Pakistan’s supreme court has struck down the death sentence for blasphemy handed down to Christian woman Asia Bibi, in a long-delayed, landmark decision that has seen the judiciary praised for its bravery in the face of threats of violence and protest from the country’s Islamist groups.
The court, in a three-member bench led by chief justice Saqib Nisar, released the verdict on Wednesday morning in Islamabad, three weeks after they had reached a decision.
The delay followed threats by blasphemy campaigners to hold large protests and kill the judges if they did not uphold the death sentence. Members of the Tehreek-e-Labbaik (TLP), a new political party dedicated to punishing blasphemy, blocked roads in Lahore and pelted police with stones after the ruling.
“Her conviction is set aside and she is to be relieved forthwith if not required in other charges,” said Nisar, reading out the judgment.
“It is ironical that in the Arabic language the appellant’s name Asia means ‘sinful’,” reads the judgment written by Justice Asif Khosa, “but in the circumstances of the present case she appears to be a person, in the words of Shakespeare’s King Lear, ‘more sinned against than sinning’.”
The Christian farm labourer, a 47-year-old mother of four, was sentenced to hang for blasphemy in 2010. She had angered fellow Muslim farm workers by taking a sip of water from a cup she had fetched for them on a hot day. When they demanded she convert to Islam, she refused, prompting a mob to later allege that she had insulted the prophet Mohammed.
Bibi remains in Adiala jail, in Rawalpindi, but will be freed as soon as jail officials receive the court order.
On Wednesday, the judges noted that no solid evidence of wrongdoing by Bibi was presented before the court. The three witnesses who did appear, according to observers, presented contradictory stories from the stand.
The two sisters who accused Bibi “had no regard for the truth” reads Khosa’s judgment, “and they were capable of deposing falsely”, adding that “the said semi-literate young sisters had a reason to level allegations against the appellant which could be untrue.”
Read more The Guardian
