See also 

Haroon Janjua & Shamil Shams, Asia Bibi: Pakistani Court Upholds Acquittal Decision, 

Deutsche Welle (Jan. 29, 2019), https://www.dw.com/en/asia-bibi-pakistani-courtupholds-acquittal-decision/a-47272482.

100 Rasheed Rehman, a lawyer representing Junaid Hafeez was murdered in 2014. See 

Pakistan ‘Blasphemy’ Lawyer Shot Dead in Multan Office, BBC (May 7, 2014), https://

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27319433. 

101 Harriet Sherwood, Asia Bibi’s Lawyer to Defend Couple on Death Row over Blasphemy,

Guardian (May 15, 2019), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/asia-bibilawyer-defend-couple-death-row-blasphemy-pakistan.

102 See Andrew Buncombe & Umair Aziz, Pakistani Lawyer Rashid Rehman Murdered 

after Taking on Blasphemy Case, Independent (May 9, 2014), https://www.independent.

co.uk/incoming/pakistani-lawyer-rashid-rehman-murdered-after-taking-blasphemycase-9341021.html.

103 Compare Asad Hashim, Explained: Pakistan’s Emotive Blasphemy Laws, Aljazeera 

(Sept. 21, 2020), https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/9/21/explained-pakistansemotive-blasphemy-laws (finding religious identity and authenticity to be tied to the 

authority of the state).

104 Bangladesh’s Criminal Justice System Incapable of Providing Justice, Opentrial.org,

https://www.opentrial.org/page21.html. 

105 Myanmar Code of Criminal Procedure, https://www.policinglaw.info/assets/

downloads/1898_Code_of_Criminal_Procedure_(Myanmar).pdf. 

106 First Information Report & You, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, https://

www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/police/fir.pdf. 

107 Pakistan First Information Reports (FIRs) (2010–December 2013), Canada: 

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (Jan. 10, 2014), https://www.refworld.org/

docid/52eba0d84.html. 

108 Certified True Copy of Police Document, Singapore Police Force, https://eservices.police.

gov.sg/content/policehubhome/homepage/certified-true-copy-police-doc-singpass.html. 

109 FIR Lodged against Celebrities Who Wrote Open Letter to Modi on Mob Lynching, The 

Wire (Oct. 4, 2019), https://thewire.in/rights/fir-lodged-against-celebrities-who-wroteopen-letter-to-modi-on-mob-lynching. 

110 Helen Haft, Russia: ‘The Church Has an Enemy in Every Home.’ It’ Television, Free 

Speech Debate (Aug. 9, 2017), https://freespeechdebate.com/discuss/russia-the-churchhas-an-enemy-in-every-home-its-television/. 

111 See Moscow Sculptures Smashed by Orthodox Activists as ‘Blasphemous,’ Radio 

Free Europe (Aug. 15, 2015), https://www.rferl.org/a/moscow-sculptures-smashedorthodox-activists-blasphemous/27190081.html; Ivan Nechepurenko and Michele Berdy, 

Rightwing Russian Activists Attack Moscow Art Exhibition, Guardian (Aug. 18, 2015), 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/18/russia-activists-attack-moscow-artreligion. 

112 See SKR Nachal Proverku Rabot Sidura na Nalichie Priznakov Vozbuzhdeniya 

Nenavisti, SOVA Center (Sept. 28, 2015), https://www.sova-center.ru/religion/news/

authorities/feelings/2015/09/d32896/. 

113 Sabra Ayres, A Movie about a Czar’s Love Affair Ignites Violent Protest from Russia’s 

Religious Right, L.A. Times (Sept. 29, 2017), https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/

la-fg-russia-matilda-20170929-story.html. 

114 Sabra Ayres, A Movie about a Czar’s Love Affair Ignites Violent Protest from Russia’s 

Religious Right, L.A. Times (Sept. 29, 2017), https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/

la-fg-russia-matilda-20170929-story.html. 

115 Sabra Ayres, A Movie about a Czar’s Love Affair Ignites Violent Protest from Russia’s 

Religious Right, L.A. Times (Sept. 29, 2017), https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/

la-fg-russia-matilda-20170929-story.html. 

116 According to the categorization of the Pew Research Center: See Appendix A: 

Relationships between Religion and Government by Country, PEW Research Ctr. 

(2015), https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2017/09/29162845/

Appendix-A.pdf.

117 While Russia’s law on freedom of conscience and religious associations mentions 

four traditional religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism), the Russian 

Orthodox Church is given a special mention in that scheme. See Russia Federal 

Law No. 125-FZ of Sept. 26, 1997 on the Freedom of Conscience and Religious 

Associations. India is officially a secular state with a majority population of 

Hindus. And, finally, Indonesia has multiple religions recognized by the state. In 

all three countries, interreligious tensions exist. See, e.g., Jean-Christophe Peuch, 

Russia: Adygea’s Muslim Community Stirred by Recent Police Assaults, Radio Free 

Europe Radio Liberty (Nov. 23, 2005), https://www.rferl.org/a/1063216.html

(Russia); Christophe Jaffrelot, The Fate of Secularism in India (2019), https://

carnegieendowment.org/2019/04/04/fate-of-secularism-in-india-pub-78689 (India); 

Andreas Harsano, Indonesia Launches ‘Snitch’ App Targeting Religious Minorities, 

Human Rights Watch (Nov. 30, 2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/11/30/

indonesia-launches-snitch-app-targeting-religious-minorities (last visited Sept. 22, 

2020).

118 In Egypt, Kerolos Shouky Attalah, was convicted of blasphemy for “liking” a group 

on Facebook. See Christians Convicted of ‘Blasphemy’ in Egypt for ‘Liking’ Facebook 

Page, Christian Post (June 25, 2014), https://www.christianpost.com/news/christiansconvicted-of-blasphemy-in-egypt-for-liking-facebook-page-122210/. 

119 In Jordan, Nahed Hattar was murdered right before he was to stand trial for 

blasphemy allegations, after sharing a caricature that was viewed as offensive to Islam. 

See Jordanian Writer Shot Dead Outside Court before Trial over Cartoon, Today (Sep. 

25, 2016), https://www.todayonline.com/world/jordanian-writer-shot-dead-front-courttrial-over-cartoon. 

Findings

36 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
120 In Russia, Daniil Markin was charged with blasphemy after religious memes were 

found among thousands of images that he had saved on his VKontake page. See 

Voskreshenie Djona Snow Kak Oskoblenie Chuvstv, Meduza (July 30, 2018), https://

meduza.io/feature/2018/07/30/dvuh-zhiteley-barnaula-obvinyayut-v-ekstremizme-izza-memov-vo-vkontakte-zayavleniya-na-nih-podali-odni-i-te-zhe-studentki-yurfaka. 

121 In some cases, two or more social media platforms were implicated.

122 Policing Religion? There’s an App for That, PUSAD Paramadina, https://www.

paramadina-pusad.or.id/policing-religion-theres-an-app-for-that-2/. 

123 For example, in 2017, Jakarta’s governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (or “Ahok”), a 

Christian of Chinese descent, was sentenced to two years in prison on blasphemy 

charges. See Indonesia: USCIRF Denounces the Recent Conviction and Sentencing 

of Jakarta’s Governor for Blasphemy, U.S. Commissionn on International Religious 

Freedom, https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/press-releases/indonesia-uscirf-denouncesthe-recent-conviction-and-sentencing-jakarta-s.

124 For example, in 2017, Jakarta’s governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (or “Ahok”), a 

Christian of Chinese descent, was sentenced to two years in prison on blasphemy 

charges. See Indonesia: USCIRF Denounces the Recent Conviction and Sentencing 

of Jakarta’s Governor for Blasphemy, U.S. Commissionn on International Religious 

Freedom, https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/press-releases/indonesia-uscirf-denouncesthe-recent-conviction-and-sentencing-jakarta-s. In a more recent example: an ethnic 

Chinese woman and Buddhist, Meliana, was imprisoned on blasphemy charges 

after noting the loudness of the call to prayer. See Aisyah Llewellyn, Indonesia Frees 

Ethnic Chinese Woman Jailed for Blasphemy, Al Jazeera (May 23, 2019), https://

www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/05/indonesia-frees-ethnic-chinese-woman-jailedblasphemy-190523020705974.html. 

125 Andreas Harsono, Indonesia Launches ‘Snitch’ App Targeting Religious Minorities, 

Human Rights Watch (Nov. 30, 2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/11/30/

indonesia-launches-snitch-app-targeting-religious-minorities; Agustinus Beo Da Costa,

Indonesia’s ‘Millennials Party’ Draws Fire for Comments on Sharia by Laws, Reuters

(Nov. 23, 2018), https://w ww.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-politics/indonesiasmillennials-party-draws-fire-for-comments-on-sharia-bylaws-idUSKCN1NS0QV; 

https://putusan.mahkamahagung.go.id/putusan/0b2c169bb5e560c60c4777053210f604.

126 Andreas Harsono, Indonesia Launches ‘Snitch’ App Targeting Religious Minorities, 

Human Rights Watch (Nov. 30, 2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/11/30/

indonesia-launches-snitch-app-targeting-religious-minorities. See also, Sanal 

Edamaruk, Indonesian Blasphemy App on Google Play!, Rationalist International 

(Dec. 14, 2018), https://www.rationalists.net/post/sanal-edamaruku-on-indonesiablasphemy-law; Agustinus Beo Da Costa, Indonesia’s ‘Millennials Party’ Draws Fire 

for Comments on Sharia by Laws, Reuters (Nov. 23, 2018), https://w ww.reuters.com/

article/us-indonesia-politics/indonesias-millennials-party-draws-fire-for-commentson-sharia-bylaws-idUSKCN1NS0QV https://putusan.mahkamahagung.go.id/

putusan/0b2c169bb5e560c60c4777053210f604. 

127 Andreas Harsono, Indonesia Launches ‘Snitch’ App Targeting Religious Minorities, 

Human Rights Watch (Nov. 30, 2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/11/30/

indonesia-launches-snitch-app-targeting-religious-minorities.

Findings

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 37
This page intentionally left blank.

38 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
LIMITATIONS

STUDY AND RESEARCH CHALLENGES

The research team encountered challenges related to the 

identification, collection, documentation, and analysis of 

cases of state criminal blasphemy law enforcement. Many 

of these challenges relate to the nature of the study, which 

consisted exclusively of desk research. While researchers used 

primary sources where they were found (e.g., police reports, 

charging documents, court decisions), the analysis was mainly 

based on secondary source information (e.g., news reports). 

Scarcity of Primary Source Information 

While researchers aimed to include transcripts of court 

proceedings and judgments related to prosecutions of alleged 

blasphemers, very few countries with criminal blasphemy 

laws make available transparent and reliable access to 

online legal sources. Consequently, most of the information 

identified, collected, and recorded during the study came 

from secondary source information such as legal databases, 

online media sources and information from international, 

local human rights and specialized NGOs. Judicial cases of 

enforcement were not sufficiently available to fill out the 

detailed questionnaire that researchers created to populate the 

mapping database. In a few instances, researchers contacted 

individuals with first- or second-hand knowledge of cases of 

blasphemy enforcement, including lawyers, family members 

of the accused, and human rights activists. 

Access to—and Reliability of—Secondary 

Source Information 

Secondary source information, including media and 

press reports, was largely dependent upon the level of 

transparency—especially online transparency—of each 

country studied. Countries with vibrant civil societies, 

independent media, higher levels of press freedom, and 

greater accessibility to technology and online platforms, 

enabled researchers to access and analyze more information—

as well as to verify accuracy. In countries where this was not 

the case, research was more difficult.1 Furthermore, the study 

relies on secondary source reporting, which is by its nature 

uneven in the factual details presented. 

Language Limitations 

Most desk research consisted of combing through secondary 

sources in English and French. Researchers also had access 

to Russian, Persian/Dari, and Spanish speakers to assist 

in gathering primary and secondary sources. Language 

limitations may have undercounted and/or distorted the 

picture of blasphemy enforcement in some countries. For 

example, in Russia, researchers were able to identify a 

significant number of cases because the team included Russian 

language speakers, whereas researchers were unable to engage 

in the same level of research in countries in which no team 

member spoke or read the language (e.g., Bahasi or Arabic). 

In countries such as Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, the research 

team relied more heavily on English-language news sources.

Underrepresentation of Some Accused Faith Groups 

Christian non-governmental organizations and Christian 

online journals are well organized and operative throughout 

the world. Thus, incidents of blasphemy against Christians, 

particularly in Muslim-majority countries, may receive more 

domestic and international media attention than incidents 

of blasphemy against Muslims. The greater availability 

of reported information on cases of blasphemy against 

Christians may present a skewed picture that fails to capture 

actual number of Muslims who are charged with blasphemy 

in Muslim-majority countries. 

Difficulty in Identifying the Date of State Enforcement 

In most cases (93%), researchers identified the year of 

the inciting incident and/or the year of the initial state 

enforcement action against the accused during the study 

period. In 48 cases, secondary source information did not 

include this information, but the date of the news source itself 

indicated that the case date fell between January 1, 2014 and 

December 31, 2018. Further, a significant number of cases are 

ongoing, and thus, the fate of the accused is unknown. In the 

absence of any updated information on an arrest, for instance, 

researchers presumed the accused to continue to be detained. 

Researchers found it challenging to pinpoint the exact year 

that best embodied state enforcement for such cases. This was 

because different state actions may have occurred during the 

course of several years, from 2014 through 2018, as well as 

before and after the period of study.

Difficulty in Identifying the Criminal Law Employed 

In some cases of state criminal enforcement, it proved difficult 

to determine the legal basis of charges against the accused 

because the laws employed were not included in secondary 

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 39
source reports. In these cases, news articles reported that 

authorities arrested individuals for blasphemous conduct, but 

the press provided no information regarding the relevant law 

or laws invoked. In such cases, researchers assessed the nature 

of the underlying act and made an independent determination 

as to whether the conduct was “blasphemous” or not. Once 

the researchers determined that the nature of the act was 

blasphemous, they recorded blasphemous incidents as cases of 

state enforcement of blasphemy.

First Information Reports 

These complaint systems exist in several South and Southeast 

Asian countries. Given that any private individual can initiate 

a complaint, FIRs are not always filed in good faith and can 

be used to further personal vendettas, tarnish reputations, 

or attract negative attention.2 Researchers counted only 

those FIRs reported to be registered and, thus, acted upon in 

some way by the police. The research team, however, found 

it challenging to confirm when the police registered an FIR, 

and therefore, some incidents of state enforcement may have 

been missed.

Vague Laws and Criminal, Civil, and Administrative 

Sanctions in Former Soviet Union States 

The researchers noted the hybrid nature of numerous former 

Soviet Union states’ laws, which conflate the language 

of incitement to hatred with blasphemy allegations. The 

language of “offending religious feelings” is also widespread. 

Blurring the line between incitement to religious hatred and 

blasphemy is a trend within post-Soviet space generally—as 

is the application of laws punishing blasphemy and hate 

speech in conjunction with other offenses. For instance, in the 

case of Azerbaijan, ambiguous statutory language prohibits 

the “excitation of national, racial or religious hostility.”3 In 

some instances, it was difficult to identify whether a law was 

an “incitement” law or a “blasphemy” law. The researchers 

decided not to include certain laws that seemed closer to 

incitement (i.e., Azerbaijan, and Belarus), but decided to 

include other laws where the language errs on the side of 

prosecution of blasphemy (i.e., Kyrgyzstan,4 Moldova,5

Tajikistan,6 Turkmenistan,7 and Uzbekistan).8

This challenge proved even more significant as only states 

with a law recognized as a blasphemy law were examined for 

the purposes of mapping cases. Among these laws, some of 

the maximum penalties were stricter than previously reported 

in Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws 

(i.e., Kazakhstan).9 Additionally, some of these laws specified 

administrative fines (Tajikistan) or were in the code of 

administrative offenses (Turkmenistan). Given that these laws 

either have been or have the potential to be applied jointly, 

we included them in our list of criminal blasphemy laws 

in Annex 2.

Limited Data to Assess Specific Trends 

While very few cases reported additional characteristics of an 

accused individual, in a select number of cases, researchers 

looked for and found other identity markers, such as sexual 

orientation and gender identity (SOGI), disability, and 

literacy. For instance, 7 cases reported that the accused was 

LGBTQI+, 11 cases reported that the accused had a disability, 

and 10 cases reported that the accused was illiterate. Given 

the small number of cases reporting such information relative 

to the total number of cases, quantitative assessment of these 

trends would be unreliable. 

Shari’a Law Enforcement of Blasphemy Crimes

Many countries in which Islam is the official state religion 

have inherited criminal blasphemy laws from British colonial 

rule and adapted them to domestic contexts.10 Hybrid 

legal systems in some Islamic states made it difficult for 

researchers to find and analyze Shari’a criminal blasphemy 

law judgments. Given that no single interpretation of Shari’a 

exists, even within the same schools of thought, the scope of 

Shari’a laws can vary from country to country. 

Depending on the country, criminal blasphemy laws may be 

applied nationally or selectively in only some regions. Shari’abased law plays a significant role in state criminal blasphemy 

law enforcement in some countries where Islam is the official 

state religion. In some countries, Shari’a is applied exclusively 

with respect to Muslims, whereas in other countries, the laws 

are applied to all citizens regardless of faith. For example, 

during the study period, Shari’a was applied to all citizens 

in Sudan,11 but Shari’a laws are applied only to Muslims 

in northern Nigeria.12 In countries where there are several 

religions, and Shari’a law applies either only to Muslims or 

only in Muslim regions or provinces, Muslims tend to face 

more stringent laws and harsher penalties for blasphemy 

than do their non-Muslim neighbors. In some states, such 

as Egypt, otherwise secular criminal codes include Shari’a.13

In other states, such as Malaysia, both systems operate in 

parallel.14 Additionally, as detailed below, the hybrid nature 

of these legal systems complicated the research as researchers 

could not locate Shari’a judgments unless they were reported 

in secondary sources.15 The following examples demonstrate 

a variety of models of Shari’a and its relation to criminal 

blasphemy enforcement:

Limitations

40 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Afghanistan’s penal code prohibits “Crimes Against 

Religions,”16 and Shari’a generally governs blasphemy 

crimes.17 Thus, courts interpret Islamic law to enforce against 

alleged blasphemy crimes and give accused persons three days 

to recant their blasphemous acts or else they are sentenced 

to death.18

While Egypt’s criminal code reflects European influence,19 a 

1980 amendment instituted Shari’a principles “as the primary 

legal source for all Egyptian legislation.”20 Egypt’s blasphemy 

law, rooted in a largely secular criminal code,21 constitutes the 

basis of state criminal blasphemy law enforcement.22

Indonesia enforces against blasphemy using article 156(a) 

of its criminal code. The semi-autonomous Aceh province, 

however, implements Shari’a law.23

Shari’a law is fully incorporated into Iran’s criminal code.24

Malaysia’s secular and Islamic laws prohibit blasphemy. The 

penal code criminalizes blasphemy at the national level while 

Shari’a law covers state offenses, with enforcement varying 

across states.25 Experts note that “Malaysia’s highest court is 

beginning to show itself willing to reassert judicial power, 

including over the Shari’a courts. But for decades the civil 

courts’ trend toward jurisdictional deference and judicial 

Islamization have fueled the shift away from the Malaysian 

constitution’s originally secular basis.”26

Similarly, Nigeria’s legal system combines English common 

and statutory law, customary law, and Shari’a law.27 Both 

the secular and Shari’a systems punish blasphemy, and 

enforcement varies state to state.28 Only Muslims, however, 

are subject to Shari’a law in the state criminal context.29

Pakistan’s penal code criminalizes blasphemy, punishing 

blasphemy with criminal fines, long prison sentences, and 

even death.30 While the state’s Islamic courts can strike down 

laws deemed contrary to Islam, the Supreme Court can serve 

as a remedial check on the state’s criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement,31 as in the case of Asia Bibi.

As explained infra, Saudi Arabia’s Shari’a law, which governs 

blasphemy, is not codified in writing.32

COUNTRY-SPECIFIC CHALLENGES

When it came to coding cases, each state had its own set 

of challenges given the specificity of each domestic legal 

enforcement framework. Some countries merit special attention: 

Afghanistan 

Afghanistan’s judicial system includes formal and informal 

dispute resolution; thus, it is likely that unreported cases of 

criminal blasphemy law enforcement exist at an informal 

level. Widespread corruption leads many Afghans to distrust 

the formal judicial system, turning to Taliban courts and 

traditional jirgas.

33

Brunei

Though Brunei’s revised penal code entered fully into force in 

2019, outside of the study period, elements of the Shari’a code 

went into effect in May 2014. Given the limited information 

on enforcement, however, researchers could not determine 

which parts of the law were applied from 2014 through 2018.

Russia

In accordance with the study methodology, the researchers 

included cases that involved state action or mob activity 

that resulted in violence against persons or destruction 

of property. Many incidents did not qualify under our 

methodology for a “case” but nonetheless reflected an 

important Russia-specific dynamic with respect to blasphemy 

law enforcement. There were several cases of “Orthodox 

activists” filing or threatening to file complaints (that to our 

knowledge were not acted upon) as a way of intimidating 

the subject of the case into deleting content or engaging in 

self-censorship. While not reflected in our recorded cases, 

these cases are worth mentioning as they illustrate the ways in 

which the threat of a charge can be enough to chill speech.

Saudi Arabia

As noted supra, Saudi Arabia proved challenging to research 

and compare with other countries’ criminal blasphemy law 

enforcement because the state does not have a formal written 

penal code.34 The criminal law system is based on Shari’a 

law and judicial interpretations are grounded in restrictive 

interpretations of Hanbali Sunni Islam.35 Additionally, the 

government exerts tight control over the media, resulting in 

low levels of press freedom and high rates of human rights 

abuses against journalists.36 As a result, this study likely 

underestimates criminal blasphemy law enforcement in 

Saudi Arabia.

Thailand 

Thailand’s laws, and specifically Section 112 of the Criminal 

Code punish “Whoever, defames, insults or threatens the 

King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent,” with 

imprisonment.37 The researchers determined, however, that 

defaming the King did not amount to defaming Buddhism 

and excluded cases of defamation against the King.

Limitations

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 41
NOTES

1 For example, Eritrea is an extremely closed country with low levels of press freedom; 

thus, researchers found it difficult to locate secondary sources at all, let alone 

secondary sources discussing blasphemy law enforcement.

2 For example, tarnishing the reputation of a celebrity and accusing him/her of 

blasphemy. 

3 For example, in the case of Azerbaijan, Article 283 of the criminal code appeared to 

be more of an incitement law than a blasphemy law: See Article 283 of the Criminal 

Code of the Azerbaijan Republic https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/az/

az017en.pdf. However, Article 283 was used in 2006 against Rafiq Tagi and Samir 

Sadagatoglu, who criticized the Prophet Mohammed. They were sentenced to three 

years in prison. In 2011, Tagi was assassinated. See Journalist Critical of Islam Dies 

Four Days after Being Stabbed by Attacker, Reporters Without Borders (Nov. 23, 

2011), https://rsf.org/en/news/journalist-critical-islam-dies-four-days-after-beingstabbed-attacker; Article 19 Protests Against Sentencing of Azerbaijani Journalists 

Rafiq Tagi and Samir Sadagatoglu, Article 19 (May 9, 2007), https://www.refworld.

org/pdfid/4756cf8dd.pdf. While researchers identified this example of blasphemy 

enforcement under Article 283, because no such cases were identified during the 

timeframe of 2014–2018 and the language of the law did not correspond to the 

researchers’ criteria, it was not included as a blasphemy law. 

4 See Annex 2, Kyrgyzstan, Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations 

(2008), Article 4. 

5 See Annex 2, Moldova, Code on Misdemeanors, Article 54(5).

6 See Annex 2, Tajikistan, Code on Administrative Offenses, Article 86.

7 See Annex 2, Turkmenistan, Code on Administrative Offenses, Article 75. 

8 See Annex 2, Uzbekistan, Criminal Code, Article 156. [Incitement of Ethnic, Racial or 

Religious Hatred]. 

9 Researchers reached out to a Kazakh human-rights lawyer regarding Article 174. The 

consensus is that the unspecific nature of some of the terms such as “hatred,” “enmity,” 

and “agitation” make it easy for the law to be manipulated and applied to almost 

anyone who is propagating or criticizing a religion. Most applications of the law apply 

to people exercising freedom of religion, with blasphemy accusations making up a 

small percentage of cases. In the blasphemy cases researchers discovered, blasphemy 

allegations were used as one element in the charges to discredit individuals who were 

proselytizing (usually Christians who organized lectures in apartments). See, e.g., 

Madi Bekmaganbetov, Protestant na Svobode, Radio Azatyk (Nov. 9, 2015), https://rus.

azattyq.org/a/kabduakasov-protestant-adventisty-sedmogo-dnja-prigovor/27353933.

html. 

10 Krithika Varagur, The Islamic World Has a Blasphemy Problem, Foreign Policy (May 

25, 2017), https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/05/25/the-islamic-world-has-a-blasphemyproblem/. 

11 But See Sudan Separates Religion from State Ending 30 Years of Islamic Rule, Middle 

East Monitor (Sept. 7, 2020), https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200907-sudanseparates-religion-from-state-ending-30-years-of-islamic-rule/. 

12 Political Shari’a Human Rights and Islamic Law in Northern Nigeria, Human Rights 

Watch (Sept. 21, 2004), https://www.hrw.org/report/2004/09/21/political-sharia/

human-rights-and-islamic-law-northern-nigeria. 

13 Study of the Present Egyptian Constitution and the Law Articles that Conflict with 

Minority Rights, https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Minorities/WG/11/AlKalema-3A.pdf. 

14 Policing Belief: The Impact of Blasphemy Laws on Human Rights - Malaysia, Freedom 

House (Oct. 21, 2010), https://www.refworld.org/docid/4d5a700a2.html.

15 For example, a high-profile case appeared in news sources in which death by 

hanging was imposed on alleged blasphemer Yahaya Sharif-Aminu by an Islamic 

Court in northern Nigeria. See Eoin McSweeney & Stephanie Busari, The WhatsApp 

Voice Note that Led to a Death Sentence, CNN (Sept. 29, 2020), https://edition.cnn.

com/2020/09/29/africa/blasphemy-trial-nigeria/index.html.

16 Afghanistan, End Blasphemy Laws (June 18, 2020), https://end-blasphemy-laws.

org/countries/asia-central-southern-and-south-eastern/afghanistan/; https://endblasphemy-laws.org/countries/asia-central-southern-and-south-eastern/afghanistan/.

17 National Laws on Blasphemy: Afghanistan, Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace 

& World Affairs, https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/essays/national-laws-onblasphemy-afghanistan. 

18 Afghanistan, End Blasphemy Laws (June 18, 2020), https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/

countries/asia-central-southern-and-south-eastern/afghanistan/. 

19 Maurits Berger & Nadia Sonneveld, Sharia and National Law in Egypt, in Sharia 

Incorporated 51, 51 (Jan. 2017, Michiel Otto ed.). 

20 Maurits Berger & Nadia Sonneveld, Sharia and National Law in Egypt, in Sharia 

Incorporated 51, 73 (Jan. 2017, Michiel Otto ed.). 

21 Maurits Berger & Nadia Sonneveld, Sharia and National Law in Egypt, in Sharia 

Incorporated 51, 78 (Jan. 2017, Michiel Otto, ed.). 

22 See Annex 2, Egypt Penal Code Article 98(f). 

23 Ana Salva, Sharia is Here to Stay in Indonesia’s Aceh, Diplomat (Sept. 27, 2018), 

https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/shariah-is-here-to-stay-in-indonesias-aceh/. 

24 Codifying Repression: An Assessment of Iran’s New Penal Code, Human Rights 

Watch (Aug. 28, 2012), https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/08/28/codifying-repression/

assessment-irans-new-penal-code. 

25 Policing Belief: The Impact of Blasphemy Laws on Human Rights – Malaysia, Freedom 

House (Oct. 21, 2010), https://www.refworld.org/docid/4d5a700a2.html.

26 Yvonne Tew, How are Constitutional Theocracies Born?, I-Connect, (Feb. 12, 2020), 

http://www.iconnectblog.com/2020/02/how-are-constitutional-theocracies-born/. 

27 Heather Bourbeau, Dr. Muhammad Sani Umar & Peter Bauman, U.S. Commission 

on International Religious Freedom, Shari’ah Criminal Law in Northern Nigeria 3 

(2019), https://www.uscirf.gov/reports-briefs/special-reports/shari-ah-criminal-law-innorthern-nigeria. 

28 Political Shari’a?: Human Rights and Islamic Law in Northern Nigeria, Human Rights 

Watch (Sept. 21, 2004), https://www.hrw.org/report/2004/09/21/political-sharia/

human-rights-and-islamic-law-northern-nigeria. 

29 Heather Bourbeau, Dr. Muhammad Sani Umar & Peter Bauman, U.S. Commission 

on International Religious Freedom, Shari’ah Criminal Law in Northern Nigeria 3 

(2019), https://www.uscirf.gov/reports-briefs/special-reports/shari-ah-criminal-law-innorthern-nigeria. 

30 See Annex 2, Pakistan Penal Code Chapter XV - Of Offenses Relating to Religion.

31 See, e.g., Library of Congress, Blasphemy and Related Laws in Selected Jurisdictions: 

Pakistan, 50 (2017), https://www.loc.gov/law/help/blasphemy/blasphemy.pdf.

32 Nathan J. Brown, Why Won’t Saudi Arabia Write Down Its Laws?, Foreign Policy (Jan. 

23, 2012),https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/23/why-wont-saudi-arabia-write-down-itslaws/. 

33 Gabriel Dominguez, Why Many Afghans Distrust their Judicial System, Deutsche 

Welle (Feb. 5, 2015), https://www.dw.com/en/why-many-afghans-distrust-theirjudicial-system/a-18235687-0. 

34 Nathan J. Brown, Why Won’t Saudi Arabia Write Down Its Laws?, Foreign Policy (Jan. 

23, 2012), https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/23/why-wont-saudi-arabia-write-downits-laws/. In 2018, the government published eight tomes of judicial principles and 

legal precedents. Saudi Justice Minister Inaugurates Book on Legal Precedents, Arab 

News (Jan. 5, 2018), http://www.arabnews.com/node/1219391/saudi-arabia.

35 See Hossein Esmaeili, On a Slow Boat towards the Rule of Law: The Nature of Law in 

the Saudi Arabian Legal System, 26 Arizona Journal of International & Comparative 

Law (2009), http://arizonajournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Esmaeili.pdf. 

36 How Free Expression is Suppressed in Saudi Arabia, Economist (Jul. 26, 2018), https://

www.economist.com/open-future/2018/07/26/how-free-expression-is-suppressed-insaudi-arabia/.

37 Section 112 Criminal Code of Thailand, https://library.siam-legal.com/thai-law/

criminal-code-royal-family-sections-107-112/. 

Limitations

42 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
CONCLUSION

1 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws 1 (2017).

Blasphemy laws are found in criminal codes in every region of 

the world. Often blasphemy laws are vaguely worded, do not 

specify intent, and carry unduly harsh penalties for violators.1

Such laws on the books, however, tell only half the story. 

In nearly half of those countries, governments to varying 

extents actively enforce criminal blasphemy laws against 

alleged blasphemers, violating fundamental human rights—

including rights to freedom of expression, freedom of religion 

or belief, freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman, and 

degrading treatment or punishment, and fair trial rights—

of the accused. 

Alleged blasphemers are mostly men, but also include women. 

Often, they are lawyers, politicians, government officials, 

academics, media personalities, and human rights defenders. 

The accused represent a variety of religions and beliefs, and 

most reported cases indicate that Muslims are most frequently 

targeted for enforcement. In several states, mob activity, 

mob violence, and/or threats of mob violence accompany 

accusations of blasphemy; many times, injuries, death, and 

property destruction follow in the wake of such violence. 

States mete out harsh sentences, including life imprisonment 

and even death for blasphemy crimes, and some states subject 

alleged blasphemers to human rights abuses as they navigate 

the criminal justice system. Understanding the contexts 

surrounding criminal blasphemy laws’ implementation and 

enforcement supports future advocacy and policy analysis 

related to blasphemy law reform, especially where repeal is 

not practicable or feasible. This report’s findings highlight 

concrete contexts and pinpoints problems to address through 

constructive dialogue toward much needed legal reform. 

It is time for states to protect fundamental human rights 

and prevent future harm against individuals, rather than 

protecting religious ideas at the expense of individual rights. 

This report was sponsored by the U.S. Commission on 

International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) and directed and 

co-authored by Joelle Fiss and Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum. 

Research assistance and coding analysis was provided by 

students and staff of the Benjamin B. Ferencz Human Rights 

and Atrocity Prevention Clinic at the Benjamin N. Cardozo 

School of Law.

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 43
This page intentionally left blank.

44 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ABOUT THE AUTHORS 

Joelle Fiss is a leading expert on blasphemy laws worldwide 

and currently a member of the OSCE/ODIHR Panel of 

Experts on Freedom of Religion or Belief. Swiss and British, 

she has 20 years of work experience on human rights 

and foreign policy—both in the public sector and nongovernmental organizations. She is currently a human rights 

researcher and analyst based in Geneva. Joelle continues to 

work on the compelling role that religion plays in today’s 

world and its multifaceted effects on security, conflict, 

human rights, society, and identity. She has published in 

English and French, on questions linked to anti-blasphemy 

allegations, violence committed in the name of religion, 

and different legal cultures related to freedom of expression 

worldwide. She studied international relations at the Graduate 

Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland, 

and has also consulted for two UN Special Rapporteurs on 

freedom of religion or belief (Heiner Bielefeldt and Ahmed 

Shaheed). Before that, she worked for Human Rights First 

(New York, Washington DC) and for the Alliance of Liberals 

and Democrats in the European Parliament (Brussels, 

Strasbourg). She remains connected to the human rights 

ecosystem—whether within the OSCE, the UN, or the EU 

policy circles. Finally, Joelle is also a member of the Geneva 

Parliament and active in local politics. For more information, 

please visit www.joellefiss.com.

Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum is Associate Professor of Clinical 

Law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law where she 

directs the Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic. 

Jocelyn has developed and expanded clinical projects, 

including in-depth fact finding on issues of sexual and 

gender-based crimes, persecution as a crime against humanity 

and genocide early warning risk analysis, on four continents 

and in more than 10 countries. She also serves as Faculty 

Director of the Cardozo Law Institute on Holocaust and 

Human Rights, a leading global center strengthening laws, 

norms, and institutions toward preventing mass atrocity 

crimes. She is particularly interested in mainstreaming 

atrocity prevention in law school curricula and training 

lawyers and human rights advocates on early warning risk 

analysis. Her scholarship agenda includes looking at the 

intersections of public health, law, and atrocity prevention, 

especially as it relates to preventing and responding to sexual 

and gender-based crimes and crimes against minority groups. 

Jocelyn holds a JD from Cornell Law School and an MPH 

from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 45
This page intentionally left blank.

46 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ABOUT THE BENJAMIN B. FERENCZ HUMAN 

RIGHTS AND ATROCITY PREVENTION CLINIC 

The Benjamin B. Ferencz Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law provides 

students the opportunity to engage in human rights litigation and advocacy toward preventing atrocity crimes—including war 

crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide—protecting populations and rebuilding societies in the aftermath of atrocity. For 

more information, please contact Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum at jocelyn.getgen@yu.edu. 

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 47
This page intentionally left blank.

48 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank Elizabeth Cassidy (Director 

of Research and Policy) and Kirsten Lavery (Supervisory 

Policy Analyst) of the U.S. Commission on International 

Religious Freedom (USCIRF) for their constant guidance 

through the research process, as well as their insights, 

practical assistance, and multiple document reviews. 

The authors would also like to thank Faraz Sanei, who, as 

the Visiting Instructor of Clinical Law at the Benjamin N. 

Cardozo School of Law, provided many insightful comments 

and analysis, particularly on the methodology of the report 

and management of the researchers’ data collection. Thank 

you to Casey Pearlman, Claudia Diaz, Nazli Kalfazade, 

Gursimran Kaur, and Helen Haft who, as legal interns, 

fellows, and students of the Law Clinic, went beyond their 

assigned research duties and generously shared their acquired 

skills and expertise with the authors throughout the process. 

A special note of thanks to Helen Haft who contributed 

countless hours and expertise to fact-checking, editing, and 

finalizing the report. Finally, a thank you to Ali Cain for 

her editing and proofreading assistance in the final stages of 

the report. 

Law Interns & Clinic Contributors

Sean Adessky, Cardozo Class of 2020

Claudia Diaz, Cardozo Class of 2021

Chelsea Gonzalez, Sorbonne Law School Class of 2019

Helen Haft, NYU Law Class of 2021

Benjamin Hughes, Cardozo Class of 2021

Rosie Jiang, Cornell Law Class of 2021

Nazli Kalfazade, Cardozo Class of 2021

Ashlye Meyer, Cardozo Class of 2020

Jamie Robbins, Cardozo Class of 2020

Adam Thomas, Washington University in St. Louis Law 

Class of 2021

Armand Zappa, Cardozo Class of 2020

Throughout the entire project, researchers, and students used 

the resources of, and directly consulted with, international 

non-governmental human rights organizations (INGOs), 

regional and local NGOs, faith-based organizations, 

lawyers, human rights defenders, legal experts, diplomatic 

representatives and victims of blasphemy allegations. They 

benefited from the great variety of resources and reporting on 

cases available, which made this report possible. The authors 

would like to express their deepest gratitude to the broader 

NGO community and experts working on human rights 

issues relating to blasphemy allegations. 

The researchers would like to extend their very special thanks 

to Humanists International, who extensively shared their 

expertise on specific cases in many countries. Their input 

was invaluable.

Deepest thanks to Human Rights Activists in Iran and Iran 

Prison Atlas, who provided key access to important Persianlanguage databases to the researchers, which greatly helped 

identify or confirm blasphemy cases in the country.

Finally, many thanks to Eric Ecoffey from Cybériade for his 

statistical data analysis (and interpretation), and for creating 

the visual representations of findings throughout the report.

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 49
This page intentionally left blank.

50 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ANNEX 1: 

CHANGES IN BLASPHEMY LAWS SINCE 2014

NEGATIVE LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS 

Since 2014, some countries have adopted or amended 

existing criminal laws that prohibit blasphemy to further 

curb individuals’ rights to freedom of religion or belief and 

freedom of expression, or to increase criminal sanctions 

against blasphemers. New laws or amended laws referencing 

insults to religion entered into force in Kazakhstan (2014), 

Nepal (2017), Oman (2018), Mauritania (2018), Morocco 

(2018), and Brunei (2019).1 In addition, Germany’s blasphemy 

provision was referenced in a new German technology 

law (2018).

Kazakhstan (2014)2

In 2014, Kazakhstan amended its anti-blasphemy law (Article 

164), adding penalties associated with the crime of insult 

of the “religious feelings of citizens.”3 Prior to 2014, the 

maximum penalty for this offense was “correctional labour 

for a period up to two years or deprivation of freedom for 

period up to five years.”4 The revisions now provide for a 

maximum penalty of “restriction of liberty for the term of two 

to seven years or imprisonment for the same term.”5

Nepal (2017)6

In August 2017, Nepal passed a new penal code criminalizing 

the “hurting of religious sentiment” (Article 156) and 

“proselytizing” (Article 158).7 Those who “hurt religious 

sentiments” can receive fines and up to two years in prison.8

Since the adoption of this code, the state has enforced the 

measure in relation to conversion.9 The language of Articles 

156 and 158, which criminalize the “obstruction of others’ 

religious rites” and “conduct which undermines the religion, 

opinion or faith of any caste,” is ambiguous and has the 

potential to encompass acts deemed blasphemous. 

Germany (2018)10

Whereas many European states have repealed their 

blasphemy laws since 2015, Germany referenced its blasphemy 

law in a 2018 piece of legislation entitled the Network 

Enforcement Act.11 This law requires social media networks 

with over 2 million users to remove illegal content flagged 

by individuals.12 Tech companies are subject to robust 

fines if “manifestly unlawful” content is not taken down 

within 24 hours.13 No new offenses were created, but the law 

references specific provisions of the German criminal code, 

including the controversial and rarely enforced “defamation 

of religions” law.14 This is the first time that a European state 

has enacted a legal requirement that social media platforms 

remove content related to an “insult to religion” following an 

individual complaint.15

Oman (2018)16

In January 2018, Oman replaced its previous criminal 

blasphemy law (Article 20917) with Article 269.18 The inclusion 

of language prohibiting “blaspheming against or insulting 

the Divinity,” “insulting, perverting or desecrating the Holy 

Qur’an,” or “insulting the Islamic religion or any of its rites”19

significantly expands the acts criminalized by the law.20

Additionally, the penalty increased from a previous range of 

10 days to 3 years imprisonment or a fine, to a stricter penalty 

of 3 to 10 years imprisonment.21

Mauritania (2018)22

On April 27, 2018, Mauritania’s National Assembly reformed 

Article 306 of the criminal code to mandate the death penalty 

for all individuals convicted of “blasphemous” speech or 

acts.23 The law removes previous leniency measures, such 

as prison terms in place of death sentences, when convicted 

apostates repent.24 Fines and prison terms are provided for 

“Anyone who commits an act that violates modesty or Islamic 

values or who violates any of the sanctities of God, or who 

helps to do so.”25

Morocco (2018)26

In 2018, Morocco reformed its criminal code, considerably 

changing the wording of its blasphemy law.27 First, the law’s 

reach was expanded to include not only publishers, but all 

individuals who allegedly blaspheme.28 Second, the law 

increased the punishment for blasphemy, doubling fines 

and prison sentences.29 It also increased the punishment for 

blasphemous acts in public and online forums.30

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 51
Brunei (2019)31

Although this change occurred beyond the period covered 

in the research for this report, in April 2019, the final phase 

of Brunei’s 2013 criminal code went into effect,32 permitting 

the death penalty for several offenses, including for insulting 

or defaming the Prophet Muhammad.33 In the past, 

implementation stages of the new laws had been considerably 

delayed for several years due to international outcry.34

POSITIVE LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS 

In other country contexts, blasphemy laws have been 

reformed to include lesser punishments.

Italy

Italy’s criminal blasphemy provisions are different from what 

the authors reported in 2017 in the Respecting Rights? report. 

Although it proved challenging to confirm the information,35

certain provisions have been declared invalid36 and, thus, 

are not enforceable. Furthermore, Articles 403, 404, and 

724 of the penal code have been substantially modified.37

Article 403 was changed to account for the abolition of state 

religion. The penalty of insult to religion is now a fine, rather 

than imprisonment. Article 404 used to provide for a double 

penalty for insulting the state religion (Catholicism), but 

now it no longer “discriminates” against other faiths and the 

penalty is the same for insulting all religions. 

Sudan (2020)

Although also after the period covered by the research for this 

report, in July 2020 Sudan amended its criminal blasphemy 

law under Article 125 of its penal code to remove the penalty 

of flogging for blasphemy crimes.38

LEGISLATIVE REPEALS

The attack against staffers of the satirical paper Charlie Hebdo

in Paris in January 201539 instigated a trend, particularly in 

liberal democratic states, to repeal blasphemy laws. Since 

that time, such laws have been repealed in Iceland (2015),40

Norway (2015),41 a province of France (Alsace-Moselle) 

(2016),42 Malta (2016),43 Denmark (2017),44 Ireland (2018),45

Canada (2018),46 New Zealand (2019),47Greece (2019),48 and 

Scotland (2020).49

ADDITIONAL BLASPHEMY LAWS

USCIRF, the U.S. Law Library of Congress, and the 

researchers of this study identified criminal laws prohibiting 

blasphemy that existed prior to 2017 but which were not 

included in Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s 

Blasphemy Laws.

50 This resulted in the inclusion in Annex 2 of 

blasphemy provisions from the following states: Andorra,51

Bangladesh,52 Botswana,53 Burma,54 Cameroon,55 Cape 

Verde,56 Gambia,57 Indonesia,58 Iran,59 Jamaica,60 Kenya,61

Kyrgyzstan,62 Malawi,63 Maldives,64 Mauritania,65 Moldova,66

Nepal,67 Seychelles,68 Tajikistan,69 Trinidad and Tobago,70

Turkmenistan,71 Ukraine,72 United Arab Emirates,73 and 

Uzbekistan.74

NOTES

1 In addition, the authors updated information on the blasphemy laws mentioned 

in Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, to their most recent 

versions. Though some criminal blasphemy laws had been amended prior to 2017, 

their more recent versions since Respecting Rights have been included in Annex 2.

2 See Annex 2, Kazakhstan Penal Code Article 174.

3 See Annex 2, Kazakhstan Penal Code Article 174.

4 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 62 (2017).

5 See Annex 2, Kazakhstan Penal Code Article 174.

6 See Annex 2, Nepal Penal Code Articles 156 and 158.

7 See Annex 2, Nepal Penal Code Articles 156 and 158, https://www.state.gov/

reports/2018-report-on-international-religious-freedom/nepal/. There is legal ambiguity 

in para. 2 of Article 158: 

“(2) No person shall do any act or conduct which undermines the religion, opinion or 

faith of any caste, race, community or convert any one into another religion, whether 

by inducement or not, in a manner to so undermine or propagate such religion or 

opinion with the intention of making such conversion.”

8 See Annex 2, Nepal Penal Code Article 156. 

9 See Recent Persecution of the Church in Nepal, ENGAGE International (Oct. 3, 

2018), https://engageinternational.org/recent-persecution-of-the-church-in-nepal/. 

For example, Sonia Chanda Thakuri and her baby were arrested after Thakuri was 

accused of trying to convert and “destroying Hindu idols.”

10 Network Enforcement Act (Netzdurchsetzunggesetz, NetzDG), Art. 1, § 3, P. 2., 

https://germanlawarchive.iuscomp.org/?p=1245.

11 Network Enforcement Act (Netzdurchsetzunggesetz, NetzDG), 

https://germanlawarchive.iuscomp.org/?p=1245. 

 For more information: https://www.article19.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/170901-

Legal-Analysis-German-NetzDG-Act.pdf; and, http://justitia-int.org/the-digital-berlinwall-how-germany-created-a-prototype-for-global-online-censorship/.

12 Network Enforcement Act (Netzdurchsetzunggesetz, NetzDG), Art. 1, § 1, ¶ 2., 

https://germanlawarchive.iuscomp.org/?p=1245. 

13 Network Enforcement Act (Netzdurchsetzunggesetz, NetzDG), Art. 1, § 3, ¶ 2., 

https://germanlawarchive.iuscomp.org/?p=1245. 

14 Jacob Mchangama & Joelle Fiss, Justitia, The Digital Berlin Wall: How Germany 

(Accidentally) Created a Prototype for Global Online Censorship 3 (Nov. 2019), http://

justitia-int.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Analyse_The-Digital-Berlin-Wall-HowGermany-Accidentally-Created-a-Prototype-for-Global-Online-Censorship.pdf. See also 

Germany ¶ 166 of Criminal Code. 

15 In the past, social media networks have taken down content deemed “offensive to 

religion” upon the request of Muslim-majority states, leading for example to the 

blocking of Google’s YouTube by Pakistani authorities after the video “Innocence 

of Muslims,” was deemed offensive to Islam. See Joelle Fiss, The Brookings Project 

on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, Anti-Blasphemy Offensives in the Digital 

Age: When Hardliners Take Over 24 (2016), https://www.brookings.edu/research/antiblasphemy-in-the-digital-age-when-hardliners-take-over (last visited Sept. 18, 2020).

16 See Annex 2, Oman, Penal Code Article 269. 

17 See Annex 2, Oman, Penal Code Article 209 [Crimes Relating to Religion] (prior law). 

1. Concerning violation of the sanctity of religion

Article 209: Anyone who does the following shall be punished by imprisonment from 

10 days to 3 years or by a fine of 5 rials to 500 rials:

1. Blasphemes against the divine glory or against the great prophets

2. Publicly or in a publication insults divine religions and religious beliefs with the 

intent to disparage them

3.Commits an act that disturbs the peace required by law for a gathering to 

perform religious ceremonies

U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 74 (2017). 

18 See Annex 2, Oman, Penal Code Article 269.

Article 269: “The punishment shall be imprisonment for a term of not less than 3 

years and not more than 10 years for anyone who commits one of the following acts:

(a) blaspheming against or insulting the Divinity in speech or by means of writing, 

drawing, gestures or by any other means;

Annex 1: Changes in Blasphemy Laws Since 2014

52 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
(b) insulting, perverting or desecrating the Holy Qur’an;

(c) insulting the Islamic religion or any of its rites, or any of the divine religions;

(d) blaspheming against or insulting any of the prophets verbally or by means of 

writing, drawing, gestures or by any other means; or

(e) destroying or desecrating a building or any part of its contents intended for use in 

religious rites of the Islamic religion or any of the other divine religions” Oman’s New 

Penal Code: A Human Right’s Bonfire, The Omani Center for Human Rights (Mar. 19, 

2018), https://ochroman.org/eng/2018/03/penalcode. 

19 See Annex 2, Oman, Penal Code Article 269, https://ochroman.org/eng/2018/03/

penalcode/: “The punishment shall be imprisonment for a term of not less than 3 

years and not more than 10 years for anyone who commits one of the following acts:

(a) blaspheming against or insulting the Divinity in speech or by means of writing, 

drawing, gestures or by any other means;

(b) insulting, perverting or desecrating the Holy Qur’an;

(c) insulting the Islamic religion or any of its rites, or any of the divine religions;

(d) blaspheming against or insulting any of the prophets in speech or by means of 

writing, drawing, gestures or by any other means; or

(e) destroying or desecrating a building or any part of its contents intended for use in 

religious rites of the Islamic religion or any of the other divine religions.” Oman’s New 

Penal Code: A Human Right’s Bonfire, The Omani Center for Human Rights (Mar. 19, 

2018), https://ochroman.org/eng/2018/03/penalcode. 

20 See Annex 2, Oman, Penal Code Article 209 [Crimes Relating to Religion] (prior law). 

1. Concerning violation of the sanctity of religion

Article 209: Anyone who does the following shall be punished by imprisonment from 

10 days to 3 years or by a fine of 5 rials to 500 rials:

1. Blasphemes against the divine glory or against the great prophets

2. Publicly or in a publication insults divine religions and religious beliefs with the 

intent to disparage them

3.Commits an act that disturbs the peace required by law for a gathering to 

perform religious ceremonies

U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws 74 (2017).

21 Penal Code, Article 269, https://ochroman.org/eng/2018/03/penalcode/: “The 

punishment shall be imprisonment for a term of not less than 3 years and not more 

than 10 years for anyone who commits one of the following acts....”

22 Mauritania Draft bill to cancel and replace the provisions of Article 306 of Legal 

Order No. 162-83 issued on July 9, 1983, including the criminal law; http://www.droitafrique.com/upload/doc/mauritanie/Mauritanie-Code-1983-penal.pdf; http://www.

elbadil.info/2013/media/images/555(6).jpg. 

23 Mauritania: Mandatory Death Penalty for Blasphemy, Human Rights Watch 

(May 4, 2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/05/04/mauritania-mandatory-deathpenalty-blasphemy. See also Annex 2 - Mauritania Draft bill to cancel and replace the 

provisions of Article 306 of Legal Order No. 162-83 issued on July 9, 1983, including 

the criminal law. 

24 Mauritania: Mandatory Death Penalty for Blasphemy, Human Rights Watch

(May 4, 2018), https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/05/04/mauritania-mandatory-deathpenalty-blasphemy. 

25 See Annex 2. Mauritania Draft bill was to cancel and replace the provisions of Article 

306 of Legal Order No. 162-83 issued on July 9, 1983, including the criminal law.

26 See Annex 2, Morocco, Penal Code Article 267-5.

27 See Morocco Law 1-02-207, 25th of Rajab 1423 (October 3, 2002): Article 41 Penal 

Code & Updated version in Annex 2: Article 267-5.

28 See Annex 2, Morocco, Penal Code Article 267-5.

29 See Annex 2, Morocco, Penal Code Article 267-5.

30 See Annex 2, Morocco, Penal Code Article 267-5.

31 See Annex 2, Brunei, Syariah Penal Code Articles 110-111.

“110. Contempt of Nabi [“Contempt of the Prophet”]; 111. Deriding etc. verses of 

the Al-Qur’an, hadith or obligatory matters with ijma’; 213. Publication contrary to 

Hukum Syara’ [“laws of any sect the court considers valid”]; 214. Delivering or giving 

publications relating to religion other than religion of Islam to Muslims or persons 

having no religion; 215. Giving in public places publications relating to religion 

other than religion of Islam to Muslims or persons having no religion; 217. Offenses 

in relation to use of certain words in respect of religion of Islam; 220. Contempt or 

brings into contempt etc. religion of Islam; 221. Contempt of Nabi by non-Muslim; 

222. Deriding etc. verses of Al-Qur’an or hadith by non-Muslim; 230. Contempt etc. 

of religious authority.” 

32 Ain Bandial, Full Implementation of Pakistan Syariah Penal Code to Begin April 3, 

Scoop (Mar. 30, 2019), https://thescoop.co/2019/03/30/full-implementation-of-syariahpenal-code-to-begin-april-3/. Elements of the Sharia penal code took effect in May 

2014, constituting “phase one” of the law’s implementation. See Brunei Introduces 

Tough Islamic Penal Code, BBC News (Apr. 30, 2014), https://www.bbc.com/news/

world-asia-27216798. 

33 See Annex 2, Brunei, Syariah Penal Code Articles 110-111. Brunei first introduced 

these criminal reforms in 2013. Brunei: New Penal Code Imposes Maiming, Stoning, 

Human Rights Watch (Apr. 3, 2019), https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/03/bruneinew-penal-code-imposes-maiming-stoning.

34 Human Dignity Trust, Brunei: Briefing on Brunei’s Implementation of the Syariah Penal 

Code Order 2013 2 (2019), https://www.humandignitytrust.org/wp-content/uploads/

resources/2019.04.08-Briefing-on-Bruneis-implementation-of-the-Syariah-Penal-CodeOrder-2013-WS.pdf (last visited Sept. 20, 2020).

35 The researchers would like to thank the Italian section of Humanists International 

who dedicated much time to explaining the legal changes as well as identifying and 

discussing cases of state enforcement.

36 See Annex 2, Italy, Criminal Code. In cooperation with the Italian government and 

non-governmental organization Humanists International, the researchers tried to 

better understand the complex situation described in Respecting Rights? Measuring 

the World’s Blasphemy Laws. In Respecting Rights?, articles 402 (Insulting the State 

religion), 403 (Insulting the State religion by insulting individuals), 404 (Insulting the 

State religion by offending against property), 406 (Offenses against religions recognized 

by the State), and 724 (Blasphemy and insulting the dead) were quoted from the 

Italian criminal code. After much research and consultation with the Italian foreign 

ministry, we confirm that the legislative landscape has been modified, both through 

a Constitutional Court decision and Law n.85/2006. First, articles 402 (Insulting the 

State religion) and 406 (Offenses against religions recognized by the state) have been 

declared invalid. Article 402 was declared invalid by the Constitutional Court in its 

judgment No. 508 of 20 November 2000. This article is impossible to enforce and 

is no longer applicable because in 1984, Italy abolished its state religion. Secondly, 

article 406 was declared invalid by article No.10 of the Law of 24 February 2006, n. 85. 

Similarly, it is also not possible to reference this article in any court proceedings and is 

no longer applicable.

37 Article 403 (Offenses to a religious confession by offending people): Anyone who 

publicly offends a religious confession, by disrespecting those who profess it, is 

punished with a fine from 1,000 to 5,000 euros. The fine from 2,000 to 6,000 euros 

is applied to those who offend a religious confession, by offending a minister of 

religion. Article 404 (Offenses to a religious confession by insulting or damaging things): 

Anyone who, in a place destined for worship, or in a public place or open to the 

public, offending a religious confession, reviles with insulting expressions things that 

form the object of worship, or are consecrated to worship, or are necessarily intended 

for the exercise of worship, or commits the act on the occasion of religious services, 

performed in a private place by a minister of the cult, is punished with a fine from 

1,000 to 5,000 euros. Article 724 (Blasphemy and outrageous manifestations towards 

the dead) remains a blasphemy law, but has also been substantially modified, like 

in the case of 403. Anyone who publicly blasphemes, with invectives or outrageous 

words against a deity, is punished with a pecuniary administrative sanction from 51 

to 309 euros. The same sanction applies to those who carry out any public outrageous 

demonstration against the dead. 

38 See Annex 2, Sudan, Criminal Act of 1991, Article 125.

Article 125 (blasphemy) as amended (source sent directly to researchers by USCIRF) 

and Arabic version is also available.

39 Twelve (12) people were killed in the Charlie Hebdo attack and 11 others were 

injured. The gunmen identified themselves as belonging to Al-Qaeda branch in 

Yemen. The attack was coordinated with the attack against the kosher supermarket 

Hyper Cacher, where a terrorist held hostages, of whom he murdered 4 Jews. Claire 

Williams, Charlie Hebdo Attack: The Three Days That Shook France, France 24, https://

webdoc.france24.com/france-paris-charlie-kosher-terrorism/; Dan Bilefsky and Maïa 

de la Baume, Terrorists Strike Charlie Hebdo Newspaper in Paris, Leaving 12 Dead, 

N.Y. Times (Jan. 7, 2015), https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/world/europe/charliehebdo-paris-shooting.html; Conor Fortune, Gagging in the Wake of Charlie Hebdo, 

Amnesty Int’l (Jan. 8, 2015), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/01/gaggingin-the-wake-of-charlie-hebdo/; One Year On, France Remembers Victims of Kosher Store 

Massacre, Times of Israel (Jan. 9, 2016), https://www.timesofisrael.com/one-year-onfrance-remembers-victims-of-kosher-store-massacre/

40 Iceland Makes Blasphemy Legal, BBC News (July 3, 2015), https://www.bbc.com/news/

world-europe-33378778. 

41 Eugene Volokh, Norway Repeals Blasphemy Law, In Response to Charlie Hebdo 

Murders, Wash. Post (May 9, 2015), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokhconspiracy/wp/2015/05/08/norway-repeals-blasphemy-law-in-response-to-charliehebdo-murders/.

42 Loup Besmond de Senneville, Le délit de blasphème « ne peut plus être appliqué » en 

Alsace, La Croix (Jan. 4, 2016), https://www.la-croix.com/Religion/Actualite/Le-delitde-blaspheme-ne-peut-plus-etre-applique-en-Alsace-2016-01-04-1399624; Blasphemy 

Law Abolished in Alsace-Moselle Region of France, End Blasphemy Laws (Oct. 31, 

2016), https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/2016/10/blasphemy-law-abolished-in-alsacemoselle-region-of-france/.

43 Repealing Blasphemy Law A Victory for Freedom of Speech, Says Humanist Association, 

Times of Malta (Jul. 14, 2016), https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/repealingblasphemy-law-a-victory-for-freedom-of-speech-says-humanist.618859. 

44 Denmark Scraps 334-year-old Blasphemy Laws, Guardian (June 2, 2017), https://www.

theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/02/denmark-scraps-334-year-old-blasphemy-law. 

45 Emma Graham-Harrison, Ireland Votes to Oust ‘Medieval’ Blasphemy Law, Guardian 

(Oct. 27, 2018), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/27/ireland-votes-to-oustblasphemy-ban-from-constitution. 

46 Canada Repeals Blasphemy Law, B.C. Humanist Assoc. (Dec. 11, 2018), https://www.

bchumanist.ca/canada_repeals_blasphemy_law. 

47 Blasphemous Libel Law Repealed, Beehive.gov.nz (Mar. 5, 2019), https://www.beehive.

govt.nz/release/blasphemous-libel-law-repealed. 

48 Blasphemy Law to be Abolished in Greece Under New Criminal Code, Humanists U.K. 

(June 17, 2019), https://humanism.org.uk/2019/06/17/blasphemy-to-be-abolished-ingreece-under-new-criminal-code/. 

49 Fraser Sutherland, Humanist Society Campaign Success as Government Confirm the 

Scrapping of Blasphemy Law, Humanist Society of Scotland (April 2020), https://www.

humanism.scot/what-we-do/news/humanist-society-campaign-success-as-governmentconfirm-the-scrapping-of-blasphemy-law/.

50 These laws were identified by the authors and students, the staff at the U.S 

Commission on International Religious Freedom and the Library of Congress.

Annex 1: Changes in Blasphemy Laws Since 2014

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 53
51 In Respecting Rights? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, Andorra’s old criminal 

code was quoted (Article 301 of the Penal Code of 11 July 1990). However, the new 

Criminal Code which came into force on 23 September 2005 has a new redrafted 

article. Article 339 of the Criminal Code which provides that “anyone who, with 

intent to insult and in public, commits acts or utters statements which are seriously 

offensive for members of a religious, national or ethnic [...] group shall be punished 

by a term of imprisonment”. (https://rm.coe.int/09000016808b5510)

This is the original version in French (not found in English). https://sherloc.unodc.org/

res/cld/document/and/2005/penal_code_of_andorra_html/Andorra_Code_Penal_Fr.pdf

“Article 339 Délit d’offense à un groupe: Celui qui, dans l’intention d’injurier et ave

publicité, effectue des actes ou profère des expressions sérieusement offensives p

les membres d’un groupe religieux, national, ethnique, syndical, politique, ou de 

personnes professant une croyance ou idéologie déterminées, doit être puni ave

peine d’arrêt.” (A person, with the intent to insult and with publicity, who commits acts 

or utters seriously offensive statements against the members of a religious, national, 

ethnic, union or political group or against people professing a particular belief or 

ideology shall be punished with imprisonment.) [author translation].

52 See Annex 2, Bangladesh Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act 57. 

Punishment for publishing fake, obscene or defaming information in electronic form.

53 See Annex 2, Botswana, Penal Code Article 136 [Insult to religion of any class]; 

Article 138 [Trespassing on burial places]; Article 140 [Writing or uttering words with 

intent to wound religious feelings].

54 See Annex 2, Burma, Penal Code 295A, 298.

55 See Annex 2, Cameroon, Penal Code § 241 [Contempt of Race or Religion].

56 See Annex 2, Cape Verde, Constitution Article 49 (Freedom of conscience, religion 

and worship).

57 See Annex 2, Gambia, Criminal Code Chapter XIV— Offenses Related to Religion, 

Articles 117, 119, 120.

58 See Annex 2, Indonesia, Amendment to Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information 

and Transactions Article 45 (par. 3).

59 See Annex 2, Iran, Penal Code Articles 262, 263, and 513.

60 See Annex 2, Jamaica, Libel and Slander Act (Article 15).

61 See Annex 2, Kenya, Penal Code Chapter XIV: Offenses Relating to Religion, §§ 134, 

136 & 138. 

62 See Annex 2, Kyrgyzstan, Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations 

(2008), Article 4. 

63 See Annex 2, Malawi, Penal Code Chapter XIV - Offenses Relating to Religion, §§ 

127, 129 & 130.

64 See Annex 2, Maldives, Penal Code § 617 Criticizing Islam. 

65 See Annex 2, Mauritania, Draft bill to cancel and replace the provisions of Article 306 

of Legal Order No. 162-83 issued on July 9, 1983, including the criminal law, Articles 

1 and 2.

66 See Annex 2, Moldova, Code on Misdemeanors, Article 54(5).

67 See Annex 2, Nepal, Penal Code Articles 156; 158.

68 See Annex 2, Seychelles, Penal Code Articles 35, 125, 127, 128.

69 See Annex 2, Tajikistan, Code on Administrative Offenses Article 86 (§ 2).

70 See Annex 2, Trinidad and Tobago, Criminal Offenses Act Article 5.

71 See Annex 2, Turkmenistan, Code on Administrative Offenses Article 75, Violation of 

the right to freedom of religious confession and association in religious organizations. 

72 See Annex 2, Ukraine, Criminal Code Article 161, Violation of citizens’ equality based 

on their race, nationality or religious preferences. 

73 See Annex 2, United Arab Emirates. Federal Decree Law No. 2 of 2015, Articles 4; 5; 

Penal Code [Fed. Law 3 of 1987 as Amended], Article 319.

74 See Annex 2, Uzbekistan, Penal Code Article 156, Incitement of Ethnic, Racial or 

Religious Hatred.

Annex 1: Changes in Blasphemy Laws Since 2014

54 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ANNEX 2: 

CRIMINAL BLASPHEMY LAWS AS OF 2020

AFGHANISTAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution1

Article 1: Islamic Republic

Afghanistan is an Islamic Republic, independent, unitary, 

and indivisible state.

Article 2: Religions

(1) The religion of the state of the Islamic Republic of 

Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam.

(2) Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith 

and perform their religious rites within the limits of the 

provisions of law.

Article 3: Law and Religion

In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and 

provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.

Article 35: Organizations, Parties

(1) Formation and functioning of a party based on ethnicity, 

language, Islamic school of thought (mazhab-i fiqhi), and 

region is not permissible.

Article 149: Islam, Fundamental Rights

(1) The provisions of adherence to the fundamentals of 

the sacred religion of Islam and the regime of the Islamic 

Republic cannot be amended.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Mass Media Law2

Article 45:

Production, reproduction, print, and publishing of the 

following reports and material in mass media, and agencies 

mentioned in article (27) of this law are not permissible:

(1) Works and materials [that] are contrary to the principles 

and provisions of the holy religion of Islam.

(2) Works and materials [that] are offensive to other 

religions and sects.

(3) Works and materials [that] are defamatory, insulting, 

and offensive to the real or legal persons.

(4) Works and materials that are considered libelous/

defamatory to real and legal persons, and cause damage to 

their personality and credibility.

(5) Works and materials that are contrary to the 

Constitution and are considered crimes by the Penal Code.

ALGERIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution3

Article 2: State Religion

Islam is the religion of the state.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code of 19794

Article 144:

Allows for up to 5 years’ imprisonment and a fine of 

50,000 to 100,000 dinars for “insulting the prophet and 

any of the messengers of God, or denigrating the creed and 

precepts of Islam, whether by writing, drawing, declaration, 

or any other means.”5

ANDORRA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution6

Article 11(3): State Religion

The Constitution guarantees the Roman Catholic Church 

free and public exercise of its activities and the preservation 

of the relations of special cooperation with the state in 

accordance with the Andorran tradition.

The Constitution recognizes the full legal capacity of the 

bodies of the Roman Catholic Church which have legal 

status in accordance with their own rules.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code7

Article 339:8

Anyone who, with intent to insult and in public, commits 

acts or utters statements [that] are seriously offensive for 

members of a religious, national, ethnic, union, or political 

group or people professing a particular belief or ideology 

shall be punished by a term of imprisonment.9

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 55
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution10

Preamble:

WHEREAS the People of Antigua and Barbuda–

(1a) proclaim that they are a sovereign nation founded upon 

principles that acknowledge the supremacy of God, the 

dignity and worth of the human person, the entitlement of 

all persons to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the 

individual, the position of the family in a society of free 

men and women and free institutions.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Small Charges Act11

Part II Article 9:

Anyone who makes use of any abusive, blasphemous, 

indecent, insulting, profane, or threatening language–

(a) in any public place; or

(b) in any place to the annoyance of the public; or

(c) tending to a breach of the peace;

shall be liable to a fine not exceeding 500 East Caribbean 

dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

one month.

AUSTRIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code12

Section 188: Disparaging of religious precepts

Whoever publicly disparages or mocks a person or a thing, 

respectively, being an object of worship or a dogma, a 

legally permitted rite, or a legally permitted institution of a 

church or religious society located in Austria, in a manner 

capable of giving rise to justified annoyance, is liable to 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or 

to a fine.

BAHRAIN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution

Article 2:

The religion of the state is Islam. The Islamic Shari’a is the 

primary source of law. The official language is Arabic.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code13

Article 309:

A punishment for a period not exceeding one year or a 

fine not exceeding 100 Bahraini dinar shall be inflicted 

upon any person who commits an offense by any method 

of expression against one of the recognized religious 

communities or ridicules the rituals thereof.

Article 310:

The punishment provided for in the preceding Article 

shall be inflicted upon any person who commits in public 

an insult against a symbol or a person that is glorified or 

considered sacred to members of a particular sect; (or) 

upon any person who imitates in public a religious ritual or 

ceremony with the intention of ridiculing it.

BANGLADESH

The religious framework of the state: Constitution14

Article 2A: The state religion

The state religion of the Republic is Islam, but other 

religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in 

the Republic.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code15

Article 295: Injuring or Defiling Place of Worship, with 

Intent to Insult the Religion of Any Class

Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, 

or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the 

intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of 

persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is 

likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement 

as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with a fine, or with both.

Article 295A: Deliberate and Malicious Acts Intended to 

Outrage Religious Feelings of Any Class by Insulting its 

Religion or Religious Beliefs

Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of 

outraging the religious feelings of any class of the citizens of 

Bangladesh, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible 

representations insults or attempts to insult the religion 

or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with fine, or with both.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

56 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Article 298: Uttering Words, etc., with Deliberate Intent to 

Wound Religious Feelings

Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the 

religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes 

any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any 

gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the 

sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment 

of either description for a term which may extend to one 

year, or with a fine, or with both.

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act16

57: Punishment for publishing fake, obscene or defaming 

information in electronic form

(1) If any person deliberately publishes or transmits or 

causes to be published or transmitted in the website or in 

electronic form any material that is fake and obscene or 

its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons 

who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, 

to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, 

or causes to deteriorate or creates possibility to deteriorate 

law and order, prejudice the image of the state or person 

or causes to hurt or may hurt religious belief or instigate 

against any person or organization, then this activity of his 

will be regarded as an offense.

(2) Whoever commits an offense under sub-section (1) of 

this section he shall be punishable with imprisonment for 

a term which may extend to 10 years and with a fine which 

may extend to Taka one crore.

BOTSWANA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code17

Article 136: Insult to religion of any class

Any person who destroys, damages or defiles any place of 

worship or any object [that] is held sacred by any class of 

persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion 

of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class 

of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage 

or defilement as an insult to their religion, is guilty of 

an offense.

Article 138: Trespassing on burial places

Every person who, with the intention of wounding the 

feelings of any person or of insulting the religion of any 

person or with the knowledge that the feelings of any 

person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any 

person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass 

in any place of worship or in any place of sepulture, or in 

any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites or 

as a depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any 

indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance 

to any persons assembled for the purpose of funeral 

ceremonies, is guilty of an offense.

Article 140: Writing or uttering words with intent to 

wound religious feelings

Any person who, with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any other person, writes any word 

or any person who, with the like intention, utters any word 

or makes any sound in the hearing of any other person 

or makes any gesture or places any object in the sight of 

any other person, is guilty of an offense and is liable to 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.

BRAZIL

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code18

Article 208:

Publicly mock someone for reasons of belief or religious 

function, prevent or disrupt the ceremony or practice of 

religious worship, publicly vilify, act or object of worship:

Penalty – imprisonment of one month to one year or a fine.

Sole Paragraph – If there is use of violence, the penalty 

is increased by a third, without prejudice to the 

corresponding violence.

BRUNEI DARUSSALAM

The religious framework of the state: Constitution19

Article 3: Religion of Brunei Darussalam and religious 

observances

(1) The religion of Brunei Darussalam shall be the Muslim 

Religion according to the Shafeite sect of that religion. 

Provided that all other religions may be practiced in peace 

and harmony by the person professing them in any part of 

Brunei Darussalam 

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Syariah Penal Code20

110: Contempt of Nabi: “Contempt of the Prophet”

(1) Any Muslim who contempts or brings into contempt 

Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam or any 

Nabi Allah and it is proved either by ikrar of the accused, 

or by syahadah of at least two syahid according to Hukum 

Syara’ after the Court is satisfied having regard to the 

requirements of tazkiyah al syuhud, is guilty of the offense 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 57
of irtidad [apostasy] and shall be liable on conviction to 

death as hadd.

(2) Any Muslim who contempts or brings into contempt 

Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam or any Nabi 

Allah and it is proved by evidence other than those provided 

under subsection (1) is guilty of the offense of irtidad and 

shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 30 years and whipping not exceeding 40 strokes.

111: Deriding etc. verses of the Al-Qur’an, hadith or 

obligatory matters with ijma’

(1) Any Muslim who–

(a) derides, mocks, mimics, ridicules or insults any 

verse of the Al-Qur’an or hadith of Nabi Muhammad 

Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam;

(b) denies the hadith of Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu 

‘Alaihi Wa Sallam as a source or authority (hujjiyyah) of 

the teachings of the religion of Islam; or

(c) denies obligatory matters with ijma’, 

and it is proved either by ikrar of the accused, or by 

syahadah of at least two syahid according to Hukum 

Syara’ after the Court is satisfied having regard to the 

requirements of tazkiyah al syuhud, is guilty of the offense 

of irtidad and shall be liable on conviction to death as hadd.

(2) Any Muslim who–

(a) derides, mocks, mimics, ridicules or insults any 

verse of the Al-Qur’an or hadith of Nabi Muhammad 

Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam;

(b) denies the hadith of Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu 

‘Alaihi Wa Sallam as a source or authority (hujjiyyah) of 

the teachings of the religion of Islam; or

(c) denies obligatory matters with ijma’,

and it is proved by evidence other than those provided 

under subsection (1) is guilty of the offense of irtidad and 

shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 30 years and whipping not exceeding 40 strokes.

213: Publication contrary to Hukum Syara’[“laws of any 

sect the court considers valid”]

(1) Any person who–

(a) prints, publishes, imports, broadcasts or distributes 

for purposes of sale or otherwise or in any other 

manner; or

(b) has in his possession,

any publication that gives or purports to give instruction 

on any matter relating to the teachings of Islam, 

containing any matter that is contrary to Hukum Syara’ 

is guilty of an offense and shall be liable on conviction to 

a fine not exceeding 8,000 Brunei dollars, imprisonment 

for a term not exceeding 2 years or both.

(2) The Court may order for any documents or thing, 

among others, used in the commission of or related to the 

offense referred to in subsection (1) to be forfeited and 

destroyed notwithstanding that no person may have been 

convicted for the offense.

214: Delivering or giving publications relating to religion 

other than religion of Islam to Muslims or persons having 

no religion

(1) Any person who sends or delivers or causes to be sent 

or delivered to a Muslim or person having no religion, any 

publication relating to religion other than the religion of 

Islam, or any advertising material for such publication 

that the other person did not request for, is guilty of an 

offense and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not 

exceeding 2,000 Brunei dollars, imprisonment for a term 

not exceeding 6 months, or both.

(2) For the purpose of subsection (1), any publication sent or 

delivered to the address of any person shall be deemed to be 

sent or delivered to that person.

(3) It shall not be a defense against a charge under 

subsection (1) that the person to whom the publication was 

sent or delivered has requested for it if that request has been 

persuaded by the accused person or any person acting on 

his behalf.

(4) Subsection (1) does not apply to the delivery of any 

publication by the Post Office and any similar services.

215: Giving in public places publications relating to 

religion other than religion of Islam to Muslims or 

persons having no religion

Any person who gives any publication relating to 

religion other than the religion of Islam to a Muslim or 

person having no religion in public places is guilty of 

an offense and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not 

exceeding $1,000, imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

3 months, or both.

217: Offenses in relation to use of certain words in respect 

of religion of Islam

(1) Any person who, in any–

(a) publication;

(b) speech or public statement;

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

58 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
(c) speech or statement addressed to any assembly; or

(d) published or broadcasted speech or statement and 

at the time of the speech or statement was made he 

knows, or reasonably should have known, that it will be 

published or broadcasted,

uses any word listed in Part I of the Fifth Schedule, 

or any derivatives or its variation, to state or express 

any fact, belief, idea, concept, act, activity, matter or 

instances of or relating to a religion other than the 

religion of Islam is guilty of an offense and shall be liable 

on conviction to a fine not exceeding 12,000 Brunei 

dollars, imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

3 years or both.

(2) Any non-Muslim who, in instances mentioned in 

subsection (1), uses any expression listed in Part II of the 

Fifth Schedule, except as a citation or reference, is guilty 

of an offense and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not 

exceeding 12,000 Brunei dollars, imprisonment for a term 

not exceeding 3 years, or both.

(3) The Court may order for any publication or thing, 

among others, used in the commission of or related to the 

offense referred to in subsections (1) and (2) to be forfeited 

and destroyed notwithstanding that no person may have 

been convicted for the offense.

220: Contempt or brings into contempt etc. 

religion of Islam

Any person who, orally, in writing, by visible representation 

or in any other manner contempts or brings into contempt, 

insults, makes fun of, mocks, mimics or ridicules–

(a) the teaching of the religion of Islam;

(b) the practice or ceremony related to the religion of Islam;

(c) words that are regarded as holy by Muslims;

(d) any law in force related to the religion of Islam;

(e) any sahabat;

(f) the tenets of any recognised sect; or

(g) any fatwa published in the Gazette,

is guilty of an offense and shall be liable on conviction to a 

fine not exceeding 12,000 Brunei dollars, imprisonment for 

a term not exceeding 3 years, or both.

221: Contempt of Nabi by non-Muslim

(1) Any non-Muslim who, orally, in writing, by visible 

representation or in any other manner contempts or brings 

into contempt Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa 

Sallam or any Nabi Allah and it is proved either by ikrar of 

the accused, or by syahadah of at least two syahid according 

to Hukum Syara’ after the Court is satisfied having regard 

to the requirements of tazkiyah al syuhud, is guilty of an 

offense and shall be liable on conviction to death penalty.

(2) Any non-Muslim who, orally, in writing, by visible 

representation or in any other manner contempts or brings 

into contempt Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa 

Sallam or any Nabi Allah and it is proved by evidence other 

than those provided under subsection (1) is guilty of an 

offense and shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment 

for a term not exceeding 30 years and whipping not 

exceeding 40 strokes.

222: Deriding etc. verses of Al-Qur’an or hadith by 

non-Muslim

(1) Any non-Muslim who derides, mocks, mimics, ridicules 

or contempts, by word or deed, any verse of the Al-Qur’an 

or hadith of Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa 

Sallam and it is proved either by ikrar of the accused, or 

by syahadah of at least two syahid according to Hukum 

Syara’ after the Court is satisfied having regard to the 

requirements of tazkiyah al syuhud, is guilty of an offense 

and shall be liable on conviction to death penalty.

(2) Any non-Muslim who derides, mocks, mimics, ridicules, 

or insults, by words or deed, any verse of the Al-Qur’an or 

hadith of Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam 

and it is proved by evidence other than those provided 

under subsection (1) is guilty of an offense and shall 

be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 30 years and whipping not exceeding 40 strokes.

230: Contempt etc. of religious authority

(1) Any person who in any manner contempts, neglects, 

contravenes, opposes or insults any titah of His Majesty 

the Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan with respect to religion 

in his capacity as the Head of the official religion of 

Brunei Darussalam is guilty of an offense and shall be 

liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 5 years.

(2) Any person who in any manner contempts–

(a) the Majlis or Members of the Majlis;

(b) any committee of the Majlis or its members;

(c) Court; or

(d) the administration of the Syariah justice,

is guilty of an offense and shall be liable on conviction to 

a fine not exceeding $8,000, imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 2 years, or both.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 59
BURMA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code21

295A: Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention 

of outraging the religious feelings of any class of [persons 

resident in the Union] by words, either spoken or written, 

or by visible representations, insults or attempts to insult 

the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall 

be punished with imprisonment of either description 

for a term which may extend to 2 years, or with fine, or 

with both.

298: Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or 

makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any 

gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the 

sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment 

of either description for a term which may extend to one 

year, or with a fine, or with both.

CAMEROON

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code22

Section 241: Contempt of Race or Religion

(1) Whoever commits a contempt, within the meaning 

of section 152 of this Code, of the race or religion of a 

number of citizens or residents shall be punished with 

imprisonment for from 6 days to 6 months and with a fine 

of from CFAF 5,000 (five thousand) to 500,000 CFA francs. 

(2) Where the offense is committed by means of the press or 

wireless the fine may extend to 20,000,000 CFA francs. 

(3) Where the offense is committed with intent to arouse 

hatred or contempt between citizens, the penalties provided 

by the foregoing subsections should be doubled. 

CAPE VERDE

The religious framework of the state: Constitution

Article 49: Freedom of conscience, religion, and worship23

(1) Freedom of conscience, religion, and worship is 

inviolable, everyone having the right, individually or 

collectively, to profess a religion or not, to have a religious 

conviction of their choice, to participate in acts of worship 

and to freely express their faith and spread their doctrine or 

conviction, as long as they do not undermine the rights of 

others and the common good.

(2) No one can be discriminated against, persecuted, 

harmed, deprived of rights, benefited, or exempted 

from duties because of their religious faith, convictions, 

or practice.

(3) Churches and other religious communities are separated 

from the state and are independent and free in their 

organization and exercise of their own activities, considered 

partners in promoting the social and spiritual development 

of the Cape Verdean people.

(4) Freedom of religious education is guaranteed.

(5) Freedom of religious assistance is guaranteed in hospital, 

care, and prison establishments, as well as within the armed 

forces, under terms of the law.

(6) Churches are recognized the right to use social media 

to carry out their activities and purposes, under terms 

of the law.

(7) Protection of places of worship is guaranteed, as well 

as religious symbols, ensigns, and rites, and mocking or 

ridicule is prohibited.

(8) The right to conscientious objection is guaranteed, 

under terms of the law.

COMOROS

The religious framework of the state: Constitution24

Preamble:

The Comorian people solemnly affirm their will to draw 

from Islam, the religion of the state, the permanent 

inspiration of the principles and rules that govern 

the Union;

This Preamble shall be considered an integral part of the 

Constitution.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code25

Article 230: 

Any person who in any way profanes:

(1) Places for or currently used for the performance of a cult;

(2) The objects of worship in the places listed above shall be 

punished by a fine of 15,000 to 100,000 Comoro francs and 

imprisonment from 3 months to 1 year.

Article 231: 

Anyone who has insulted the minister of religion, in the 

exercise of his functions, is liable to a fine of 15,000 to 

45,000 Swiss francs and an imprisonment of 6 months 

to 2 years.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

60 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
He who struck the minister of religion in the exercise of 

his duties, shall be punished with imprisonment from 

2 to 5 years.

CYPRUS

The religious framework of the state: Constitution26

Article 2:

For the purposes of this Constitution

(1) the Greek Community comprises all citizens of the 

Republic who are of Greek origin and whose mother tongue 

is Greek, or who share the Greek cultural traditions, or who 

are members of the Greek-Orthodox Church;

(2) the Turkish Community comprises all citizens of the 

Republic who are of Turkish origin and whose mother 

tongue is Turkish, or who share the Turkish cultural 

traditions, or who are Muslims;

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code27

Article 138:

Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place of 

worship or any object [that] is held sacred by any class of 

persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion 

of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class 

of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage, 

or defilement as an insult of their religion, is guilty of a 

misdemeanor.

Article 141:

Any person who with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any person utters any word or 

makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes 

any gesture in the sight of the person, or places any object 

in the sight of that person, is guilty of a misdemeanor and is 

liable to imprisonment for 1 year.

Article 142:

(1) Any person who publishes a book or pamphlet or any 

article or letter in a newspaper or periodical [that] any class 

of persons considers as a public insult to their religion, with 

intent to vilify such religion or to shock or insult believers 

in such religion, is guilty of misdemeanor.

(2) A prosecution for an offense under the provisions of 

this section shall not be commenced except by, or with the 

consent of, the Attorney-General of the Republic.

EGYPT

The religious framework of the state: Constitution28

Article 1: Nature of the Republic

The Arab Republic of Egypt is a sovereign state, united and 

indivisible, where nothing is dispensable, and its system 

is a democratic republic based on citizenship and the 

rule of law.

Egypt is part of the Arab nation and enhances its 

integration and unity. It is part of the Muslim world, 

belongs to the African continent, is proud of its Asian 

dimension, and contributes to building human civilization.

Article 2: Islam, Principles of Islamic Shari’a

Islam is the religion of the state and Arabic is its official 

language. The principles of Islamic Shari’a are the principle 

source of legislation.

Article 3: Christian and Jewish religious affairs

The principles of the laws of Egyptian Christians and Jews 

are the main source of laws regulating their personal status, 

religious affairs, and selection of spiritual leaders.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code29

Article 98(f):

Detention for a period of not less than 6 months and 

not exceeding 5 years, or paying a fine of not less than 

500 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 1,000 Egyptian 

pounds shall be the penalty inflicted on whoever exploits 

and uses the religion in advocating and propagating by talk 

or in writing, or by any other method, extremist thoughts 

with the aim of instigating sedition and division or 

disdaining and disrespecting any of the heavenly religions 

or the sects belonging thereto, or prejudicing national unity 

or social peace.

Article 161:

These penalties shall be imposed on any encroachment that 

takes place by one of the methods prescribed in Article 171, 

on a religion whose rituals are publicly held.

The following shall fall under the provisions of this Article:

First: Printing and publishing a book which is viewed as 

holy by members of a religion whose rituals are publicly 

held, if a text of this book is perverted in a way that changes 

its meaning.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 61
Second: Imitating a religious celebration in a public place 

or public community, with the aim of ridicule, or for the 

attendants to watch.

Article 171: 

Whoever induces one or more persons to commit a felony 

or misdemeanor, by talks, shouting in public, a deed, or a 

hint insinuated in public, by writing, drawing, pictures/

photographs, marks and symbols, or any other method of 

representation made in public, or in any other means of 

publicness, shall be considered an accomplice in doing it, 

and shall be punished with the penalty prescribed therefor, 

if such inducement results in actual occurrence of the felony 

or misdemeanor.

However, if the inducement results in just an attempt of 

murder, the judge shall apply the legal provisions on attempt 

penalty. Talk or shouting shall be considered publicly made 

if it is declared openly or reiterated via any mechanical 

method at a general meeting, on a public road or any other 

frequented place, or if it is declared openly or reiterated, 

such that anyone found on that road or in that place can 

hear it, or if it is diffused by wireless or any other method. 

The deed or hint shall be considered publicly made if it 

takes place at a general meeting, on a public road, or at any 

other frequented place, or if it takes place such that whoever 

is found on that road or at that place can see it. Writing, 

drawings, pictures, photographs, signs, symbols, and other 

representation methods shall be considered as publicly 

displayed, if they are distributed without differentiation to a 

number of people, or if they are displayed such that whoever 

is found on the public road or at any frequented place can 

see them, or if they are sold or offered for sale at any place.

Note on Law No. 263 of 196030

“[P]racticing the Baha’i faith is considered blasphemy. The 

religion is criminalized under Law No. 263 of 1960, which 

bans Baha’i institutions and community activities and strips 

Baha’is of any legal recognition.”

ERITREA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code31

Article 196: Disturbance of Religious or Ethnic Feelings

A person who intentionally and publicly disparages a 

ceremony or rite of any lawful religious group, or profanes 

a place, image, or object used for such religious ceremonies 

or ceremonies relating to any ethnic group, is guilty of 

disturbance of religious or ethnic feelings, a Class 1 petty 

offense, punishable with a definite term of imprisonment 

of not less than 6 months and not more than 12 months, 

or a fine of 20,001 – 50,000 nakfas, to be set in intervals of 

2,500 nakfas.

ETHIOPIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code32

Article 816: Blasphemous or Scandalous Utterances 

or Attitudes

Whoever, apart from the cases punishable under the 

Criminal Code (Arts 492 and 493), in a public place or 

in a place open to the public or that can be viewed by the 

public, by gestures or words scoffs at religion or expresses 

himself in a manner which is blasphemous, scandalous, or 

grossly offensive to the feelings or convictions of others or 

towards the Divine Being or the religious symbols, rites, 

or religious personages, is punishable by fine or arrest not 

exceeding 1 month.

Article 492: Outrage on Religious Peace and Feeling

Whoever publicly:

(a) prevents the solemnization of, or disturbs or scoffs at, an 

authorized religious ceremony or office; or

(b) profanes a place, image, or object used for religious 

ceremonies, 

is punishable with a fine not exceeding 1,000 birr, or with 

simple imprisonment not exceeding 2 years.

FINLAND

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code33

Chapter 17 [Offenses against public order (563/1998)] 

Section 10: Breach of the sanctity of religion (563/1998)

A person who

(1) publicly blasphemes against God or, for the purpose of 

offending, publicly defames or desecrates what is otherwise 

held to be sacred by a church or religious community, 

as referred to in the Act on the Freedom of Religion 

(267/1998), or

(2) by making noise, acting threateningly or otherwise, 

disturbs worship, ecclesiastical proceedings, other similar 

religious proceedings or a funeral, 

shall be sentenced for a breach of the sanctity of religion to a 

fine or to imprisonment for at most 6 months.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

62 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
GAMBIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code34

Chapter XIV: Offenses Related to Religion

117: Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place 

of worship or any object [that] is held sacred by any class of 

persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion 

of any class of persons, or with the knowledge that any class 

of persons is likely to, consider such destruction, damage, 

or defilement as an insult to their religion, is guilty of a 

misdemeanor.

119: Every person who, with the intention of wounding 

the feelings of any person or of insulting the religion of 

any person, or with the knowledge that the feelings of any 

person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any 

person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass 

in any place of worship or in any place of sepulture, or in 

any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites or 

as a depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any 

indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance 

to any persons assembled for the purpose of funeral 

ceremonies, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

120: Any person who, with the deliberate intention of 

wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters or 

writes any word, or makes any sound in the hearing of that 

person, or makes any gesture in the sight of that person, or 

places any object in the sight of that person; is guilty of a 

misdemeanor, and is liable to imprisonment for 1 year.

GERMANY

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code (1998)35

Section 166: Insulting of faiths, religious societies, and 

organizations dedicated to a philosophy of life

(1) Whoever publicly or through dissemination of writings 

(Section 11 sub-section 3) insults the content of others’ 

religious faith or faith related to a philosophy of life in a 

manner that is capable of disturbing the public peace, shall 

be punished with imprisonment for not more than 3 years 

or a fine.

(2) Whoever publicly or through dissemination of writings 

(Section 11 sub-section 3) insults a church, other religious 

society, or organization dedicated to a philosophy of life 

located in Germany, or their institutions or customs in a 

manner that is capable of disturbing the public peace, shall 

be similarly punished.

Network Enforcement Act (2017)36

Section 1:

(1) This Act shall apply to telemedia service providers 

which, for profit-making purposes, operate internet 

platforms which are designed to enable users to share 

any content with other users or to make such content 

available to the public (social networks). Platforms 

offering journalistic or editorial content, the responsibility 

for which lies with the service provider itself, shall not 

constitute social networks within the meaning of this Act. 

The same shall apply to platforms which are designed to 

enable individual communication or the dissemination of 

specific content.

(2) Unlawful content shall be content within the meaning of 

subsection (1) which fulfills the requirements of the offenses 

described in sections 86, 86a, 89a, 91, 100a, 111, 126, 129 to 

129b, 130, 131, 140, 166, 184b in connection with 184d, 

185 to 187, 241 or 269 of the Criminal Code and which is 

not justified.37

GRENADA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code38

Section 429: Publication or Sale of Blasphemous or 

Obscene Matter

Whoever publishes, sells, or offers for sale any blasphemous 

or obscene book, writing, or representation, shall be liable 

to imprisonment for 2 years.

GUYANA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code39

Part V: Offenses against Religion, Morality, and Public 

Inconvenience 

Title 24: Offenses against Religion

Article 348:

(1) Everyone who publishes any blasphemous libel shall 

be guilty of a misdemeanor and liable to imprisonment 

for 1 year.

(2) It shall be a question of fact whether any particular 

published matter is or is not a blasphemous libel:

Provided that no person shall be liable to be convicted on 

any indictment for a blasphemous libel only for expressing 

in good faith and in decent language, or attempting to 

establish any arguments used in good faith and conveyed 

in decent language, any opinion whatever upon any 

religious subject.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 63
INDIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code40

Article 295: Injuring or defiling place of worship, with 

intent to insult the religion of any class

Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship, 

or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the 

intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of 

persons, or with the knowledge that any class of persons is 

likely to consider such destruction, damage, or defilement 

as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with a fine, or with both.

Article 295A: Deliberate and malicious acts intended 

to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its 

religion or religious beliefs

Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of 

outraging the religious feelings of any class of [citizens of 

India], [by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or 

by visible representations, or otherwise] insults or attempts 

to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, 

shall be punished with imprisonment of either description 

for a term which may extend to [3 years], or with a fine, or 

with both.]

Article 296: Disturbing religious assembly

Whoever voluntarily causes disturbance to any assembly 

lawfully engaged in the performance of religious worship, or 

religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment 

of either description for a term which may extend to 1 year, 

or with a fine, or with both.

Article 297: Trespassing on burial places, etc.

Whoever, with the intention of wounding the feelings of 

any person, or of insulting the religion of any person, or 

with the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely 

to be wounded, or that the religion of any person is likely 

to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass in any place 

of worship or on any place of sepulture, or any place set 

apart for the performance of funeral rites or as a depository 

for the remains of the dead, or offers any indignity to 

any human corpse, or causes disturbance to any persons 

assembled for the performance of funeral ceremonies, 

shall be punished with imprisonment of either description 

for a term which may extend to 1 year, or with a fine, or 

with both.

Article 298: Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to 

wound religious feelings

Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the 

religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes 

any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any 

gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the 

sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment 

of either description for a term which may extend to 1 year, 

or with a fine, or with both.

INDONESIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution41

Article 29:

(1) The state shall be based upon the belief in the One 

and Only God.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code42

Article 156(a):

By a maximum imprisonment of 5 years shall be punished 

any person who deliberately in public gives expression to 

feelings or commits an act,

(a) which principally has the character of being at enmity 

with, abusing, or staining a religion, adhered to in 

Indonesia;

(b) with the intention to prevent a person to adhere to any 

religion based on the belief of the almighty God.

Amendment to Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic 

Information and Transactions43

Article 45:44

(3) Any person who knowingly and without authority 

distributes and/or transmits and/or causes to be accessible 

Electronic Information and/or Electronic Records with 

contents of affronts and/or defamation as referred to in 

Article 27 paragraph (3) shall be sentenced to imprisonment 

not exceeding 4 years and/or a fine not exceeding 

750,000,000.00 rupiah.

IRAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution45

Article 1: Form of Government

The form of government of Iran is that of an Islamic 

Republic, endorsed by the people of Iran on the basis of 

their longstanding belief in the sovereignty of truth and 

Koranic justice, in the referendum of 29 and 30 March 

1979, through the affirmative vote of a majority of 98.2% of 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

64 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
eligible voters, held after the victorious Islamic Revolution 

led by Imam Khumayni.

Article 12: Official Religion

The official religion of Iran is Islam and the Twelver Ja’fari 

school, and this principle will remain eternally immutable. 

Other Islamic schools are to be accorded full respect, and 

their followers are free to act in accordance with their 

own jurisprudence in performing their religious rites. 

These schools enjoy official status in matters pertaining 

to religious education, affairs of personal status (marriage, 

divorce, inheritance, and wills) and related litigation in 

courts of law. In regions of the country where Muslims 

following any one of these schools constitute the majority, 

local regulations, within the bounds of the jurisdiction of 

local councils, are to be in accordance with the respective 

school, without infringing upon the rights of the followers 

of other schools.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code46

Article 262:

Anyone who swears at or commits qazf against the Great 

Prophet [of Islam] (peace be upon him) or any of the Great 

Prophets, shall be considered as Sāb ul-nabi [a person 

who swears at the Prophet], and shall be sentenced to the 

death penalty.

Note: Commission of qazf against, or swearing at, the [12] 

Shi’ite Imams (peace be upon them) or the Holy Fatima 

(peace be upon her) shall be regarded as Sab-e nabi.

Article 263:

When the accused of a sabb-e nabi (swearing at the Prophet) 

claims that his/her statements have been under coercion 

or mistake, or in a state of drunkenness, or anger or slip 

of the tongue, or without paying attention to the meaning 

of the words, or quoting someone else, then s/he shall 

not be considered as Sāb ul-nabi [a person who swears at 

the Prophet].

Note: When a sabb-e nabi (swearing at the Prophet) is 

committed in the state of drunkenness, or anger, or quoting 

someone else, if it is considered to be an insult, the offender 

shall be sentenced to a ta’zir punishment of up to 74 lashes.

Article 513: 47

Anyone who insults the Islamic sanctities or any of the 

imams or her excellency Sadigheh Tahereh shall be executed 

if his insult equals to speaking disparagingly of Prophet 

Muhamad; otherwise, they shall be imprisoned from 

1 to 5 years.

IRAQ

The religious framework of the state: Constitution48

Article 2: Official State Religion 

(1) Islam is the official religion of the state and is a 

foundational source of legislation:

(a) No law may be enacted that contradicts the 

established provisions of Islam.

(b) No law may be enacted that contradicts the principles 

of democracy.

(c) No law may be enacted that contradicts the rights and 

basic freedoms stipulated in this Constitution.

(2) This Constitution guarantees the Islamic identity 

of the majority of the Iraqi people and guarantees the 

full religious rights to freedom of religious belief and 

practice of all individuals such as Christians, Yazidis, and 

Mandean Sabeans.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code49

Chapter 8 Section 2: Offenses that violate religious 

sensibilities

Paragraph 372:

The following persons are punishable by a period of 

detention not exceeding 3 years or by a fine not exceeding 

100 dinars:

(1) Any person who attacks the creed of a religious minority 

or pours scorn on its religious practices.

(4) Any person who prints or publishes a book sacred to a 

religious minority and deliberately misspells the texts so 

that the meaning of the text is altered or who makes light of 

its tenets or teachings.

(5) Any person who publicly insults a symbol or a person 

who constitutes an object of sanctification, worship, or 

reverence to a religious minority.

(6) Any person who publicly imitates a religious ceremony 

or celebration with intent to deceive.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 65
ISRAEL

The religious framework of the state:

Basic Law for Human Dignity and Liberty (1992)50

1a. Purpose (Amendment No. 1):

The purpose of this Basic Law is to protect human dignity 

and liberty, in order to establish in a Basic Law, the values of 

the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code51

Article 170: Insult to religion

If a person destroys, damages, or desecrates a place of 

worship or any object [that] is held sacred by a group of 

persons, with the intention of reviling their religion, or in 

the knowledge that they are liable to deem that act an insult 

to their religion, then he is liable to 3 years’ imprisonment.

Article 173: Injury to religious sentiment

If a person does any of the following, then he is liable to 

1-year imprisonment:

(1) he publishes a publication that is liable crudely to offend 

the religious faith or sentiment of others;

(2) he voices in a public place and in the hearing of another 

person any word or sound that is liable crudely to offend the 

religious faith or sentiment of others.

ITALY

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code52

Article 402: Insulting the State religion53

Anyone who insults the state religion shall be subject to a 

prison sentence of up to 1 year.

Article 403: Offenses to a religious confession by 

offending people

Anyone who publicly offends a religious confession, by 

disrespecting those who profess it, is punished with a 

fine from 1,000 to 5,000 euros. The fine from 2,000 to 

6,000 euros is applied to those who offend a religious 

confession, by offending a minister of religion.

Article 404: Offenses to a religious confession by insulting 

or damaging things

Anyone who, in a place destined for worship, or in a public 

place or open to the public, offending a religious confession, 

reviles with insulting expressions things that form the 

object of worship, or are consecrated to worship, or are 

necessarily intended for the exercise of worship, or commits 

the act on the occasion of religious services, performed in 

a private place by a minister of the cult, is punished with a 

fine from 1,000 to 5,000 euros. Insulting the state religion 

by offending against property.

Article 406: Offenses against religions recognized by 

the State54

Anyone who commits one of the offenses established under 

Articles 403, 404, and 405 [not included] against a religion 

recognized by the state shall be punished in accordance 

with the aforementioned articles, but the sentence shall 

be reduced.

Article 724: Blasphemy and outrageous manifestations 

towards the dead

Anyone who publicly blasphemes, with invectives or 

outrageous words against a deity, is punished with a 

pecuniary administrative sanction from 51 to 309 euros. 

The same sanction applies to those who carry out any public 

outrageous demonstration against the dead.

JAMAICA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Libel and Slander Act55

15: A fair and accurate report in any newspaper of 

proceedings publicly heard before any court exercising 

judicial authority shall, if published contemporaneously 

with such proceedings, be privileged: 

Provided that nothing in this section shall authorize 

the publication of any seditious, blasphemous, or 

indecent matter.56

JORDAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution57

Article 2:

Islam is the religion of the state and Arabic is its 

official language.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code58

Article 273:

Anyone proven to have publicly offended any prophet 

shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a period between 

1 to 3 years.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

66 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Article 278:

Anyone found guilty of any of the following shall be 

sentenced to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 

3 months or a fine not exceeding 20 dinars:

(1) Publishing any material that is offensive to other people’s 

religious feelings or beliefs.

(2) Publicly, with another person listening thereto, making 

a speech or sound that is offensive to said other person’s 

religious feelings or beliefs.

Should the public prosecutor decide to prosecute journalists 

under Article 38 of the Press and Publications Law rather 

than the Penal Code, a fine of 10,000 to 20,000 dinars would 

be imposed.

KAZAKHSTAN

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code59

Article 174. Incitement of Social, National, Clan, Racial, 

Class or Religious Antagonism 

(1) Deliberate actions aimed at the incitement of social, national, 

clan, racial, class or religious antagonism, or at offense to the 

national honor and dignity, or religious feelings of citizens, as 

well as propaganda of exclusiveness, superiority, or inferiority 

of citizens based on their attitude towards religion, social class, 

national, clan or racial belonging, if these acts are committed 

publicly or with the use of the mass information media 

or networks of telecommunication and also by way of the 

production or spreading of literature or other transmissions of 

information, that propagate social, national, clan, racial, class or 

religious antagonism – shall be punished by a fine from 2000 to 

7000 monthly base values, or restrictions on freedom from two 

to seven years, or deprivation of freedom for the same period. 

(2) The same acts committed by a group of persons, 

or a group of people in accordance with a preliminary 

agreement, or committed repeatedly, or combined with 

violence or a threat to apply it, as well as committed by a 

person with the use of his official position, or by the leader 

of a public association, including the use of means received 

from foreign sources – shall be punished with deprivation 

of liberty for a period from 5 to 10 years, with a deprivation 

of the right to hold certain position and engage in certain 

activities for a period of up to 3 years, or without such. 

(3) The acts stipulated by the first and second parts of this 

Article committed by a criminal group which entailed serious 

consequences – shall be punished by deprivation of freedom 

for a length of time from 12 to 20 years, with a deprivation 

of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain 

activities, for a period of up to 3 years, or without such.

KENYA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code60

Section 134: Insult to religion 

Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place of 

worship or any object [that] is held sacred by any class of persons 

with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class 

of persons, or with the knowledge that any class of persons is 

likely to consider such destruction, damage, or defilement as an 

insult to their religion, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Section 136: Trespassing on burial places 

Every person who, with the intention of wounding the feelings 

of any person or of insulting the religion of any person, or 

with the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely 

to be wounded, or that the religion of any person is likely to be 

insulted thereby, commits any trespass in any place of worship 

or in any place of sepulture, or in any place set apart for the 

performance of funeral rites or as a depository for the remains 

of the dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse, or 

causes disturbance to any persons assembled for the purpose 

of funeral ceremonies, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Section 138: Writing or uttering words with intent to 

wound religious feelings 

Any person who, with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any other person, writes any word, 

or any person who, with the like intention, utters any word 

or makes any sound in the hearing of any other person or 

makes any gesture or places any object in the sight of any 

other person, is guilty of a misdemeanor and is liable to 

imprisonment for 1 year.

KUWAIT

The religious framework of the state: Constitution61

Article 2: State Religion

The religion of the state is Islam, and the Islamic Shari’a 

shall be a main source of legislation.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Law No. 19 of 2012 on the Protection of National Unity 

(19/2012)62

Article 1:

It is prohibited to engage in, call for, or incite, by any 

means of expression specified in Article 29 of Law No. 

31 of 1970 (through the amendment of certain provisions 

of the Penal Code), hatred of or showing contempt 

for any segment of society, inciting sectarian or tribal 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 67
strife, publishing ideas claiming the superiority of any 

race, group, color, origin, religious persuasion, sex, or 

descent, or encouraging acts of violence for such purpose, 

or broadcasting, publishing, printing, disseminating, 

rebroadcasting, producing, or discussing any content or 

publication of visual or audio material, or disseminating 

false rumors that contain anything that by its nature would 

lead to the foregoing. The provisions of the preceding 

paragraph apply to anyone who commits an act outside the 

State of Kuwait that makes him a principal or a partner in a 

crime that occurs in whole or in part in the State of Kuwait. 

Information networks and the blogs that are published on 

them and other modern means of communications are 

included in the means of expression.

Article 2:

Without prejudice to any more stringent penalty provided 

by another law, anyone who commits an act that violates 

the prohibition specified in Article 1 of this law shall 

be punished by imprisonment for a period of not more 

than 7 years and a fine of not less than 10,000 dinars and 

not more than 100,000 dinars, or by either one of these 

penalties, and a judgment will be made to confiscate the 

facilities, money, devices, newspapers, and publications 

used in the commission of the crime. The punishment will 

be doubled if the violation is repeated.

Article 3:

In cases in which a crime specified in this law is committed 

by a legal entity, without prejudice to the criminal liability 

of the natural person, the legal entity shall be punished 

by a fine of not less than 10,000 dinars and not more than 

100,000 dinars if the crime was committed in its name or 

on its behalf. A judgment to revoke the business license can 

be issued and, at the request of the prosecutor’s office, the 

head of the competent felonies department or the summary 

matters judge can issue a decision to suspend the license 

temporarily for a period of 1 month, subject to renewal.

Article 4:

Any of the perpetrators who reports to the competent 

authorities the existence of a criminal agreement to 

commit a crime before the start of its implementation shall 

be exempt from the punishment, and the court can also 

exempt from punishment if the informing was done after 

the completion of the crime but prior to the investigation. 

It can also do so if the criminal enabled the authorities to 

arrest the remaining criminals.

Article 5:

The Prime Minister and the ministers, all those concerned, 

shall implement this statutory decree and act in accordance 

with it as of the date of its publication in the official gazette 

and its presentation to the National Assembly.

Penal Code63

Article 25:

Anyone who publicly or in a public place or in a place in 

which he can be heard or seen by anyone in a public place, 

by speaking or shouting or writing or with drawings or 

pictures or any other means of expressing an idea, defames 

the rights and authority of the Amir, or dishonors the Amir, 

or displays arrogant behavior towards the underpinnings of 

this emirate shall be punished by imprisonment for a period 

of not more than 5 years.

Article 111:

Anyone who disseminates, in one of the public ways stated 

in Article 101,64 views that include ridicule or contempt 

or belittling of a religion or a religious sect, whether by 

defaming its doctrines, its rituals, its ceremonies, or its 

tenets, shall be punished by imprisonment for a period 

of not more than 1 year and a fine of not more than 

1,000 dinars, or by either one of these two penalties.

Article 112:

There is no crime if research on a religion or a religious sect 

is disseminated in a lecture, an essay, or a scholarly book 

in a calm and balanced way that is free of statements that 

incite, and the good intentions of the researcher have been 

proved by his propensity for pure scholarly criticism.

Article 204:

Anyone who, in a public place, publicly instigates the 

practice of immorality or indecency shall be punished by 

imprisonment for a period of not more than 3 years and 

a fine of not more than 3,000 dinars, or by either one of 

these two penalties. (This paragraph was replaced pursuant 

to Law No. 106 of 1994 Article 1). The aforementioned 

penalties shall be imposed on anyone who prints or sells 

or distributes or displays photographs or drawings or 

models or anything else that is indecent. There is no 

crime if the statements are made or the writing, drawings, 

or photographs are published in a way recognized by 

science or art as part of the participation in scientific or 

artistic progress.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

68 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
KYRGYZSTAN

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious 

Organizations (2008)65

Article 4:

(4) The limitation of rights or establishment of any 

privileges of citizens dependent upon their attitude 

toward religion, as well as the incitement of enmity and 

hatred, or the intentional offense of the feelings of citizens 

in connection with their attitude towards religion, the 

desecration of sacred or other religious cult objects, 

entails liabilities in accordance with the legislation of the 

Kyrgyz Republic.

LEBANON

The religious framework of the state: Constitution66

Article 9:

Freedom of conscience is absolute. In assuming the 

obligations of glorifying God, the Most High, the state 

respects all religions and creeds, and safeguards the 

freedom of exercising the religious rites under its protection, 

without disturbing the public order. It also guarantees 

the respect of the system of personal status and religious 

interests of the people, regardless of their different creeds.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code67

Article 473: Profaning the name of God

Anyone who profanes the name of God publicly shall be 

punished by imprisonment from 1 month to 1 year.

Article 474: Disparaging religious ceremonies

The text of Article 474 was abrogated pursuant to Law 

1/12/1954 and was replaced by the following text:

Anyone who, by means of the ways specified in Article 

209,68 dares to publicly disparage religious ceremonies that 

are practiced or foments disdain for any of those religious 

ceremonies shall be punished by imprisonment from 

6 months to 3 years.

LIBYA

The religious framework of the state:

The Constitutional Declaration69

Article 1:

Libya is an independent democratic state wherein the 

people are the source of powers. The city of Tripoli shall be 

the capital of the state. Islam is the religion of the state and 

the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence 

(Shari’a). The state shall guarantee for non-Muslims the 

freedom of practicing religious rituals. Arabic is its official 

language. The state shall guarantee the cultural rights for all 

components of the Libyan society and its languages shall be 

deemed national ones.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code70

Article 291:

Whoever publicly attacks the Mohammedan religion, 

which is the official religion of the state in accordance with 

the Constitution of the United Kingdom of Libya, or who 

blasphemes against God, Mohammed, or the prophets 

shall be punished by a penalty of detention for a period not 

exceeding 1 year or of a fine not exceeding 50 Libyan dinar.

LIECHTENSTEIN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution71

Article 37:

(4) The Roman Catholic Church is the state church and as 

such enjoys the full protection of the state; other confessions 

shall be entitled to practice their creeds and to hold 

religious services to the extent consistent with morality and 

public order.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code72

Section 188: Disparaging of religious precepts

Whoever publicly disparages or mocks a person or a thing, 

respectively, being an object of worship or a dogma, a legally 

permitted rite, or a legally permitted institution of a church 

or religious society located on the territory, in a manner 

capable of giving rise to justified annoyance is liable to 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a 

fine of up to 360 days’ pay.

MALAWI

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code73

Chapter XIV: Offenses Relating to Religion

127: Insult to religion of any class 

Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place 

of worship or any object that is held sacred by any class of 

persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion 

of any class of persons, or with the knowledge that any class 

of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage, or 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 69
defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be guilty of a 

misdemeanor.

129: Trespassing on burial places 

Every person who with the intention of wounding the 

feelings of any person or of insulting the religion of any 

person, or with the knowledge that the feelings of any 

person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any 

person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass 

in any place of worship or in any place of sepulture or in 

any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites or 

as a depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any 

indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance 

to any persons assembled for the purpose of funeral 

ceremonies, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

130: Writing or uttering, words with intent to wound 

religious feelings 

Any person who, with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any other person, writes any word, 

or any person who, with the like intention, utters any word 

or makes any sound in the hearing of any other person or 

makes any gesture or places any object in the sight of any 

other person, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be 

liable to imprisonment for 1 year.

MALAYSIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution74

Article 3: Religion of the Federation

Islam is the religion of the Federation, but other religions 

may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the 

Federation.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code75

Chapter XV: Offenses Relating to Religion

295: Injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to 

insult the religion of any class

Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship 

or any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the 

intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of 

persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is 

likely to consider such destruction damage or defilement 

as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with a fine, or with both.

297: Trespassing on burial places, etc.

Whoever, with the intention of wounding the feelings of any 

person, or of insulting the religion of any person, or with 

the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely to 

be wounded, or that the religion of any person is likely to 

be insulted thereby, commits any trespass in any place of 

worship or on any place of sepulture or any place set apart 

for the performance of funeral rites, or as a depository 

for the remains of the dead, or offers any indignity to 

any human corpse, or causes disturbance to any person 

assembled for the performance of funeral ceremonies, shall 

be punished with imprisonment for a term which may 

extend to 1 year, or with a fine, or with both.

298: Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound 

the religious feelings of any person 

Whoever, with deliberate intention of wounding the 

religious feelings of any person, utters any word or 

makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes 

any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any 

object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with 

imprisonment for a term which may extend to 1 year, or 

with a fine, or with both.

298A: Causing, etc., disharmony, disunity, or feelings 

of enmity, hatred or ill-will, or prejudicing etc., the 

maintenance of harmony or unity, on grounds of religion

(1) Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by 

signs, or by visible representations, or by any act, activity 

or conduct, or by organising, promoting or arranging, 

or assisting in organising, promoting or arranging, any 

activity, or otherwise in any other manner–

(a) causes, or attempts to cause, or is likely to cause 

disharmony, disunity, or feelings of enmity, hatred, or 

ill-will; or

(b) prejudices, or attempts to prejudice, or is likely 

to prejudice, the maintenance of harmony or unity, 

on grounds of religion, between persons or groups of 

persons professing the same or different religions, shall 

be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less 

than 2 years and not more than 5 years.

MALDIVES

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code76

Section 617: Criticizing Islam

(a) Offense Defined. A person commits an offense if 

(1) engages in religious oration and criticism of Islam in 

public or in a public medium with the intention to cause 

disregard for Islam; or

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

70 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
(2) produces, sells, distributes, or offers material 

criticizing Islam with the intention to cause disregard 

[for] Islam;

(3) The production, possession, sale, distribution, 

dissemination of pornography in the Maldives or 

importation thereof.

(4) The production, possession, sale, distribution, 

dissemination, and importation of idols of worship in the 

Maldives or importation thereof.

(5) Attempting to disrupt the religious unity of the 

citizens of Maldives, and conversing and acting 

in a manner likely to cause religious segregation 

amongst people.

(c) Grading. The offense is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Section 92: Authorized Terms of Imprisonment77

Except as otherwise provided, the maximum authorized 

term of imprisonment for a:

(f) Class 1 misdemeanor is imprisonment for not more 

than 1 year;

Section 93: Authorized Fines 

Except as otherwise provided, the maximum authorized 

fine for an offense is: 

(a) twice the harm caused or the gain derived, or 

(b) (6) MVR (Rufiyaa) [50,000] for a Class 1 misdemeanor.

MAURITANIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Draft bill to cancel and replace the provisions of Article 

306 of Legal Order No. 162-83 issued on July 9, 1983, 

including the criminal law78

Article 1:79

The provisions of Article 306 of Legal Order No. 162-

83 issued on July 9, 1983, including the criminal law, are 

abrogated and replaced by the following provisions: 

Article 306 (new): Anyone who commits an act that 

violates modesty or Islamic values or who violates any of 

the sanctities of God, or who helps to do so, and this act is 

not a crime of hudud [refers to crimes whose punishment 

is mandated by God], qisas [refers to a crime of revenge], 

or diyah [refers to a crime requiring compensation 

paid to the victim], shall be punished through tazir 

[i.e., at the discretion of the judge] by imprisonment of 

3 months to 2 years and by a fine of 50,000 ouguiyas to 

600,000 ouguiyas. 

Any Muslim, male or female, who ridicules or insults 

God or His messenger (may God bless him and grant 

him salvation), or His angels, or His books, or one of His 

prophets, shall be put to death, and he will not be called 

on to repent. Even if he repents, the death penalty will not 

be removed.

Any Muslim who explicitly apostatizes from Islam, or who 

says or does something that would require or include that, 

or who renounces what he knows to be required by the 

religion, shall be imprisoned for 3 days, during which time 

he will be asked to repent. If he does not repent, he will be 

sentenced to death for blasphemy, and his property will be 

transferred to the treasury of the Muslims. 

Any person who professes Islam outwardly but is secretly an 

infidel is considered a disbeliever and he will be punished 

by death when he is discovered, without being asked to 

repent. His repentance will not be accepted unless it is 

declared before his apostasy has been discovered. 

Any legally competent Muslim who fails to perform his 

prayers despite acknowledging that they are required will 

be ordered to do so and he will be expected to do the last 

required rak’ah [a series of bending and prostrations in 

Islamic prayer]. If he persists in failing to perform the 

prayers, he will be put to death in the end. If he denies that 

prayer is required, he will be put to death for apostasy. His 

body will not be prepared or buried in the way Muslims 

are. His property will be transferred to the treasury of the 

Muslims. This crime will be proved only by admission.

Article 2:

All prior provisions that are contrary to this law are 

abrogated.

MAURITIUS

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code80

Article 185:

Any person who, by word or gesture, commits an outrage 

on the objects used for religious worship in the place 

devoted to or actually used for such religious worship, or 

upon any minister of such religion whilst officiating as such, 

shall be punished by a fine not exceeding 10,000 rupees, and 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 1 year.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 71
MOLDOVA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Code on Misdemeanors81

Article 54(5):

Offense of people’s religious feelings, violations of sacred 

objects, spaces, monuments, and conceptual symbols is 

subject to a fine of between 12 to 24 monetary units or 

punishment in the form of 40 to 60 hours of unpaid labor 

for the benefit of society.82

MONTENEGRO

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code83

Article 370:

Anyone who causes and spreads national, religious, or race 

hatred, divisions or intolerance among people, national 

minorities, or ethnic groups living in Montenegro, shall 

be punished by imprisonment for a term of 6 months 

to 5 years.

If an act under Paragraph 1 is done by coercion, 

maltreatment, endangering of safety, exposure to mockery 

of national, ethnic, or religious symbols, by damaging 

another person’s goods, or by desecration of monuments, 

memorial-tablets or tombs, the offender shall be punished 

by imprisonment for a term of 1 to 8 years.

Anyone who commits an act referred to in paragraphs 1 and 

2 of this article by abusing his/her position or authority, 

or if, as a result of these acts, riot or violence occurs, or 

other severe consequences for the communal life of people, 

national minorities, or ethnic groups living in Montenegro, 

shall be punished for an act under paragraph 1 of this 

article by imprisonment of 1 to 8 years, and for an act under 

paragraph 2 by imprisonment of 2 to 10 years.

MOROCCO

The religious framework of the state: Constitution84

Article 3:

Islam is the religion of the state, which guarantees to all the 

free exercise of beliefs [cultes].

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code85

Article 267-5:

Anyone who undermines the Islamic religion, the 

monarchic regime or incites to undermine the territorial 

integrity of the Kingdom shall be condemned to an 

imprisonment of 6 months up to 2 years and a fine 

of 20,000 up to 200,000 dirhams, or one of those two 

sentences only. 

The incurred sentence can be increased from 2 to 5 years 

of prison and a fine of 50,000 up to 500,000 dirhams or 

one of those two sentences only if the acts referred to in the 

first paragraph are committed either by speech, scream, or 

threat made in public places or public meetings, or by poster 

publicly exhibited by sale, distribution, or any other means 

used for publicity included by online form, paper, and 

audiovisual form.

NEPAL

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code86

156: Prohibition of outraging religious feelings 

(1) No person shall outrage the religious feelings of any 

caste, race, community, or class by words, either spoken or 

written, by visible representation or signs or otherwise.

(2) A person who commits, or causes to be committed, 

the offense referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to a 

sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years 

and a fine not exceeding 20,000 rupees.

158: Prohibition of proselytizing

(1) No person shall convert anyone from one religion to 

another or make attempt to or abet such conversion.

(2) No person shall do any act or conduct that undermines 

the religion, opinion, or faith of any caste, race, or 

community or convert anyone into another religion, 

whether by inducement or not, in a manner to so 

undermine or propagate such religion or opinion with the 

intention of making such conversion.

(3) A person who commits, or causes to be committed, the 

offense referred to in sub-section (1) or (2) shall be liable to 

a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years 

and a fine not exceeding 50,000 rupees.

(4) If a foreigner commits, or causes to be committed, the 

offense referred to in sub-section (1) or (2), he or she shall 

be deported from Nepal within 7 days after the date of 

completion of the service of imprisonment imposed under 

this Section.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

72 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
NIGERIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code87

Chapter 19, Offenses relating to Religious Worship

Section 204:

Any person who does an act [that] any class of persons 

considers as a public insult on their religion, with the 

intention that they should consider the act such an 

insult, and any person who does an unlawful act with the 

knowledge that any class of persons will consider it such 

an insult, is guilty of a misdemeanour, and is liable to 

imprisonment for 2 years.

OMAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution88

Article 1:

The Sultanate of Oman is an Arab, Islamic, independent 

state with full sovereignty and Muscat is its capital.

Article 2:

The religion of the state is Islam and Islamic Shari’a is the 

basis for legislation.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code89

Article 269:

The punishment shall be imprisonment for a term of not 

less than 3 years and not more than 10 years for anyone who 

commits one of the following acts:

(a) blaspheming against or insulting the Divinity verbally 

or by means of writing, drawing, gestures, or by any 

other means;

(b) insulting, perverting or desecrating the Holy Qur’an;

(c) insulting the Islamic religion or any of its rites, or any of 

the divine religions;

(d) blaspheming against or insulting any of the prophets 

verbally or by means of writing, drawing, gestures, or by 

any other means; or

(e) destroying or desecrating a building or any part of its 

contents intended for use in religious rites of the Islamic 

religion or any of the other divine religions.

PAKISTAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution90

Article 1: The Republic and its territories

Pakistan shall be [a] Federal Republic to be known as 

the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, hereinafter referred to 

as Pakistan.

Article 2: Islam to be State religion

Islam shall be the state religion of Pakistan.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code91

Chapter XV: Of Offenses Relating to Religion

295: Injuring or defiling place of worship, with Intent to 

insult the religion of any class

Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship, 

or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the 

intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of 

persons, or with the knowledge that any class of persons is 

likely to consider such destruction damage or defilement 

as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with fine, or with both.

295-A: Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage 

religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or 

religious beliefs

Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of 

outraging the ‘religious feelings of any class of the citizens 

of Pakistan, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible 

representations insults the religion or the religious beliefs 

of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either 

description for a term which may extend to 10 years, or with 

fine, or with both.

295-B: Defiling, etc., of Holy Qur’an

Whoever willfully defiles, damages, or desecrates a copy of 

the Holy Qur’an or of an extract therefrom or uses it in any 

derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be 

punishable with imprisonment for life.

295-C: Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of of the 

Holy Prophet

Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by 

visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or 

insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name 

of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 73
be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall 

also be liable to fine.

298: Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound 

religious feelings

Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the 

religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes 

any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes any 

gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the 

sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment 

of either description for a term which may extend to 1 year 

or with a fine, or with both.

298-A: Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of holy 

personages

Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by 

visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, 

or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred 

name of any wife (Ummul Mumineen) or members of the 

family (Ahle-bait) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon 

him), or any of the righteous Caliphs (Khulafae-Rashideen) 

or companions (Sahaaba) of the Holy Prophet (peace be 

upon him) shall be punished with imprisonment of either 

description for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with 

a fine, or with both.

298-B: Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc., 

reserved for certain holy personages or places

(1) Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group 

(who call themselves ‘Ahmadis,’ or by any other name, 

who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible 

representation– 

(a) refers to or addresses any person, other than a Caliph 

or companion of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace 

be upon him), as “Ameer-ulMumineen,” “KhalifatulMumineen,” Khalifa-tul-Muslimeen,” “Sahaabi,” or “Razi 

Allah Anho”;

(b) refers to or addresses any person, other than a wife of 

the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as 

“Ummul-Mumineen”;

(c) refers to or addresses any person, other than a 

member of the family “Ahle-bait” of the Holy Prophet 

Muhammad (peace be upon him), as “Ahle-bait”; or 

(d) refers to, or names, or calls his place of worship 

a “Masjid”;

shall be punished with imprisonment of either description 

for a term which may extend to 3 years, and shall also be 

liable to a fine.

(2) Any person of the Qaudiani group or Lahori group (who 

call themselves “Ahmadis” or by any other name) who by 

words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation 

refers to the mode or form of call to prayers followed by his 

faith as “Azan”, or recites Azan as used by the Muslims, shall be 

punished with imprisonment of either description for a term 

which may extend to 3 years, and shall also be liable to fine.

298-C: Person of Quadiani group, etc., calling himself a 

Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith

Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group 

(who call themselves ‘Ahmadis’ or by any other name), who 

directly or indirectly poses himself as a Muslim, or calls or 

refers to his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, 

or invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken 

or written, or by visible representations, or in any manner 

whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims shall be 

punished with imprisonment of either description for a term 

which may extend to 3 years and shall also be liable to fine.

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution92

Preamble:

WE, THE PEOPLE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA

• united in one nation 

• pay homage to the memory of our ancestors—the source of 

our strength and origin of our combined heritage 

• acknowledge the worthy customs and traditional wisdoms 

of our people—which have come down to us from 

generation to generation 

• pledge ourselves to guard and pass on to those who come 

after us our noble traditions and the Christian principles 

that are ours now. By authority of our inherent right as 

ancient, free and independent peoples 

WE, THE PEOPLE, do now establish this sovereign nation 

and declare ourselves, under the guiding hand of God, to be 

the Independent State of Papua New Guinea.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Customs Act

Article 97:93

Goods (other than films) which, whether of their own 

nature or having regard to any literary or other work or 

matter that is embodied, recorded, or reproduced in, or can 

be reproduced from, them – 

(a) are blasphemous, indecent or obscene; or

(b) unduly emphasize matters of sex, horror, violence 

or crime; or

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

74 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
(c) are likely to encourage depravity,

And advertising matters relating to such goods. Subject 

to compliance with the provisions of the Classification of 

Publication (Censorship) Act 1989.

Classification of Publication (Censorship) Act 198994

2: Interpretation 

(1) In this Act, unless the contrary intention appears—

“objectionable publication” means a publication that—

(a) describes, depicts, expresses, or otherwise deals 

with matters of sex, drug misuse, or addiction, crime, 

cruelty, blasphemy, immorality, violence or revolting or 

abhorrent phenomena in a manner that is likely to be 

offensive to a reasonable adult person and is undesirable 

in the interest of the public; or

(b) depicts a child (whether engaged in sexual activity or 

otherwise) who is, or who is apparently, under the age of 

18 years, in a manner that is likely to cause offense to a 

reasonable adult person and is undesirable in the interest 

of the public; or

(c) promotes, incites, or encourages terrorism;

70: Publishing of objectionable publications 

(1) A person who publishes an objectionable publication, 

other than a prescribed publication, is guilty of an offense 

punishable:

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding K5,000.00; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

K1,000.00 or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

six months, or both.

(2) A person who publishes a prescribed publication is 

guilty of an offense, punishable–

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding K10,000.00; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

K1,000.00 or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

six months, or both.

71: Possession of objectionable publications 

(1) A person who has in his possession an objectionable 

publication, other than a prescribed publication, is guilty of 

an offense punishable:

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 5,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

(2) A person who has in his possession a prescribed 

publication is guilty of an offense punishable:

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 10,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

72: Keeping objectionable publications at a premises 

(1) The occupier of premises who keeps or permits to be 

kept at or in the premises an objectionable publication, 

other than a prescribed publication, is guilty of an offense 

punishable–

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 5,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

(2) The occupier of premises who keeps or permits to be 

kept at or in those premises a prescribed publication is 

guilty of an offense punishable–

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 10,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

73: Publishing objectionable publications in a public place 

(1) A person who exhibits or displays an objectionable 

publication, other than a prescribed publication, in a public 

place or in such a manner that it is visible to persons in or 

on a public place is guilty of an offense punishable–

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 5,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

(2) A person who exhibits or displays a prescribed 

publication in a public place, or in such a manner that it 

is visible to persons in or on a public place, is guilty of an 

offense punishable–

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 75
(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 10,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

74: Making objectionable publications 

(1) A person who involves himself in the printing or 

otherwise in the making of or producing an objectionable 

publication is guilty of an offense punishable–

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 5,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

(2) A person who involves himself in the printing or 

otherwise in the making of or producing a prescribed 

publication is guilty of an offense punishable–

(a) in the case of a body corporate–by a fine not 

exceeding 10,000.00 kina; and

(b) in the case of an individual–by a fine not exceeding 

1,000.00 kina or by imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 6 months, or both.

Summary Offenses Act 197795

25A: Possession, etc., of indecent etc., article96

(1) A person who–

(a) has in his possession; or

(b) makes; or

(c) produces; or

(d) performs in the making or production of; or

(e) exhibits; or 

(f) sells,

an article or articles that–

(a) is or are blasphemous or indecent; or

(b) grossly offends or grossly offend against accepted 

standards of decency, is guilty of an offense.

Penalty: A fine not exceeding 2,000.00 kina or 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 1 year, or both.

(2) It is a defense to a charge of an offense against 

Subsection (1)(d) that the person charged was not aware 

that he was performing in the making or production of an 

article or articles.

(3) For the purposes of this section–

“article” means any description of article containing or 

embodying matter to be read or looked at or both, any sound 

record and any film or other record or a picture or pictures;

“film” means–

(a) a cinematograph film, and includes a positive or 

negative of a cinematograph film; or

(b) a video tape or video disc.

PHILIPPINES

The religious framework of the state: Constitution97

Preamble:

We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of 

Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society 

and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals 

and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and 

develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our 

posterity the blessings of independence and democracy 

under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, 

love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this 

Constitution.

Penal Code98

Article 133: Offending the religious feelings

The penalty of arrest to mayor in its maximum period 

to prison correctional in its minimum period shall be 

imposed upon anyone who, in a place devoted to religious 

worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony, 

shall perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of 

the faithful.

POLAND

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code99

Offenses against Freedom of Conscience and Religion

Article 196:

Anyone found guilty of offending religious feelings through 

public calumny of an object or place of worship is liable 

to a fine, restriction of liberty, or a maximum 2-year 

prison sentence.

QATAR

The religious framework of the state: Constitution100

Article 1:

Qatar is an independent sovereign Arab state. Its religion 

is Islam, and Shari’a law shall be a main source of its 

legislations. Its political system is democratic. The Arabic 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

76 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
language shall be its official language. The people of Qatar 

are a part of the Arab nation.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code101

Article 1: Introductory Provisions

Islamic Shari’a provisions concerning the following crimes 

are applicable if the suspect or the victim is a Muslim:

(1) The crimes such as theft, adultery, defamation, drinking 

alcohol, and apostasy.

(2) The crimes of retaliation and blood money.

Otherwise, the crimes and the punishments are determined 

due to this law and any other law.

Article 256: Crimes related to religions and the violability 

of the dead

One is convicted to no more than 7 years in prison in case 

of committing any of the following deeds:

(1) Insulting the Supreme Being in letter and spirit, in 

writing, drawing, gesturing, or in any other way.

(2) Offending, misinterpreting, or violating the 

Holy Qur’an.

(3) Offending the Islamic religion or one of its rites.

(4) Cursing any of the divine religions according to the 

regulations of the Islamic law.

(5) Insulting any of the prophets in letter and spirit, in 

writing, drawing, gesturing, or in any other way.

(6) Sabotaging, breaking, damaging, or violating places or 

their contents if they are made to perform religious rites for 

one of the divine religions according to the regulations of 

the Islamic law.

Article 263:

One is convicted to no more than a year and to a fine of no 

more than 1,000 riyals or to one of these two penalties in 

case of producing, selling, exposing for sale or circulation, 

or possessing products, merchandise, prints, or tapes 

including drawings, slogans, words, symbols, signals, or 

anything else that might offend the Islamic religion or 

other divine religions according to the regulations of the 

Islamic law.

The same penalty is imposed on everyone who uses disks, 

computer programs, or magnetized tapes to offend Islam 

or other divine religions according to the regulations of the 

Islamic law.

RWANDA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code102

Article 278: Publicly humiliating a religious worship

Any person who, by acts, speeches, gestures, writing or 

threats, publicly humiliates rites, symbols, or objects of 

religion, either in place intended for or generally used for 

practice of religion shall be liable to a term of imprisonment 

of at least 15 days but less than 6 months and a fine of 

50,000 to 500,000 Rwandan francs, or one of these penalties.

Article 279: Insults, battery, or injury upon a 

religious leader

Any person who, by acts, speeches, gestures, or threats, 

humiliates a religious leader shall be liable to a term of 

imprisonment of 6 months to 2 years.

If that religious leader is beaten in the exercise of his/

her ministry, the offender will be liable to a term of 

imprisonment of 2 to 5 years and a fine of 100,000 to 

500,000 Rwandan francs.

If the battery results in bleeding, bodily injuries, or illness, 

the offender shall be liable to a term of imprisonment of 2 to 

5 years and fine of 100,000 to 1,000,000 Rwandan francs.

RUSSIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Federal Law No. 136-FZ dated 29 June 2013 of the Russian 

Federation Moscow103

“On amendments to article 148 of the Criminal Code of 

the Russian Federation and some legislative instruments of 

the Russian Federation to counter offence [sic] against the 

religious beliefs and feelings of citizens.”

Article 1:

Article 148 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 

(Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 1996, 

No. 25, art. 2954; 2003, No. 50, art. 4848; 2010, No. 19, art. 

2289; 2011, No. 50, art. 7362) shall be hereby revised to read 

as follows:

“Article 148. Infringement of the right to freedom of 

conscience and religion

(1) Public actions expressing overt disrespect for society 

and committed for the purpose of offending the religious 

feelings of believers

–shall be punishable by a fine of up to 300,000 rubles or 

the amount of the earned or other income of the convicted 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 77
offender for a period of up to 2 years, or mandatory 

community service of up to 240 hours, or compulsory 

labor for up to 1 year, or incarceration for the same 

period of time.

(2) Criminal acts covered by part one hereof which are 

committed in places specially designated for worship and 

other religious observances and ceremonies,

–shall be punishable by a fine of up to 500,000 rubles or 

the amount of the earned or other income of the convicted 

offender for a period of up to 3 years, or mandatory 

community service of up to 480 hours, or compulsory labor 

for up to 3 years, or incarceration for the same period with 

or without restriction of freedom for up to 1 year.

(3) Unlawful obstruction of the activity of religious 

organizations or the conduct of worship or other religious 

observances and ceremonies

–shall be punishable by a fine of up to 300,000 rubles or the 

amount of earned or other income of the convicted offender 

for a period of up to 2 years, or mandatory community 

service of up to 360 hours, or remedial labor for up to 1 year, 

or confinement for up to 3 months.

(4) Criminal acts covered by part three hereof committed:

(a) by a person using their official position;

(b) with the use or threat of force–

shall be punishable by a fine of up to 200,000 rubles 

or the amount of the earned or other income of the 

convicted offender for a period of up to 1 year, or 

mandatory community service for up to 480 hours, or 

remedial labor for up to 2 years, or compulsory labor 

for up to 1 year, or incarceration for the same period 

with disqualification from holding certain positions or 

engaging in certain activities for up to two 2 years.”

Article 5.26:104

Violation of the law on freedom of conscience and freedom 

of religion and on religious associations

(1) Obstruction of the exercise of the right to freedom of 

conscience and freedom of religion, including acceptance or 

rejection of religious or other convictions, or of entry into 

or withdrawal from a religious association, shall incur an 

administrative fine on citizens of 10,000 to 30,000 rubles; 

and on officials from 15,000 to 100,000 rubles.

(2) Intentional public desecration, damage, or destruction of 

religious or liturgical literature, items of religious worship, 

signs or emblems of belief symbolism and attributes shall 

incur an administrative fine on citizens of 30,000 to 

50,000 rubles or mandatory community service of up to 

120 hours; and on officials from 100,000 to 200,000 rubles.”

SAN MARINO

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code105

Article 260: Religious insult

Whoever desecrates the symbols or the objects of cult or 

worship of a religion [that] is not contrary to morals, or 

publicly mocks the acts of a cult, is liable to first-degree 

imprisonment.

The same penalty is applicable to attacks on the honor or 

prestige of a priest in or due to the exercise of his functions. 

Whoever desecrates the sacred relics of San Marino is liable 

to second-term imprisonment.

SAUDI ARABIA

The religious framework of the state:

“Saudi Arabia does not have a written penal code, but relies 

on judges’ interpretations of the Shari’a for determination 

of which actions constitute crimes and what the attendant 

punishment should be. The definitions of crimes and nature 

and severity of punishments may vary from case to case.”106

“Saudi law divides punishments for criminal acts into 

three broad categories: (1) offenses against God carrying 

inalterable punishments prescribed by the Qur’an (hadd); 

(2) private rights to retribution connected with a criminal 

act (qisas); and (3) discretionary punishments (ta’zir) for all 

other criminal offenses.”107

Apostasy (riddah) is a hadd crime and is punishable by 

death. Blasphemy against Salafism or the Saudi monarchy 

is also punishable by death, but the more common 

penalties are prison sentences, fines, and lashing.108

“There have been no confirmed reports of executions 

for either apostasy or blasphemy in recent years.”109 The 

Commission to Promote Virtue and Prevent Vice (CPVPV), 

or Mutaween, is the Saudi government’s religious police, 

tasked with enforcing public morality based on the Saudi 

government’s interpretation of Islamic law. The CPVPV 

consists of approximately 5,000 field officers, approximately 

2,000 administrative workers, and more than 3,500 offices 

throughout the country. In more recent years, the Saudi 

government has curtailed the powers of the CPVPV; 

for example, they are no longer allowed to engage in 

surveillance, detain individuals for more than 24 hours, 

arrest individuals without police accompaniment, and carry 

out any kind of punishment.110

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

78 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Basic Law of Government Chapter 1 General Principles 

Article 1: Official state religion

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic 

state with Islam as its religion; God’s Book and the Sunnah 

of His Prophet, God’s prayers and peace be upon him, are its 

constitution; Arabic is its language and Riyadh is its capital.

Article 11:

Saudi society will be based on the principle of adherence to 

God’s command, on mutual cooperation in good deeds and 

piety and mutual support and inseparability.

Article 48:

The courts will apply the rules of the Islamic Shari’a in 

the cases that are brought before them, in accordance with 

what is indicated in the Book and the Sunnah, and statutes 

decreed by the Ruler which do not contradict the Book or 

the Sunnah.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

External Printed Matter

Article 18:

External printed matter shall be approved if free from 

anything insulting to Islam or the system of Government 

or injurious to high interests of the state or scarify public 

morality and conflict with ethical standards.

SEYCHELLES

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code111

Section 35: When in this code no punishment is especially 

provided for any misdemeanor, it shall be punishable with 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or with a 

fine, or with both.112

Section 125: Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles 

any place of worship or any object [that] is held sacred 

by any class of persons with the intention of thereby 

insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the 

knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider 

such destruction, damage, or defilement as an insult to their 

religion, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Section 127: Every person who with the intention of 

wounding the feelings of any person or of insulting the 

religion of any person, or with the knowledge that the 

feelings of any person are likely to be wounded, or that 

the religion of any person is likely to be insulted thereby, 

commits any trespass in any place of worship or in any place 

of sepulture or in any place set apart for the performance 

of funeral rites or as a depository for the remains of the 

dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse, or causes 

disturbance to any persons assembled for the purpose of 

funeral ceremonies, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Section 128: Any person who, with the deliberate intention 

of wounding the religious feelings of any other person, any 

word, or any person who, with the like intention, utters any 

word or makes any sound in the hearing of any other person 

or makes any gesture or places any object in the sight of 

any other person is guilty of misdemeanor and is liable to 

imprisonment for 1 year.

SINGAPORE

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code: Offenses Relating to Religion or Race113

Article 298: Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to 

wound the religious or racial feelings of any person

Whoever, with deliberate intention of wounding the 

religious or racial feelings of any person, utters any word or 

makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes 

any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object 

in the sight of that person, or causes any matter however 

represented to be seen or heard by that person, shall be 

punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend 

to 3 years, or with fine, or with both.

SOMALIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution114

Article 2: State and Religion

(1) Islam is the religion of the state.

(2) No religion other than Islam can be propagated in 

the country.

(3) No law which is not compliant with the general 

principles of Shari’a can be enacted.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code115

Part IV, Chapter 1

Article 313: Bringing the Religion of the State 

into contempt

(1) Whoever publicly brings the religion of Islam [1 Const.] 

into contempt shall be punished with imprisonment 

[96 P.C.] up to 2 years.

(2) Whoever publicly insults the religion of Islam [1 Const.] 

by bringing into contempt persons professing it or places 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 79
or objects dedicated to worship shall be liable to the same 

punishment.

SOUTH SUDAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution116

Preamble:

We, the People of South Sudan, Grateful to the Almighty 

God for giving the people of South Sudan the wisdom 

and courage to determine their destiny and future 

through a free, transparent, and peaceful referendum in 

accordance with the provisions of the Comprehensive Peace 

Agreement, 2005;

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code117

Chapter XV: Offenses Relating to Religion

Section 201: Insulting or Inciting Contempt of 

Religious Creed

Whoever by any means publicly insults or seeks to incite 

contempt of any religion in such a manner as to be likely to 

lead to a breach of the peace, commits an offense, and upon 

conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term 

exceeding 3 years or with a fine, or with both.

Section 203: Injuring or Defiling Place of Worship with 

Intent to Insult the Religion of any Class

Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship 

or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the 

intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of 

persons likely to consider such destruction, damage, or 

defilement as an insult to their religion, commits an offense, 

and upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment 

for a term not exceeding 3 years or with a fine, or with both.

SPAIN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution118

No religion shall have a state character. The public 

authorities shall take into account the religious beliefs 

of Spanish society and shall consequently maintain 

appropriate cooperation relations with the Catholic Church 

and other confessions.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code119

Article 525:

(1) Whoever, in order to offend the feelings of the members 

of a religious confession, publicly disparages their dogmas, 

beliefs, rites, or ceremonies in public, verbally or in writing, or 

insult, also publicly, those who profess or practice these, shall 

incur the punishment of a fine from 8 to 12 months.

(2) The same penalties shall be incurred by those who publicly 

disparage, verbally or in writing, those who do not profess any 

religion or belief whatsoever.

SRI LANKA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution120

9: Buddhism

The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the 

foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of 

the state to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while 

assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 

10 and 14(1)(e).

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code121

Chapter XV: Offenses Relating to Religion

Article 290:

Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship, 

or any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the 

intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of 

persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is 

likely to consider such destruction, damage, or defilement 

as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with a fine, or with both.

Article 290A:

Whoever does any act, in or upon, or in the vicinity of, 

any place of worship or any object [that] is held sacred or 

in veneration by any class of persons, with the intention 

of wounding the religious feelings of any class of persons 

or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely 

to consider such an act an insult to their religion, shall 

be punished with imprisonment of either description for 

a term which may extend to 1 year, or with [a] fine, or 

with both.

Article 291A:

Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or 

makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes 

any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any 

object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 1 year, or with [a] fine, or with both.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

80 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
Article 291B:

Whoever, with the deliberate and malicious intention 

of outraging the religious feelings of any class of 

persons, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible 

representations, insults or attempts to insult the religion 

or religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with 

imprisonment of either description for a term which may 

extend to 2 years, or with [a] fine, or with both.

ST. LUCIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code122

Article 318: Conditional privilege on publication in 

good faith

A publication of defamatory matter is privileged, on 

condition that it is published in good faith, and in any of the 

following cases—

(g) if the matter published is in fact a fair report of anything 

said, done, or shown in a civil or criminal inquiry or 

proceeding before any Court, unless the Court prohibits 

the publication of anything said or shown before it, on the 

ground that it is seditious, immoral, or blasphemous;

Article 326: Plea of justification of libel

(1) Where a person accused of publishing defamatory 

matter pleads that the defamatory matter published by him 

or her was true, and that it was for the public benefit that 

the matter should be published in the manner in which and 

at the time when it was published, such plea may justify 

the defamatory matter in the sense specified, if any, in 

the count, or in the sense which the defamatory matter 

bears without any such specific justification, or separate 

pleas justifying the defamatory matter in each sense may 

be pleaded separately, as if two libels had been charged in 

separate counts.

(6) No plea of justification shall be pleaded to any 

indictment or count of a charge of seditious, blasphemous, 

or obscene libel.

Article 327: Penalty for intentional libel 

Any person who is convicted of intentional libel is liable on 

conviction on indictment to imprisonment for 5 years.

Article 328: Penalty for negligent libel

Any person who is convicted of negligent libel is liable on 

conviction on indictment to imprisonment for 2 years.

ST. VINCENT AND GRENADINES

The religious framework of the state: Constitution123

Preamble:

WHEREAS the Peoples of the Island of Saint Vincent, who 

are known as Vincentians–

(a) have affirmed that the Nation is founded on the belief in 

the supremacy of God and the freedom and dignity of man;

(b) desire that their society be so ordered as to express their 

recognition of the principles of democracy, free institutions, 

social justice, and equality before the law;

(c) realize that the maintenance of human dignity 

presupposes safeguarding the rights of privacy of family life, 

of property, and the fostering of the pursuit of just economic 

rewards for labor;

(d) desire that their Constitution should enshrine the abovementioned freedoms, principles, and ideals;

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code124

Article 117:

Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place of 

worship, or any object [that] is held sacred by any group 

or class of persons, with the intention thereby of insulting 

the religion of those persons, or with the knowledge that 

any group or class of person is likely to consider such 

destruction, damage, or defilement as an insult to their 

religion, is guilty of an offense and liable to imprisonment 

for 5 years.

Article 119:

Any person who with the intention of wounding the 

religious feeling of any other person, writes any word, or 

utters any word or makes any gesture or sound in the sight 

or hearing of any other person, or places any object in the 

sight of any other person, is guilty of an offense and liable to 

imprisonment for 2 years.

SUDAN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution125

Article 5: Sources of Legislation

(1) Nationally enacted legislation having effect only in 

respect of the Northern states of the Sudan shall have as its 

sources of legislation Islamic Shari’a and the consensus of 

the people.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 81
Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

The Criminal Act of 1991126

Article 125: Insulting Religious Beliefs127 128

(1) Whoever degrades or publicly insults, in any way, any 

beliefs, religions, and/or their rituals or beliefs, or works to 

stir up a feeling of contempt about religions, is punished 

with imprisonment for a period not exceeding 6 months, 

or a fine; 

(2) Whoever (non-Muslims) publicly degrades or insults our 

prophet Muhammad shall be punished with imprisonment 

for a period not exceeding 5 years; 

(3) Whoever curses or insults, in any way, any of the 

companions of prophet Muhammad, or any of his wives, 

or his lineage, shall be punished with imprisonment for a 

period not exceeding 5 years; 

(4) Whoever is convicted of the crime mentioned in clauses 

(2) and (3) and continues to repeat these crimes for the third 

time, their penalty should be doubled.

SURINAME

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code129

Article 196:

A prison sentence not exceeding 1 year and a fine of 

the third category, or either one of these punishments, 

shall apply to:

(1) the person who publicly in speech or in writing 

or through image or data from automated works 

utters mocking blasphemy that is offensive to one’s 

religious feelings;

(2) the person who mocks a religious minister in the lawful 

performance of his service;

(3) the person who taunts objects devoted to a worship 

service, where and when the practice of that service 

is lawful.

Article 197:

(1) The person who distributes, openly exhibits, or 

affixes writings or images or data from automated works 

containing expressions that, as mocking blasphemy, may 

be offensive to one’s religious feelings, or has these in 

his possession for the distribution, open exhibition, or 

initiation thereof, if he knows or has serious reason to 

suspect that these writings or images contain such an 

expression, he shall be punished with a prison sentence 

not exceeding 6 months and a fine of the third category, or 

either one of these punishments.

(2) The same punishment shall apply to the person 

who, with equal knowledge or equal reason to suspect, 

publicly renders the content of such writings or data from 

automated works.

(3) In passing sentence on one of the crimes described 

in this Article, the deprivation of the rights mentioned 

in Article 46, paragraph 1, sections (1) and (2) may be 

pronounced.

SWITZERLAND

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code130

Title Twelve: Felonies and Misdemeanors against 

Public Order

Article 261:

Any person who publicly and maliciously insults or mocks 

the religious conventions of others, and in particular their 

belief in God, or maliciously desecrates objects of religious 

veneration, is liable to a monetary penalty not exceeding 

180 daily penalty units.

SYRIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution131

Article 3:

The religion of the President of the Republic is Islam; 

Islamic jurisprudence shall be a major source of legislation. 

The state shall respect all religions, and ensure the freedom 

to perform all the rituals that do not prejudice public order. 

The personal status of religious communities shall be 

protected and respected.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code132

Article 208:

Public venues are considered:

(1) Activities and movements if they occur in a public 

place or in an area available to the public, or an exhibition 

for viewing, or which are seen because a person who had 

nothing to do with them saw them by mistake.

(2) Talking or shouting, whether publicly or transmitted 

mechanically, so that in both cases they are actually heard 

by those who have nothing to do with them.

(3) Writing, drawings, paintings, photographs, films, 

symbols, and illustrations of various kinds if they are 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

82 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
exhibited in a public place or in an area available to the 

public, or an exhibit for viewing, or if they are sold or 

displayed for sale or are distributed to one or more people.

Article 462:

Anyone who engages in one of the ways specified in Article 

208 to disparage the religious rituals that are practiced 

publicly or who incites to showing contempt for these 

rituals shall be punished by imprisonment from 2 months 

to 2 years.

Article 463:

The following shall be punished by imprisonment of 

1 month to 1 year:

(1) Anyone who causes a disturbance during the 

performance of a religious ritual, celebration, or ceremony, 

or who obstructs them by violence or threats.

(2) Anyone who destroys, smashes, defaces, desecrates, 

or defiles a building dedicated to worship, a slogan, or 

anything else that is venerated by the members of a religion 

or a group of people.

(3) Violation of the sanctity of the dead or crimes that 

violate the orderliness of their burial.

Article 464:

Anyone who creates a disturbance at funeral ceremonies 

or celebrations of the dead or who obstructs them with 

violence or threats shall be punished by imprisonment of 

2 months to 1 year.

TAJIKISTAN

Code on Administrative Offenses133

Article 86:134

2: The offense of religious feelings of citizens, or the 

desecration of objects and also signs and emblems of 

symbols of a worldview, which in accordance with their 

beliefs, are objects for worship, in the absence of signs of a 

crime lead to a fine on individuals in the sum of from 10 to 

20, and on officials, from 40 to 50 base values.135

TANZANIA

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code136

Chapter XIV: Offenses Relating to Religion 

125: Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place 

of insult to worship or any object which is held sacred by 

any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting 

the religion of any class of any class persons or with the 

knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider 

such destruction, damage, or defilement as an insult to their 

religion, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

127: Every person who with the intention of wounding or 

trespassing on the feelings of any person or of insulting 

the religion of any person, or with the knowledge that the 

feelings of any person are likely to be wounded, or that 

the religion of any person is likely to be insulted thereby, 

commits any trespass in any place of worship or in any place 

of sepulture or in any place set apart for the performance 

of funeral rites or as a depository for the remains of the 

dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse, or causes 

disturbance to any persons assembled for the purpose of 

funeral ceremonies, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

129: Any person who, with the deliberate intention of 

wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any 

word, or makes any sound in hearing of that person, or 

makes any gesture in the wound right of that person, or 

places any object in the sight of that person, is guilty of a 

misdemeanor, and is liable to imprisonment for 1 year.

THAILAND

The religious framework of the state: Constitution137

Section 79:

The state shall patronize and protect Buddhism, which is 

the religion the majority of Thai people have practiced for a 

long time, and other religions, promote good understanding 

and harmony among followers of all religions, as well as 

encourage the application of religious principles to create 

virtue and develop the quality of life.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code138

Section 206:

Whoever to do, by any means whatever, to the object or 

place of religious worship of any group of persons in the 

manner likely to insult such religion, shall be imprisoned as 

from 2 years to 7 years or fined as from 2,000 two baht to 

14,000 baht, or both.

THE SANGHA ACT139

B.E. 2505 [1962]

BHUMIBOL ADULYADEJ REX.;

CHAPTER 7

PENAL PROVISIONS140

Section 44:

Any person who has been relieved from monkhood because 

he has committed a grave offense which resulted in expulsion 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 83
from monkhood, regardless of a judgment pursuant to 

Section 25, and comes back to be ordained by giving a false 

statement or conceals facts from the preceptor shall be liable 

to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 1 year.

Section 44 bis:

Any person who defames, insults, or threatens the Supreme 

Patriarch shall be liable for imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 1 year, or fine not exceeding 20,000 baht, or both.

Section 44 ter:

Any person who imputes the Sangha or other Sangha, 

which may be injurious to the reputation or create 

disharmony, shall be liable for imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding 1 year, or fine not exceeding 20,000 baht, or both.

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Offenses Act141

Section 5: Any person who is convicted of any of the 

following offenses, that is to say, any attempt to commit a 

common law offense or an offense made indictable by any 

statute or Order in Council of the United Kingdom or any 

Act in force in Trinidad and Tobago at the time of such 

attempt being made; blasphemy, writing and publishing, 

or printing and publishing, any blasphemous libel; bribery, 

conspiracy, escape, or aiding or assisting in, or voluntarily 

or negligently permitting any escape; breaking out of any 

prison in which such person shall be lawfully detained 

on any civil process, or under sentence for any indictable 

offense, or to which such person has been committed on any 

charge of an indictable offense; any rescue of, or attempt to 

rescue, any person, when such offense is not punishable as 

an arrestable offense; keeping a common gaming-house, 

or common bawdy-house, or a common ill-governed and 

disorderly house; sending any challenge with intent to 

provoke, or otherwise endeavouring to provoke, any person 

to commit a breach of the peace; sedition; writing and 

publishing or printing and publishing, any seditious libel, or 

publishing any obscene print, writing, or picture; every such 

offender is liable to a fine and to imprisonment for 2 years.

TUNISIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution142

Article 1: Sovereignty, Religion, Language, 

Government system

Tunisia is a free, independent, sovereign state; its religion is 

Islam, its language Arabic, and its system is republican.

This article might not be amended.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code143

Article 121a:

Any person provoking rebellion, either by speeches in 

public meetings or public spaces or by advertisement or 

poster or printed publication, shall be punished as having 

taken part in the rebellion. Should the rebellion not take 

place, the agitator shall be punished by imprisonment 

for 1 year.

Article 121b:

This article has been moved from the press code in virtue of 

Article 2 of the law No. 2001-43 of May 3, 2001 – Ex. Article 

61 – When performed deliberately, the sale, distribution, 

or reproduction of banned works, or the publication or the 

defamation under a different title of a banned work, shall be 

punishable by imprisonment for 16 days to 1 year and a fine 

of 60 to 600 dinars.

The Ministry of the Interior shall proceed with an 

attachment order for the copies and reproductions of the 

banned works.

Article 121c:

This article has been moved from the press code in virtue of 

Article 2 of the law No. 2001-43 of May 3, 2001 – Ex Article 

62 – Distribution, sale, public exhibition, and possession 

with the intent to distribute, sell, exhibit in the form of 

propaganda, leaflets, bulletins or flyers, whether or not 

of foreign origin and having the effect of a breach of the 

peace or public morals are prohibited. Any violation of the 

prohibition decreed in the previous paragraph may lead to 

imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years and a fine of 120 to 

1,200 dinars in addition to immediate seizure.

Article 226a:

Any act of public indecency committed by any person 

shall be subject to 6 months of imprisonment and a fine of 

48 dinars.

Article 226b:

Any act or speech considered lewd or injurious to public 

morals or an intentional assault on the decency of another 

person or which causes another person’s embarrassment 

shall be punishable by 6 months imprisonment and a fine of 

1,000 dinars.

The same punishment as set forth in the preceding 

paragraph shall apply to any person who draws public 

attention to a commission of debauchery through 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

84 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
publications, recordings, or audio, visual, electronic or 

optical means.

Article 226c:

Any person committing an act of sexual harassment shall be 

subject to 1 year of imprisonment and a fine of 3,000 dinars.

Sexual harassment includes persistent embarrassment of 

another person by a repetition of acts or speech or gestures 

[that] may harm that person’s dignity or decency with the 

intent of causing the person to submit to his or her own 

sexual desires or to those of another person or to exercise 

pressure on that person to weaken their wish to resist 

such desires.

The punishment is doubled when the violation is committed 

with a minor or other person particularly susceptible to the 

harasser due to mental or physical disability.

Article 226d:

The punishments provided in the preceding two articles do 

not prejudice the application of more severe punishments 

provided for other violations.

Legal proceedings may only take place upon request by 

the public prosecutor in reaction to a complaint filed by 

the victim.

Should the case be dismissed or the accused be acquitted 

in a court of law, the accused may request, as appropriate, 

compensation for damages suffered without prejudice to 

legal action against the accuser for making false allegations.

TURKEY

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code144

Article 216:

(3) A person who openly denigrates the religious values 

of a section of the population shall be sentenced to 

imprisonment for a term of 6 months to 1 year in case the 

act is likely to distort public peace.

TURKMENISTAN

Code on Administrative Offenses145

Article 75: Violation of the right to freedom of religious 

confession and association in religious organizations146

(1) The violation of the right of citizens to confess 

any religion or none at all, to express and spread their 

convictions, in connection with religion, to participate 

in the carrying out of religious cults, rituals, and rites, to 

associate into religious organizations, and also the offense 

of religious feelings carries with it a warning or a fine in the 

amount of from 2 to 5 of the base value. 

(2) Drawing citizens into religious organizations, and also 

into movements and sects, and into their activities, through 

the use of material incentive, psychological pressure, 

deception, and other illegal acts leads to the imposition of a 

fine in the amount of from 5 to 10 of the base value. 

(3) The obstruction of citizens’ exercise of their right to 

freedom of conscience and religious confession against 

their will leads to a fine in the amount of between 5 to 10 of 

the base value or administrative arrest for a period of up 

to 15 days.147

UKRAINE

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code148

Article 161: Violation of citizens’ equality based on their 

race, nationality, or religious preferences

(1) Willful actions inciting national, racial, or religious 

enmity and hatred, humiliation of national honor and 

dignity, or the insult of citizens’ feelings in respect to 

their religious convictions, and also any direct or indirect 

restriction of rights, or granting direct or indirect privileges 

to citizens based on race, color of skin, political, religious, 

and other convictions, sex, ethnic and social origin, 

property status, place of residence, linguistic or other 

characteristics–

shall be punishable by a fine of 200 to 500 tax-free 

minimum incomes, or restraint of liberty for a term up 

to 5 years, with or without the deprivation of the right to 

occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a 

term up to 3 years.

(2) The same actions accompanied with violence, deception, 

or threats, and also committed by an official–

shall be punishable by a fine of 500 to 1,000 tax-free 

minimum incomes, or restraint of liberty for a term of 

2 to 5 years, with or without the deprivation of the right to 

occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a 

term up to 3 years.

(3) Any such actions as provided for by paragraph 1 or 2 of 

this Article, if committed by an organized group of persons, 

or where they caused grave consequences–

shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of 

5 to 8 years.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 85
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

The religious framework of the state: Constitution149

Part One: The Union, its Fundamental 

Constituents and Aims

Article 7:

Islam is the official religion of the Union. The Islamic 

Shari’a shall be a main source of legislation in the Union. 

The official language of the Union is Arabic.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code: Fed. Law 3 of 1987 as Amended150

Book Two: Crimes and their Punishments

Article 312: Crimes against Religious Faith and Rights

Shall be punishable by confinement and by fine, or by one 

of these two penalties, any individual who commits any of 

the following offenses:

(1) Offense against any of the Islamic sacred things or rites;

(2) To insult and revile any of the recognized divine 

religions;

Where any of the above offenses is committed in public, 

the punishment shall be either confinement for a minimum 

period of 1 year or a fine.

Article 319:151

Whoever opposes or vilifies the foundations or teachings 

on which the Muslim religion is based, or whatever he 

essentially knows of, offends this religion, preaches another 

religion, advocates for a doctrine or ideology that embraces 

any of the matters mentioned above, or commends or 

propagates any of these, shall be sentenced to imprisonment 

for a term not exceeding 5 years.

Federal Decree Law No. 2 of 2015152

Article 4:

Any person who commits any of the following acts shall be 

sentenced for the crime of blasphemy:

(1) Offending, showing contempt or irreverence toward the 

Divine Entity.

(2) Offending, insulting, challenging, defaming, or 

disrespecting any religion or any of its rituals or sacred 

things, or disrupting or preventing licensed religious 

observances or ceremonies by violence or threat. 

(3) Distorting, destroying, desecrating, or insulting, in any 

way, any of the holy books.

(4) Insulting, disrespecting, offending, or defaming one of 

the messengers or their spouses, family, or companions.

(5) Destroying, damaging, or desecrating the sanctity of 

places of worship, cemeteries or graves, appurtenances or 

any of their contents.

Article 5:

(a) Any person who commits any of the acts set forth in 

Clauses (2, 3, 5) of Article (4) of the present Decree Law by 

any means of expression, or by any other form or means, 

shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a period not less 

than 5 years and to a fine not less than 250,000 dirhams and 

not exceeding 1,000,000 dirhams, or either one of these two 

penalties.

(b) Any person who commits any of the acts set forth 

in Clauses (1, 4) of Article (4) of this Decree Law by any 

means of expression, or by any other form or means, shall 

be sentenced to imprisonment for a period not less than 

5 years and to a fine not less than 250,000 dirhams and not 

exceeding 2,000,000 dirhams.

UZBEKISTAN

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Criminal Code153

Article 156: Incitement of Ethnic, Racial or 

Religious Hatred

Intentional acts, humiliating ethnic honor and dignity 

and insulting religious or atheistic feelings of individuals, 

carried out with the purpose of incitement of hatred, 

intolerance, or division on national, ethnic, racial, or 

religious basis, as well as the direct or indirect restriction of 

rights or the establishment of direct or indirect privileges 

on the basis of national, racial, or ethnic origin, or religious 

beliefs – shall be punished with imprisonment up to 5 years.

The same actions committed:

(a) in a way dangerous to lives of other persons;

(b) with infliction of serious bodily injuries;

(c) with forced eviction of individuals from the places of 

their permanent residence;

(d) by an authorized official;

(e) by previous concert or by a group of individuals –

shall be punished with imprisonment from 5 to 10 years.

VANUATU

The religious framework of the state: Constitution154

Preamble:

WE the people of Vanuatu, PROUD of our struggle for 

freedom, DETERMINED to safeguard the achievements 

of this struggle, CHERISHING our ethnic, linguistic, 

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

86 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
and cultural diversity, MINDFUL at the same time of our 

common destiny, HEREBY proclaim the establishment 

of the united and free Republic of Vanuatu founded on 

traditional Melanesian values, faith in God, and Christian 

principles, AND for this purpose give ourselves this 

Constitution.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code155

Article 88: Insult to religion of any class

No person shall destroy, damage, or defile any place of 

worship or any object [that] is held sacred by any class of 

persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion 

of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class 

of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage, or 

defilement as an insult to their religion.

Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years. 

YEMEN

The religious framework of the state: Constitution156

Chapter I: The Political Foundations

Article 1:

The Republic of Yemen is an Arab, Islamic, and 

independent sovereign state whose integrity is inviolable, 

and no part of which may be ceded. The people of Yemen 

are part of the Arab and Islamic nation.

Article 2:

Islam is the religion of the state, and Arabic is its 

official language.

Article 3:

Islamic Shari’a is the source of all legislation.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code157

Article 194: Ridiculing Religion and Instigation that 

Disturbs Public Peace

To be sentenced to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 

3 years or to a fine:

First: Whoever disseminates in public ideas containing 

ridicule or contempt of religion in its beliefs or rituals or 

teachings.

Second: Whoever instigates in public or ridicules a faction 

of people or empowers a faction to dominate for the purpose 

of disturbing public peace.

Article 195: Ridicule of the Islamic Religion or any 

of its Sects

The sentence shall be imprisonment for a period not 

exceeding 5 years or a fine if the religion or the sect which 

is affected by ridicule or contempt or inferiority is the 

Islamic religion.

Chapter Three

Apostasy

Article 259: Crimes Related to Religion and the 

Sanctity of The Dead

Anyone who turns back from or denounces the religion 

of Islam is punished by the death penalty after being 

questioned for repentance three times and after giving him 

a respite of 30 days. The apostasy in public by speech or acts 

is considered contradictory to the principles of Islam and 

its pillars in intention and determination. If the intention 

or determination is not established and the guilty shows 

repentance, there will be no punishment.

Desecration

Article 260: Distortion of The Holy Qu’ran

Punishment with imprisonment for a period not exceeding 

5 years or a fine is to anyone who distorts willfully the Holy 

Qur’an in a manner [that] changes its meaning with the 

purpose of harming the natural religion.

Article 261: Assault on the Sanctity of The Faith

Punishment with imprisonment for a period not exceeding 

1 year or a fine not more than 2,000 ryals will be 

imposed on:

(1) Whoever destroys or misrepresents or profanes a 

mosque or any other place set up by a license from the state 

to perform religious rituals or a symbol or other objects 

having religious sanctity.

(2) Whoever distorts deliberately the establishment of 

recognized rituals of a sect or a celebration or religious 

meeting or disrupts something out of that or forbids it by 

force or threat.

ZAMBIA

The religious framework of the state: Constitution158

Preamble:

WE, THE PEOPLE OF ZAMBIA by our representatives, 

assembled in our Parliament, having solemnly resolved to 

maintain Zambia as a Sovereign Democratic Republic;

DECLARE the Republic a Christian nation while upholding 

the right of every person to enjoy that person’s freedom of 

conscience or religion;

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 87
Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code159

128: Insult to religion of any class

Any person who destroys, damages, or defiles any place of 

worship or any object [that] is held sacred by any class of 

persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion 

of any class of persons, or with the knowledge that any class 

of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage, 

or defilement as an insult to their religion, is guilty of a 

misdemeanor.

130: Trespassing on burial places

Every person who, with the intention of wounding the 

feelings of any person or of insulting the religion of any 

person, or with the knowledge that the feelings of any 

person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any 

person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass 

in any place of worship or in any place of sepulture or in 

any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites or 

as a depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any 

indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance 

to any persons assembled for the purpose of funeral 

ceremonies, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

131: Uttering words with the intent to wound 

religious feelings

Any person who, with the deliberate intention of wounding 

the religious feelings of any person, utters any word, or 

makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes 

any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object 

in the sight of that person, is guilty of a misdemeanour and 

is liable to imprisonment for 1 year.

ZIMBABWE

The religious framework of the state: Constitution160

Preamble:

Acknowledging the supremacy of Almighty God, in whose 

hands our future lies,

And, imploring the guidance and support of Almighty God, 

hereby make this Constitution and commit ourselves to it as 

the fundamental law of our beloved land.

Laws that make a specific reference to sanctioning insult, 

blasphemy, or defamation of religion:

Penal Code161

Section 42: Causing offense to persons of a particular race, 

religion, etc.

(1) In this section–

“creed or religion” means any system of belief associated 

with practices of worship that is adhered to by any 

significant body of persons in Zimbabwe or any 

other country;

“film,” “picture,” “publication,” “record,” and “statue” have 

the meanings assigned to those terms by section 2 of the 

Censorship and Entertainments Control Act....

“publicly,” in relation to making a statement, means–

(a) making the statement in a public space or any place to 

which the public or any section of the public have access;

(b) publishing it in any printed or electronic medium for 

reception by the public;

“statement” includes any act, gesture, or form of expression, 

whether verbal, written, or visual, but does not include 

any film, picture, publication, statue, or record that is of a 

bona fide literary or artistic character.

(2) Any person who publicly makes any insulting or 

otherwise grossly provocative statement that causes offense 

to persons of a particular race, tribe, place of origin, 

color, creed, or religion, intending to cause such offense 

or realizing there is a real risk or possibility of doing so, 

shall be guilty of causing offense to persons of a particular 

race, tribe, place of origin, color, creed, or religion, as the 

case may be, and liable to a fine not exceeding level six or 

imprisonment for a period not exceeding 1 year, or both.

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

88 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
NOTES

1 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, International Constitutional 

Law Project (Jan. 4, 2004), http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/af00000_.html 

(last visited Apr. 28, 2013).

2 Afghanistan: Mass Media Law of 2009 [Afghanistan], Refworld, 2009, https://www.

refworld.org/docid/5ddce5604.html (last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

3 The Constitution of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, International 

Constitutional Law Project (Nov.19, 1976, as amended, Nov. 28, 1996), https://www.

servat.unibe.ch/icl/ag00000_.html (last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

4 Penal Code [Algeria], Equal Rights Trust, 2007, https://www.equalrightstrust.org/sites/

default/files/ertdocs//code_penal.pdf (last visited Sept. 21, 2020).

5 Policing Belief: The Impact of Blasphemy Laws on Human Rights, Freedom House, 

15 (2010), https://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/Policing_Belief_Full.pdf

(last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

6 Andorra’s Constitution of 1993, Constitute Project, (2020), https://

www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Andorra_1993.pdf?lang=en

(last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

7 Penal Code [Andorra], Sharing Electronic Resources and Laws on Crime by 

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, https://sherloc.unodc.org/res/cld/

document/and/2005/penal_code_of_andorra_html/Andorra_Code_Penal_Fr.pdf

(last visited Sept. 19, 2020).

8 Id.

9 Third Report on Andorra, European Commission Against Racism and 

Intolerance (ECRI), 9 (June 2007), https://rm.coe.int/09000016808b5510

(last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

10 Antigua and Barbuda 1981 [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Antigua_and_Barbuda_1981?lang=en

(last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

11 Laws of Antigua and Barbuda (Cap. 405), Ministry of Legal Affairs of Antigua 

and Barbuda, 5, http://laws.gov.ag/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cap-405.pdf

(last visited Sept. 19, 2020).

12 Strafgesetzbuch [STGB] [Penal Code] No. 60/1974, §188 (Austria), https://www.

legislationline.org/documents/section/criminal-codes/country/44/Austria/show

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020). 

Blasphemy, insult and hatred: finding answers in a democratic society, Science and 

technique of democracy No. 47, Venice Commission 152 (Mar. 2010), https://www.

venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-STD(2010)047-e (last visited Sept. 23, 

2020).

13 Bahrain Penal Code 1976, art. 309, 310, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 

(UNODC), https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/bhr/1976/bahrain_penal_code_

html/Bahrain_Penal_Code_1976.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

14 Bangladesher Shongbidhan [Constitution], Human Rights Library: University of 

Minnesota, Nov. 4, 1972, http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/bangladesh-constitution.

pdf (last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

15 Bangladesh Penal Code, 1860, Bangladesh Ministry of Law, http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.

bd/act-11.html (last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

16 Information and Communication Technology Act, International Center for Not-forProfit Law (ICNL), https://www.icnl.org/research/library/bangladesh_comm2006/

(last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

17 Botswana Penal Code, 1986, art. 136, 138, 140, International Labour Org., 

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_isn=61336&p_lang=en

(last visited Sept. 14, 2020).

18 Código Penal [C.P.] [Penal Code], art. 208 (Braz.), Equal Rights Trust, https://www.

equalrightstrust.org/sites/default/files/ertdocs//Decree-Law%20No.%202%2C848_

Penal%20Code.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

19 Brunei’s Constitution of 1959 with Amendments through 1984, Constitute 

Project, 9 (2019) https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Brunei_1984.pdf

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

20 Constitution of Brunei Darussalam, art. 110, 1718–1719, http://www.agc.gov.bn/

AGC%20Images/LAWS/Gazette_PDF/2013/EN/S069.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020), 

(This new criminal law went into effect in April 2019).

21 Myanmar Penal Code, Burma Library, https://www.mlis.gov.mm/lsScPop.

do?lawordSn=9506%20 (last visited Oct. 29, 2020).

22 Republic of Cameroon Penal Code, art. 241 (CR), Tobacco Control Laws, https://

www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/files/live/Cameroon/Cameroon%20-%20Penal%20Code.

pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

23 Constituicao Da Republica De Cabo Verde, 2010 [Constitution] (Cape Verde), https://

perma.cc/RZ2W-VXMJ (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

24 Comoros 2018 [Constitution], Constitute Project, Oxford University Press, Inc; 

translated by Max Planck Institute, (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

25 Republique Federale Islamique des Comores, Assemblee Federale, Code Péna

[Penal Code] art 230, 231 (km), International Committee of Red Cross (ICRC), 

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl-nat.nsf/implementingLaws.xsp?documentId=9DFF85E1B08F439DC1257705005536A7&action=openDocument&xp_countrySelected=KM&xp_topicSelected=GVAL-992BU6&from=state&SessionID=DZ7JMHRBN0 (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

26 Cyprus Constitution of 1960 with Amendments through 2013, Constitute 

Project 8 (2020), https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Cyprus_2013.pdf

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

27 Cyprus Criminal Code (Cap. 154), art. 138, 141-142, Sovereign Base Areas 

Administration (SBAA), https://sbaadministration.org/home/legislation/01_02_09_01_

COLONIAL_CAPS_1959/01_02_01_04_Caps-125-175A/19600101_CAP154_u.pdf

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

28 Egypt 2014 [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/

constitution/Egypt_2014 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

29 Egypt: Penal Code [Egypt] art 98(f), 161, No. 58 of 1937, Refworld, https://www.

refworld.org/docid/3f827fc44.html (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

30 Freedom House, supra note 5, at 29, http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/

Policing_Belief_Full.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

31 Penal Code of The State of Eritrea, Refworld, 134 (2015), https://www.refworld.org/

pdfid/55a51ccc4.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

32 The Criminal Code of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Proclamation 

No. 414/2004, Refworld, May 9, 2005, http://www.refworld.org/docid/49216b572.html

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

33 The Criminal Code of Finland (cap. 17, section 10), Ministry of Justice 

Finland, https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039.pdf

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

34 Gambia Criminal and Penal Law 1934, Int’l Labour Org., https://www.ilo.org/dyn/

natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=en&p_isn=75289 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

35 Strafgesetzbuch [StGB] [German Criminal Code] section 166, Federal Ministry of 

Justice and Consumer Protection and the Federal Office of Justice, https://www.

gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

“Blasphemy, insult and hatred: finding answers in a democratic society” Science 

and Technique of Democracy, No. 47. Available online at: http://www.venice.coe.int/

webforms/documents/?pdf=C- DL-STD%282010%29047-e

36 Netzdurchsetzunggesetz [NetzDG] [Network Enforcement Act], Oct 1, 

2017, German Law Archive, https://germanlawarchive.iuscomp.org/?p=1245

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

37 Germany: The Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks, Article 19, 

(2017), https://www.article19.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/170901-Legal-AnalysisGerman-NetzDG-Act.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020). In 2017, Germany adopted 

the Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG), which requires social media platforms to 

remove content based on select provisions from the German Criminal Code. If the 

social media companies do not comply, they can suffer severe administrative penalties 

of up to 5 MIO euros. Among the select provisions, the NetzDG includes a reference 

to Germany’s blasphemy law, Section 166 of the Criminal Code, which reinforces 

the state’s will to enforce its blasphemy law. Id. The Digital Berlin Wall: How Germany 

(Accidentally) Created a Prototype for Global Online Censorship, Global Freedom of 

Expression: Columbia University (Nov. 16, 2019), https://globalfreedomofexpression.

columbia.edu/publications/the-digital-berlin-wall-how-germany-accidentally-created-aprototype-for-global-online-censorship/ (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

38 Grenada Criminal Code, World Intellectual Property Org., http://www.wipo.int/

wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=253233 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

39 Criminal Law (Offences) Act [Criminal Code] (Part V, title 24, art 348) 

(Guyana), United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), https://

sherloc.unodc.org/cld/document/guy/1894/criminal_law_offences_act.html?lng=en

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

40 The Indian Penal Code, art. 295 (India), No. 45 of 1860, India Code: 

Digital Repository of All Central and State Acts, https://www.indiacode.

nic.in/bitstream/123456789/4219/1/THE-INDIAN-PENAL-CODE-1860.pdf

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

41 Indonesia 1945 (reinst. 1959, rev. 2002) [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://

www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Indonesia_2002 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

42 Indonesia: Penal Code [Indonesia], Refworld, Feb 27, 1982, http://www.refworld.org/

docid/3ffc09ae2.html (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

43 Indonesian Electronic Information and Transaction Law Amended, White & 

Case LLP, https://www.whitecase.com/sites/whitecase/files/files/download/

publications/indonesian-electronic-information-and-transactions-law-amended.pdf

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

44 Id.

45 Qanuni Assassi Jumhutii Islamai Iran [The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of 

Iran] 1358 [1980], International Constitutional Law Project (ICL Project), https://

www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/ir__indx.html (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

46 Islamic Penal Code, art. 262 (Iran), Refworld, https://www.refworld.org/

docid/518a19404.html (last visited Sept. 23, 2013); Iranian Codes [English Translation 

of Books I & II of the New Islamic Penal Code], Iran Human Rights Documentation 

Center, Apr 4, 2014, https://iranhrdc.org/english-translation-of-books-i-ii-of-thenew-islamic-penal-code/#6 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

47 Islamic Penal Code, Islamic Republic of Iran—Book Five, Iran Hum. Rts. Doc. Ctr., 

available at t (last visited Oct. 9, 2020). 

48 Iraq’s Constitution of 2005, art. 2, Constitute Project, available at https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Iraq_2005.pdf?lang=en (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

49 Iraq: Penal Code (cap. 8, section 2), No. 111 of 1969, Refworld, https://www.refworld.

org/docid/452524304.html (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

50 Israel’s Constitution of 1958 with Amendments through 2013, Constitute 

Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Israel_2013.pdf?lang=en

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

51 Penal Law 5737-1977 [ISRAEL], Organization for Economic co-operation 

and development, 61, http://www.oecd.org/investment/anti-bribery/antibriberyconvention/43289694.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 89
52 Codice Penale 2020 [Penal Code 2020] [Italy], Altalex, (2020), https://www.altalex.

com/documents/codici-altalex/2014/10/30/codice-penale (last visited Sept. 16, 2020). 

(After much research and consultation with the Italian government and Italian 

NGOs since Respecting Rights, the researchers confirmed that the legislative landscape 

regarding blasphemy laws in Italy has been modified through both the Constitutional 

Court as well as Law n.85/2006. The laws listed here have been updated accordingly.)

53 Article 402 was declared invalid by the Constitutional Court in its judgment No. 508 

of 20 November 2000. This article is impossible to enforce and is no longer applicable 

because since 1984, Italy abolished its state religion. 

54 Article 406 was declared invalid by the article No.10 of the Law of 24 February 2006, 

n. 85. This article cannot be referenced in any court proceedings and is no longer 

applicable.

55 Libel and Slander Act 1851, as amended, § 15, Laws of Jamaica Cap. 219, http://

moj.gov.jm/sites/default/files/ laws/Libel%20and%20Slander%20Act.pdf, archived at

[https://perma.cc/U2H2-QX58].

56 The researchers were uncertain whether this law has a criminal component, but they 

included it in this Annex, because it was previously defined as a blasphemy law by 

USCIRF.

57 The Constitution of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, art. 2, Refworld, https://www.

refworld.org/pdfid/3ae6b53310.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

58 Laws Criminalizing Apostasy [Jordan], Library of Congress, http://www.loc.gov/law/

help/apostasy/#jordan; See also: Douglas Griffin and Libby Morgan, Introduction to 

News Media Law and Policy in Jordan, Jordan Media Strengthening Program, USAID, 

at 42-43, http://global.asc.upenn.edu/fileLibrary/PDFs/JMSPprimer_english.pdf 

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

59 Penal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, United Nations: Office on Drugs and 

Crime, July 3, 2014, https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/penal-code_html/

New_penal_code.pdf. In 2014, Kazakhstan reformed its criminal code and modified 

its previous anti-blasphemy law (Article 164 included in Respecting Rights), expanding 

the penalties associated with the so-called crime of insult of the “religious feelings of 

citizens.” The maximum penalty prior to 2014 was “correctional labour for a period 

up to two years or deprivation of freedom for period up to five years.” Id.

60 Penal Code of the Republic of Kenya, International Labour Organization, 2012, 

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/ELECTRONIC/28595/115477/F-857725769/

KEN28595.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

61 Kuwaiti Constitution 1962 (reinst. 1992), art. 2, Constitute Project, 

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Kuwait_1992.pdf?lang=en

(last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

62 Translation provided by USCIRF and LOC.

63 Translation provided by USCIRF and LOC.

64 Restrictions on Freedom of Expression [Kuwait], Human Rights Watch, https://www.

hrw.org/reports/2000/kuwait/kuwait-06.htm. (Article 101 specifies “speech, shouting, 

writing, drawing, pictures, or any other means of the means of expressing an idea.”)

65 ЗАКОН КЫРГЫЗСКОЙ РЕСПУБЛИКИ [Law of the Kyrgyz Republic], art. 4, 

Ministry of Justice of the Kyrgyz Republic, http://cbd.minjust.gov.kg/act/view/ruru/202498 (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

66 Lebanon 1926 (rev. 2004) [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Lebanon_2004?lang=en (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

67 [Penal Code], art. 473-474 (Lebanon), United Nations 

Office of Drugs and Crime: Sharing Electronic Resources and Laws on Crime 

(UNODC: SHERLOC), https://sherloc.unodc.org/res/cld/document/lebanon-penalcode_html/Lebanon_Penal_Code_1943.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2020).

68 Id. (art. 474 - Amended and Sq to the law dated 1/12/1954) 

“Article 209 – The following are considered means of publicity:

1. ...

2. talking or shouting whether made by people or transformed through mechanical 

machines in such a way as to be heard, in both cases, by those who have nothing to 

do with the act.

3. Writings, drawings, pictures made by hand, photographs, films, symbols, and all 

kinds of illustrations, if displayed in public places, or open places, or sold, or offered 

to be sold, or distributed to one person or more.” Source: “Law and Population 

in Lebanon,” by George M. Dib, Law and Population Monograph Series Number 29

(1975), Law and Population Programme, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, 

Administered with the Cooperation of Harvard University, http://pdf. usaid.gov/

pdf_docs/PNAAF173.pdf.

69 Libya’s Constitution of 2011, art. 1, Constitute Project, https://www.constituteproject.

org/constitution/Libya_2011.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

70 Penal Code (Libya), art. 291, United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 

https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/lby/1953/penal_code_html/Libyan_Penal_

Code_Excerpts.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

71 Liechtenstein Constitution of 1921 (Amendments through 2003), art. 37, Constitute 

Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Liechtenstein_2003.pdf

(Sept. 16, 2020).

72 Strafgesetzbuch vom 24. Juni 1987 [StGB] [Criminal Code] § 188 (Liechtenstein), 

Legislationline, https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/8268/file/Liechtenstein_

Criminal_Code_1987_am2017_en.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

73 Malawi Penal Code, Malawi Legal Information Institute (Malawi LII), https://

malawilii.org/system/files/consolidatedlegislation/701/penal_code_pdf_14611.pdf

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

74 Federal Constitution, art. 3 (Malaysia), World Intellectual Property Org. 

(WIPO), https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/my/my063en.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

75 Laws of Malaysia [Penal Code] § 295, 297-298, Attorney General’s Chambers of 

Malaysia, http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/uploads/files/Publications/LOM/EN/

Penal%20Code%20%5BAct%20574%5D2.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

76 Maldives Penal Code Law § 617, No. 6/2014, Penn Law: University of Pennsylvania 

Carey Law School, https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/4203-maldives-penalcode-2014, archived at [https://perma.cc/3NN4-VDCB] (last visited Sept. 16, 2020). 

Maldives passed a new Penal Code in 2014 that went into effect in July 2015.

77 Id. at§ 92, 93. Since the blasphemy provision (Section 617) does not specifically 

provide any punishment but classifies blasphemy as a “Class 1 misdemeanor,” Sections 

92 and 93 apply to the blasphemy provision.

78 Mauritania Blasphemy Law, art. 1, Tahseen, https://tahseen.ae/media/3232/

mauritania_amendments-to-the-penal-code-2018.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020). The 

Mauritanian National Assembly passed a law on April 27, 2018 replacing article 306 

of the Criminal Code. The new law eliminates the possibility under article 306 of 

substituting prison terms for the death penalty for certain apostasy-related crimes if 

the offender promptly repents. The law also extends the scope of application of the 

death penalty to “renegade acts.” 

79 Apostasy, Blasphemy, and Hate Speech Laws in Africa, United States Commission on 

International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), 37-38 (2019), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/

default/files/Africa%20Speech%20Laws%20FINAL_0.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

80 Mauritius Criminal Code 1838, art. 185, World Intellectual Property Org. 

(WIPO), http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/mu/mu008en.pdf

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

81 Misdemeanor Code, art. 54(5) (Moldova), http://continent-online.com/

Document/?doc_id=30395669#pos=5;-140 (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

82 Id. (The researchers were uncertain whether this law has a criminal component, but 

they included it in this Annex because it was previously defined as a blasphemy law 

by USCIRF.)

83 Criminal Code of Montenegro, art. 370, Legislationline, https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/8406/file/

Montenegro_CC_am2018_en.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020), 

(“Blasphemy, insult and hatred: finding answers in a democratic society”).

84 Morocco Constitution of 2011, art. 3, Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

85 Morocco Penal Code 2018, Adala Justice, http://adala.justice.gov.ma/production/

legislation/fr/Nouveautes/code%20penal.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020)

86 The National Penal Code Act 2017 [Nepal], Ministry of Law Justice and 

Parliamentary Affairs, 99-100 (2017), http://www.moljpa.gov.np/en/wp-content/

uploads/2018/12/Penal-Code-English-Revised-1.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020). In 

August 2017, Nepal passed a new criminal code, which criminalizes “hurting of 

religious sentiment” (Article 156) and “prohibiting religious conversion” as well as 

“undermining religions or faiths” (Article 158). Since the adoption of this code, anticonversion laws are being enforced and the researchers found cases where converts 

were persecuted, which is a warning that Nepal’s new blasphemy law could also be 

enforced in the future. 

87 Criminal Code Act 1990 [Nigeria], World Intellectual Property Organizaton (WIPO), 

http:// www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=179687 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

88 Oman 1996 (rev. 2011) [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Oman_2011?lang=en (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

89 Oman’s New Penal Code: A Bonfire of Human Rights, Omani Center for 

Human Rights (OCHR Oman), https://ochroman.org/eng/2018/03/penalcode/

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020). The revised penal code issued by Oman took effect in 

January 2018. Its previous blasphemy law (Article 209 included in Respecting Rights) is 

replaced with a new, harsher provision (Article 269).

90 The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, art. 1-2, National Assembly 

of Pakistan, http://www.na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1333523681_951.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

91 The Pakistan Penal Code Act XLV of 1860, Oct. 6, 1860 

(Pak.), Refworld, https://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/

rwmain?page=search&docid=485231942&skip=0&query=penal%20code&coi=PAK

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

92 Constitution of the Independent State of Papua New Guinea, World Intellectual 

Property Org. (WIPO), http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_

id=199188#LinkTarget_1808 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

93 Papua New Guinea Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulation (1973), faolex.fao.org/

docs/texts/png51771.doc (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

94 Classification of Publication (Censorship) Act 1989 [Papa New Guinea], Pacific 

Islands Legal Info. Inst. (PACLII), http://www.paclii.org/pg/legis/consol_act/

copa1989393/ (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

95 Summary Offences (cap. 264) (Papa New Guinea), Pacific Islands Legal Information 

Institute (PACLII), http://www.paclii.org/pg/legis/PG-consol_act_1986/soa189.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

96 Id. at §25 (Section 25A was added by the Summary Offences (Amendment) Act 1986 

(No. 36 of 1986), s3).

97 Constitution of the Republic of Philippines, Official Gazette, https://www.

officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/ (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

98 The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines 1930, United Nations, https://www.un.org/

Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/PHL_revised_penal_code.pdf

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

99 The Penal Code, art. 196 (Poland), Legislationline, https://www.legislationline.org/

download/id/7354/file/Poland_CC_1997_en.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

100 Qatar’s Constitution 2003, art. 1, Constitute Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/

constitution/Qatar_2003.pdf?lang=en (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

90 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
101 Penal Code, art. 1, 256, 263 (Qatar), Law No. 11 of 2004, United Nations Office 

of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/

qat/penal-code_11_2004_html/2014_Penal_Code_Law_11_2004_26.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

102 Organic Law Instituting the Penal Code, art. 278, 279 (Rwanda), United Nations 

Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), https://sherloc.unodc.org/res/cld/

document/rwa/1999/penal-code-of-rwanda_html/Penal_Code_of_Rwanda.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

103 Respecting Rights: Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, United States Commission 

on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), 84 (2016), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/

default/files/Blasphemy%20Laws%20Report.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

104 Id. at 86.

105 Blasphemy, insult, and hatred: finding answers in a democratic society, Science and 

Technique of Democracy No. 47, Venice Commission 208 (March 2010), available 

online at https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-STD(2010)047-e

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

106 Arbitrary Detention and Unfair Trials in the Deficient Criminal Justice System of Saudi 

Arabia, Human Rights Watch, 12-14 (2008), http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/

reports/saudijustice0308_1.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

107 Id.

108 National Laws on Blasphemy: Saudi Arabia, Georgetown University: Berkley Center for 

Religion, Peace & World Affairs, https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/essays/nationallaws-on-blasphemy-saudi-arabia (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

109 2011 Report on International Religious Freedom: Saudi Arabia, Sec. II, Bureau of 

Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2011/

nea/192905.htm (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

110 USCIRF 2013 Annual Report on Saudi Arabia, United States Commission on 

International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), 8-9 (2013), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/

default/files/resources/Saudi%20Arabia%202013.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

111 Seychelles Penal Code Act 12 of 1952 (Cap. 158), International Labour 

Organization (ILO), https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=en&p_

isn=91750&p_country=SYC&p_count=299&p_classification=01.04&p_classcount=8

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

112 Id. (Since Articles 125 and 127 do not specifically provide any punishment but classify 

blasphemy as a “misdemeanor,” Article 35 applies to these blasphemy provisions.)

113 Penal Code (cap. 224), art. 298 (Singapore), Singapore Statutes Online: Singapore 

Government Agency Website, https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PC1871 (last visited Sept. 23, 

2020).

114 Provisional Constitution 2012, art. 2 (The Federal Republic of Somalia), Human 

Rights Library: University of Minnesota, http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/SomaliaConstitution2012.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

115 Somalia: Penal Code 1964, Refworld, http://www.refworld.org/docid/4bc5906e2.html

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

116 South Sudan 2011 (rev. 2013) [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://

www.constituteproject.org/constitution/South_Sudan_2013?lang=en

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

117 Penal Code Act (cap. 15), art. 201 (South Sudan), Southern Sudan Gazette No. 1 Vol 

I, World Intellectual Property Org. (WIPO), https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/

en/ss/ss014en.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

118 Spain Constitution of 1978 (Amendments through 2011), Constitute Project, 

8 (2020) https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Spain_2011.pdf

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

119 Criminal Code art. 525 (Spain), Official Government Translation by Ministerio de 

Justicia [Ministry of Justice], Legislationline, https://www.legislationline.org/download/

id/6443/file/Spain_CC_am2013_en.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

120 Sri Lanka’s Constitution of 1978 (Amendments through 2015) (cap. 2), art. 9, 

Constitute Project, https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Sri_Lanka_2015.

pdf?lang=en (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

121 An Ordinance to Provide a General Penal Code for Ceylon 1855 [Penal Code] [Sri 

Lanka], Commonwealth Legal Information Institute, http:// www.commonlii.org/lk/

legis/consol_act/pc25130.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

122 Criminal Code (cap. 3.01), art. 318, 326-328 (Saint Lucia), Govermentt of Saint Lucia, 

http://www.govt.lc/media.govt.lc/www/resources/legislation/Criminal%20Code.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

123 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1979 [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://

www.constituteproject.org/constitution/St_Vincent_and_the_Grenadines_1979

(last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

124 Criminal Code (Cap. 124), art. 117, 119 (St. Vincent and the Grenadines), 

Organization of American States (OAS), http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/mesicic3_

svg_criminal.pdf (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

125 Sudan 2005 [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/

constitution/Sudan_2005?lang=en (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

126 The Penal Code 1991 (cap. XIII), art. 125, European Country of Origin Information 

Network, https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/1219135/1329_1202725629_sb106-sudcriminalact1991.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

127 USCIRF Applauds Sudan’s Repeal of Apostasy Law through Passage of New Fundamental 

Rights and Freedoms Act, United States Commission on Religious Freedom, 2020, 

https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/press-releases-statements/uscirf-applauds-sudan-srepeal-apostasy-law-through-passage-new (last visited Sept. 23, 2020). (Articles 125 

and 126 of the 1991 Criminal Act were amended to be broader and stricter in 2015. 

However, in July 2020, Sudan’s transitional government repealed its apostasy law by 

adopting the Fundamental Rights and Freedoms Act and ending flogging, which was 

previously included in its blasphemy law. The July 2020 law is included here.)

128 Id.

129 Wetboek van Strafrecht voor Suriname [Suriname Penal Code], (S.B. 215 No. 44) 

amending (G.B. 1911 no. 1), International Labour Organization (ILO), https://www.

ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=en&p_isn=102212&p_classification=01.04.

130 Swiss Criminal Code 1937, Switzerland Admin (admin.ch), 110, http://www.admin.ch/

ch/e/rs/3/311.0.en.pdf, (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

131 Syrian Arab Republic 2012 [Constitution], art. 3, Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Syria_2012 (last visited Sept. 16, 2020).

132 Respecting Rights: Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, United States Commission 

on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), 96 (2016), https://www.uscirf.gov/

sites/default/files/Blasphemy%20Laws%20Report.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020), 

(USCIRF and LOC translations).

133 Code on Administrative Offenses (Tajikistan), archived at https://perma.cc/X34V24D4 (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

134 Id. (Translated by Helen Haft.)

135 Id. (The researchers were uncertain whether this law has a criminal component, but 

they included it in this Annex, because it was previously defined as a blasphemy law 

by USCIRF.)

136 Tanzania Penal Code (cap. XIV), art. 125, 127, 129, United Nations, https://www.

un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TZA_penal_code.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

137 Thailand Constitution 2007, Constitute Project, 22 (2020), https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Thailand_2007.pdf (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

138 Penal Code § 206 (Thailand), Thailand Law Online, https://www.

thailandlawonline.com/laws-in-thailand/thailand-criminal-law-text-translation#206

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

139 Respecting Rights: Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, United States Commission 

on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), 99 (2016), https://www.uscirf.gov/

sites/default/files/Blasphemy%20Laws%20Report.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020) 

(USCIRF and LOC translations).

140 Id. at 108-109.

141 Trinidad and Tobago: Criminal Offences Act, International Labour Organization 

(ILO), https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=&p_isn=105212&p_

classification=01.04 (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

142 Tunisia Constitution 2014, Constitute Project, 4 (2020), https://www.constituteproject.

org/constitution/Tunisia_2014.pdf (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

143 Respecting Rights: Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws, United States Commission on 

International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), 112 (2016), https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/

default/files/Blasphemy%20Laws%20Report.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020) USCIRF 

and LOC translations).

144 Criminal Code, art. 216(3) (Turkey), World Intellectual Property Organization 

(WIPO), https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/tr/tr171en.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

145 Code on Administrative Offenses, art. 75 (Turkmenistan), World Intellectual 

Property Organization (WIPO), https://wipolex.wipo.int/en/legislation/details/13824

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

146 Id. (Translated by Helen Haft.)

147 Id. (The researchers were uncertain whether this law has a criminal component, but 

they included it in this Annex because it was previously defined as a blasphemy law 

by USCIRF.)

148 Criminal Code of Ukraine (2001, amended 2010), art. 161, Legislationline, https://

www.legislationline.org/documents/section/criminal-codes/country/52/Ukraine/show

(last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

149 Constitution of the United Arab Emirates, Refworld, http://www.refworld.org/

docid/48eca8132.html (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

150 United Arab Emirates (UAE), Promulgation of the Penal Code (No. 3 of 1987), 

International Labour Organization, https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_

lang=en&p_isn=59896.

151 United Arab Emirates (UAE), Promulgation of the Penal Code (No. 3 of 1987), 

International Labour Organization, https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_

lang=en&p_isn=59896.

152 United Arab Emirates: Federal Decree Law No. 2 of 2015 On Combating 

Discrimination and Hatred, ejustice.gov, http://ejustice.gov.ae/downloads/latest_

laws2015/FDL_2_2015_discrimination_hate_en.pdf (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

153 Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan (1994, amended 2002), Legislationline, 

https://www.legislationline.org/documents/section/criminal-codes/country/55/

Uzbekistan/show (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

154 Vanuatu 1980 (rev. 1983) [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Vanuatu_1983 (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

155 Vanuatu Penal Code (Cap. 135), art. 88, World Intellectual Property Organization, 

http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=198052#LinkTarget_408

(last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 91
156 The Constitution of the Republic of Yemen (cap. 1), art. 1-3, Refworld, https://www.

refworld.org/pdfid/3fc4c1e94.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

157 Yemen: Republican Decree Concerning Crimes and Penalties [Penal Code], 

art. 194-195, 259-261, Refworld, https://www.refworld.org/docid/3fec62f17.html

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

158 Zambia 1991 (rev. 2009) [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.

constituteproject.org/constitution/Zambia_2009 (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

159 The Penal Code Act, art. 128, 130 (Zambia), National Assembly of Zambia, http://

www.parliament.gov.zm/sites/default/files/documents/acts/Penal%20Code%20Act.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

160 Zimbabwe 2013 [Constitution], Constitute Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/

constitution/Zimbabwe_2013 (last visited Sept. 17, 2020).

161 Criminal Law Act § 42 (Zimbabwe), United Nations Office on Drugs and 

Crime, https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/zwe/2006/criminal_law_

codification_and_reform_act_html/criminal_law_codification_and_reform_act.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2020).

Annex 2: Criminal Blasphemy Laws as of 2020

92 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
ANNEX 3: 

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

GENERAL INFORMATION

Researchers identified and recorded general information 

about cases of criminal blasphemy law enforcement, 

including: 

• What is the country in which the criminal blasphemy law 

was enforced?

• What is the name of the accused blasphemer (including any 

additional spellings or aliases)?1

• What is the name of the accuser(s) (name of the individual 

and/or group that reported the accused)?2

• Are there any primary sources available (including any case 

law or official police reports filed)?

• What credible secondary sources report on this case 

(including news articles, reports, etc. that discuss cases of 

enforcement)?3

WHO IS THE INDIVIDUAL ACCUSED OF BLASPHEMY?

Researchers gathered data, where available, on identities that 

indicate targeting for criminal blasphemy law enforcement.4

• What is the accused’s profession?5

• What is the accused’s racial or ethnic identity? 

• What is the accused’s sexual orientation and/or gender 

identity minority status (if applicable)? 

• Does the accused have any reported mental or physical 

disability?

• Is the accused illiterate?

Where reported, researchers recorded each accused’s 

profession. At the end of the coding process, a pattern 

appeared in which certain professions were more prominent. 

The researchers then categorized those professions into the 

following groups: 

• Media6

• Government Official or Politician7

• Lawyer

• Human Rights Activist and/or Political Dissident8

• Religious Figure9

• Academic and/or Intellectual10

• Artist11

When professions were reported in news sources, in certain 

instances, the blasphemy allegation was linked in some 

way to the professional practice of the accused. Given that 

some professions overlapped (e.g., a blogger could also be 

categorized as a social media activist), researchers determined 

the accused’s main profession and prioritized the profession 

reported to be related to the blasphemy allegation. All 

professions for which no pattern emerged were placed into a 

category labeled “other.”12

RELIGIOUS OR BELIEF IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSED 

In identifying the religious or belief identity of the accused, 

the goal was to document as many details on the accused’s 

religion to identify possible trends of interreligious vs. intrareligious conflict.

• What is the religion or belief of the accused? (e.g., 

Christianity)

• What is the religious denomination of the accused? (e.g., 

Protestantism)

• Has the accused converted?

STATE AND MAJORITY RELIGIONS

Researchers collected information on the official state 

religion13 and majority religion (if any) of the enforcing 

country to explore potential correlations between the 

existence of an official state religion and state enforcement of 

blasphemy laws. 

• Does the state have an official state religion?14

• If so, which religion?

• What is the majority religion of this state’s population? (e.g., 

Christianity)

• What is the majority religious denomination of the state’s 

population? (e.g., Protestantism)

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 93
INCITING INCIDENT FACTS 

Researchers compiled specific facts legally relevant to each 

case of criminal blasphemy law enforcement. Every effort was 

made to find the exact date of the inciting incident. However, 

in some cases, the only date found was the date that a report 

was filed, or the date when the media published an article 

regarding the incident. 

• What is the date of the inciting incident that was allegedly 

blasphemous?

MOB PRESENCE, MOB ACTIVITY, MOB 

VIOLENCE, AND/OR THREATS OF VIOLENCE 

• Was there any mob activity (presence or mob violence) used 

against the accused prior to the arrest? (Yes/No)

• If yes, what was the type of mob activity? (e.g., mob 

violence, police violence, or violence used by private 

individuals/non-state actors)

• During these incidents, were there any threats, injuries, 

or deaths?

• Was any property destroyed?

USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

• Was there any use of social media in the speech pronounced 

by the accused?

• If yes, which platform? (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, 

WhatsApp) Was there any incitement to imminent violence 

used on social media by the accusers? 

EXECUTIVE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

Researchers documented any and all actions that state 

officials took to enforce the criminal blasphemy or other laws 

against alleged blasphemers.

• What is the date of arrest of the accused?

• What is the criminal law provision used to arrest 

the accused? 

• Is the provision a blasphemy law (as defined by the study)?

• Is proof of intent/purpose required under the criminal law 

provision employed?15

JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

Researchers noted any and all state actions of the judiciary 

against the accused. 

• Was the accused detained before trial?

• If the accused was detained, what was the length of 

detention before a hearing or trial?

• Did the accused receive a pre-trial hearing and, if yes, what 

type of hearing (e.g., bail, arraignment, etc.)?

• Was the accused afforded a trial before a neutral arbiter 

(i.e., judge)?

• Was the accused convicted at trial? If yes, when?

• Was the convicted person granted an appeal? If yes, when?

• Was the conviction upheld on appeal? 

• Which court heard the case and what is its level within the 

judiciary (e.g., court of first instance, appellate court, court 

of cassation)?

• What is the official case name (if available)?

PENALTIES

Researchers recorded any penalties imposed on individuals 

convicted of blasphemy. Specifically, data was collected on the 

following:

• Was any penalty imposed at trial or on appeal? (e.g., fine, 

community service, jail, exile, labor, lashes, and/or death)

• Did the penalty include a fine? If so, what amount? 

• Did the penalty include lashes? If so, how many? 

• Did the penalty include a prison sentence? What is 

the number of months convicted individuals were 

sentenced to serve?

• What is the maximum penalty under the law (to compare 

the penalties received)?

• Were any due process violations identified, as protected 

under international human rights law?16 Due process 

violations may include:

– Arbitrary arrest or detention.17

– Violations of fair (criminal) trial rights.18

• Was there any torture or ill treatment identified as 

protected under international law?19

THE ACCUSERS 

Additionally, the researchers recorded the identity of the 

accuser, when reported, to explore whether any trends 

emerged in that regard and whether there is a typology 

of people who accuse others of blasphemy. They then 

categorized the accusers into the following groups: 

• State actors20

• Private individuals/Non-state actors21

• Religious leaders22

• Academics and students23

• Engaged civil society (politicians, NGOs, or associations)24

Annex 3: Research Questions

94 Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws
NOTES

1 Multiple names spelled differently were frequent. Where possible, researchers used 

the spelling found in the primary source. Otherwise, the most common spelling from 

secondary sources was used.

2 If the accused was arrested in response to mob violence, researchers enumerated in 

the column entitled “response to public outcry.”

3 Where there were many secondary sources for one case, researchers did not include 

all sources; rather, researchers included multiple sources that (1) provided additional 

information, and/or (2) verified already recorded information given source credibility.

4 The most commonly identifiable information available was the accused’s profession. 

Other identity markers were more difficult to find, and therefore, the profession of 

the accused is the most analytically useful identity marker in our database. 

5 Common professions targeted for blasphemy law enforcement include journalist; 

teacher; artist; author; human rights activist; politician; religious figure as previously 

elaborated. If the accused’s profession is, for example, not a blogger, but the accused 

is arrested due to a blog post or social media activity, only the primary profession was 

enumerated [researchers did not identify the individual as a blogger unless that was 

the only enumerated profession].

6 All professions included in the “media” category: journalist, staff of newspaper, writer, 

editor of poetry publication, blogger, publisher, newspaper editor, TV host, magazine 

and/or newspaper and/or TV owner, radio station, cartoonist; website, non-profit 

publisher, owner of a print shop, columnist, manager or assistant of a bookshop, 

television technician. 

7 All professions included in the “government official or politician” category: politician, 

opposition leader, councilor, civil servant, lawmaker, diplomat, advisor, police officer, 

and soldier. 

8 All professions included in the “human rights and/or political dissident” category are 

human rights activists, social media activists, and non-governmental organizations.

9 All professions included in the “religious leader” category: cleric, person associated to 

a faith or belief movement, theology student, preacher, religious figure, owner of an 

Islamic school, person associated with a place of worship, pastor, faith healer, Voodoo 

practitioner. 

10 All professions included in the “academic and/or intellectual” category: student, 

current or former professor/teacher, principal/director of school, intellectual, 

academic staffer, researcher, author. 

11 All professions included in the “artist” category: music teacher, comedian, director, 

actor/actress, musician, producer, singer performer, filmmaker, photographer, 

photograph shop owner, art collector, playwright, poet, art scene leader. 

12 “Other” included the following professions (or identity descriptors): bar manager, 

computer science graduate, researcher, shoemaker, athlete, model, business owner, 

real estate executive, chef, entrepreneur, sailor, baker, athletic coach, engineer, dentist, 

mobile phone repairman, housewife, trader in plastic wares, sanitation worker, 

shopkeeper, kiln worker, head of internal security of a factory, small hotel runner, 

worker, tailor, bike shop owner, cleaner/ janitor, street-sweeper, harvester, bus owner, 

bus service employee, blacksmith, construction worker, restaurant owner, nurse, voice 

technician, welder, businessman, and fugitive.

13 As of 2015, the Pew Research Center classified relationships between religion and 

government into several categories by country: 1. Official state religion (43 states); 

2. Preferred or favored state religions (40 states); 3. No official or preferred religion 

(106 states); 4. Hostile relationship with religious institutions (10 states), https://assets.

pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2017/09/29162845/Appendix-A.pdf

14 For the categorization of the Pew Research Center, see Appendix A: Relationships 

between Religion and Government by Country, PEW Research Center (2015), https://

assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2017/09/29162845/Appendix-A.

pdf.

15 While researchers attempted to gather this information, it was rarely reported in 

secondary news sources.

16 Researchers examined due process violations in light of the rights guaranteed 

under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and International 

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as elaborated on by the Human 

Rights Committee (HRC) in its General Comments 32 and 35. See G.A. Res. 217 

(III) A, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Dec. 10, 1948) https://www.ohchr.

org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf; G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Dec. 16, 1966) https://www.

ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr.pdf; UN Human Rights Comm. 

on Its Ninetieth Session, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/32 (2007), https://digitallibrary.

un.org/record/606075?ln=en; UN Human Rights Comm. on Its One-Hundred and 

Twelfth Session, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/35 (2014) https://digitallibrary.un.org/

record/786613?ln=en. 

17 UN Human Rights Comm. on Its One-Hundred and Twelfth Session, U.N. 

Doc. CCPR/C/GC/35 (2014) http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.

ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2FPPRiCAqhKb7yhsrdB0H1l5979OVGGB%2BWPAXjdnG1mwFFfPYGIlNfb%2F6T%2Fqwtc77%2FKU9JkoeDcTWWPIpCoePGBcMsRmFtoMu58pgnmzjyiyRGkPQekcPKtaaTG. No one should be subject to arbitrary arrest or 

detention; Anyone arrested must be informed at the time of arrest of the reasons for 

arrest and promptly informed of charges. At time of arrest, the accused must be told 

why they were arrested. Additionally, within reasonable time after arrest, the accused 

must be informed of official charges against him/her; Anyone arrested/detained must 

be brought promptly before a judge/officer to exercise judicial power. The accused 

must be entitled to trial or hearing within a reasonable time or must be released; 

Anyone deprived of liberty by arrest or detention must have a right to bring charges.

18 UN Human Rights Comm. on Its Ninetieth Session, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/32 

(2007), http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/gencomm/hrcom32.html. Right to a Fair Criminal 

Trial: Article 14 of the ICCPR includes: Everyone is entitled to a fair and public 

hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal; Judgement must be made public, 

except when in the interest of a child; There is a presumption of innocence until 

proven guilty according to the law; The accused must be promptly informed in detail 

of the nature/cause of charges in a language (s)he understands; The accused must 

have adequate time and facilities to prepare a defense and speak with counsel; The 

accused must be tried without undue delay; The accused must have a right to legal 

counsel and assigned free counsel if (s)he cannot afford it; The accused must have 

a right to obtain witnesses on his/her behalf and cross examine witnesses against 

him/her; The accused must have access to an interpreter if (s)he can’t understand 

the language; One cannot be compelled to confess guilt; Juveniles must be tried as 

minors. The court must consider minor status and decide the case in the interest 

of promoting rehabilitation; The accused must have a right to appeal; A victim of 

wrongful conviction must have a right to compensation; The state may not impose 

double jeopardy on an accused who has been acquitted.

19 Researchers examined violations of the right to be free from torture and ill treatment 

as defined under the UDHR & ICCPR, and as elaborated by HRC’s GC 20. See G.A. 

Res. 39/46, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading 

Treatment or Punishment (Dec. 10, 1984), https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/

ProfessionalInterest/cat.pdf; UN Human Rights Comm. on Its Forty-Fourth Session, 

U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/20 (1992) https://www.refworld.org/docid/453883fb0.html. 

20 All professions included in the “state actor” category: police, public prosecutor, 

gendarmerie, the ministry of education (or other types of governmental departments, 

such as the ministry of the cybercrimes department, governorate, mayor of a city.) 

21 All professions included in the “private individual” category are public complaint/

outcry, parents, local resident, lawyer, blogger, landlord, friends, onlookers, journalist, 

and advocate. 

22 All personalities included in “religious leaders” are cleric, imam, sheikh, priest, and 

monk.

23 All professions included in the “academia” category are principal, student, and student 

union. 

24 All professions included in the “political actor/NGOs/associations” category are 

opposition party, congress leader or member, religious association, political party or 

association, non-governmental organization, and activist. 

Annex 3: Research Questions

Violating Rights: Enforcing the World’s Blasphemy Laws 95
This page intentionally left blank.

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

senior communications specialist Danielle Ashbahian

director of outreach and policy Dwight Bashir

policy analyst Keely Bakken

director of research and policy Elizabeth K. Cassidy

policy analyst Mingzhi Chen

researcher Patrick Greenwalt

communications specialist Gabrielle Hasenstab

director of finance and office management Roy Haskins 

director of human resources and Thomas Kraemer

senior advisor for strategic outreach

supervisory policy analyst Kirsten Lavery 

senior policy analyst Niala Mohammad 

policy analyst Jason Morton

policy analyst Mohy Omer

senior congressional relations specialist Jamie Staley

policy analyst Kristina Teater

researcher Zack Udin

congressional relations specialist Nina Ullom

policy analyst Madeline Vellturo

supervisory policy analyst Scott Weiner

supervisory policy analyst Kurt Werthmuller

UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM