NP Rank:
Death for Stand-Alone Translation of Koran in Afghan? 20 Years
UPDATE: Not this time, just 20 years in prison!
Chief judge Abdul Salam Qazizada invoked Islamic Shariah law when reading out the sentence, saying death would not have been an extreme punishment."He who commits such an act is an infidel and should be killed" according to some interpretations of Shariah law, Qazizada said.
The appeals court found the men guilty of modifying the Quran — a crime punishable by death. However, the three-judge panel reiterated a lower court ruling giving the men 20 years each.
The prosecutor had asked for the death penalty for the two men — Ahmad Ghaws Zalmai, a former spokesman for the attorney general, and Mushtaq Ahmad, a Muslim cleric who signed a letter endorsing the translation.
The appeals court reduced the sentence of the owner of the print shop that published the book to 15 months, which he has already served, from five years. Three other men charged with trying to help Zalmai flee the country were sentenced to just over seven months, also time already served.
KABUL - No one knows who brought the book to the mosque, or at least no one dares say.
The pocket-size translation of the Quran has already landed six men in prison in Afghanistan and left two of them begging judges to spare their lives. They're accused of modifying the Quran and their fate could be decided Sunday in court.
The trial illustrates what critics call the undue influence of hardline clerics in Afghanistan, a major hurdle as the country tries to establish a lawful society amid war and militant violence.
"We went to all the lawyers and they said, 'We can't help you because all the mullahs are against you. If we defend you, the mullahs will say that we should be killed.' We went six months without a lawyer," Zalmai said outside the judge's chambers.
The publisher was originally sentenced to five years in prison. Zalmai and the cleric were sentenced to 20, and now the prosecutor is demanding the death penalty for the two as a judge hears appeals.
Zalmai pleaded for forgiveness before a January hearing, saying he had assumed a stand-alone translation wasn't a problem.
"You can find these types of translations in Turkey, in Russia, in France, in Italy," he said.
The book appeared among gifts left for the cleric at a major Kabul mosque after Friday prayers in September 2007. It was a translation of the Quran into one of Afghanistan's languages, with a note giving permission to reprint the text as long as it was distributed for free.
Some of the men of the mosque said the book would be useful to Afghans who didn't know Arabic, so they took up a collection for printing. The mosque's cleric asked Ahmad Ghaws Zalmai, a longtime friend, to get the books printed.
But as some of the 1,000 copies made their way to conservative Muslim clerics in Kabul, whispers began, then an outcry.
Many clerics rejected the book because it did not include the original Arabic verses alongside the translation. It's a particularly sensitive detail for Muslims, who regard the Arabic Quran as words given directly by God. A translation is not considered a Quran itself, and a mistranslation could warp God's word.
'Zalmai is an infidel. He should be killed'
The clerics said Zalmai, a stocky 54-year-old spokesman for the attorney general, was trying to anoint himself as a prophet.
Claiming ignorance
Nearly everyone in court claims ignorance now.
The mosque's mullah says he never read the book and that he was duped into signing the letter. The print shop owner says neither he nor any of his employees read the book, noting that it's illegal for them to read materials they publish.
Is this an extreme example of 'Throwing under the bus', or not?
Recommendations (22)

Anonymous user
-
Barry Artiste
Vancouver, Canada -
158
St. Louis, Missouri, United States -
Rhonda J Mangus
North Tonawanda, New York, United States -
Roy C
Vancouver, Washington, United States -
Fripouille
Lyon, France



Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (21)
at 10:06 on February 7th, 2009
The Koran is a rich and philosophical book.
The people who are condemning these men are intellectually poor, philosophically bankrupt, and religiously perverted.
The sooner Islam rids itself of these obscurantist fascists, who refuse any interpretation of the Koran other than theirs, the happier muslims shall be.
Excellent post René, and thanks.
at 10:16 on February 7th, 2009
Have you studied the Koran?
It is a mixture of "rich and philosophical" and "sura" such as the one where Mohammed points out to the Jews that the Jews had't been following Abrahamaic law when they stopped stoning adulterers to death.
The fanatics have plenty of real material in the Koran to justify their behavior.
That example was just one example. There are many.
at 10:35 on February 7th, 2009
Hi Roy C. "Studied", I don't know, but read a couple of times. It's a bit like any book. It's not rocket science.
I take what I need personally and breath out the rest. Of course there is stuff there that I do not adhere to either, but I will not throw the baby out with the bathwater, sorry...
As Moonwolf implies, all religious (and philosophical for me too) books can be taken down, or held up as beacons, if blanket judgements are the only rules of the game.
I just don't think people should be killed for interpreting things their way....including me, including you, including these poor men who may well soon die.
Thanks
at 11:31 on February 7th, 2009
Yes, but the "Old Testament" is OLD because it has been supplanted by a "New Covenant" which was a major step forward.
Mohammed actually rolled the wheel of progress backward.
In the incident where Mohammed was debating the Jews of Medina, the Jews had answered to his call to read what it said in the Torah regarding adultery, but they covered (according to the Koran) that part.
Mohammed called the Jews on it and stoning for adultery has remained a part of the practice of Islam ever since.
So, you cannot compare the Koran with the Bible on this. The followers of the "Book", as Mohammed called it, reformed themselves, both Jews and Christians.
Instead, Mohammed revived a reactionary position and enthroned it.
at 10:55 on February 7th, 2009
The problem for Islam is that the reactionary element triumphed over its progressive one centuries ago, and that was made all the more possible because of Mohammed's Koran.
Below is a piece from a lecture by Hoodhoy:
"First encounters
Islam's encounter with science has had happy and unhappy periods. There was no science in Arab culture in the initial period of Islam, around 610 AD. But as Islam established itself politically and militarily, its territory expanded. In the mid-eighth century, Muslim conquerors came upon the ancient treasures of Greek learning. Translations from Greek into Arabic were ordered by liberal and enlightened caliphs, who filled their courts in Baghdad with visiting scholars from near and far.
Politics was dominated by the rationalist Mutazilites, who sought to combine faith and reason in opposition to their rivals, the dogmatic Asharites. A generally tolerant and pluralistic Islamic culture allowed Muslims, Christians, and Jews to create new works of art and science together.
But over time, the theological tensions between liberal and fundamentalist interpretations of Islam—such as on the issue of free will versus predestination—became intense and turned bloody.
A resurgent religious orthodoxy eventually inflicted a crushing defeat on the Mutazilites. Thereafter, the open-minded pursuits of philosophy, mathematics, and science were increasingly relegated to the margins of Islam.1""
at 14:38 on February 7th, 2009
wow, this site is becoming a mouthpiece for fomenting hate in the world.
the usa stats on death penalty:
The Death Penalty Information Center's Year End Report for 2008 recorded 37 executions for the year that ends today. That is a 12% drop from the 42 executions in 2007.
at 14:43 on February 7th, 2009
I suppose you will have no problem when a topic on the Catholic Church comes up and I am very critical of them.
What are the stats on the death penalty in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Nigeria and other countries where the law of Sharia is in effect?
at 14:57 on February 7th, 2009
Wikipedia
China
470+ (other sources est. 5,000)1
at 15:10 on February 7th, 2009
thanks for that, 158, bet Nigeria and Sudan statistics are very high too.
at 14:46 on February 7th, 2009
This is an example of the misuse of religion by letting a personal opinion prevail.
at 15:05 on February 7th, 2009
In this remark I referred to the original story.The Koran has no prohibition against translations and Muhammad said it should be shared by all.
So the Islamic leaders were using their opinion to try to execute these men.
at 14:54 on February 7th, 2009
This post was put up by someone who wanted to write about six men who are risking their lives because they had the courage to express themselves.
The comments on it have transformed it into a bourgouis and semantic armchair debate on the merits or not of this or that religion and how such and such ancient writings should be interpreted or not. Thank god that those discussing it so glibly on the net do not live in Kabul.
I'm unsubscribing. Beurk.
at 15:07 on February 7th, 2009
Fripouille, which one applies to you?
These men face death and long imprisonment because: the version of the Koran they printed was only in the Afghan language and did not include the Arabic.
And one faces death because his mullah, his mosque's cleric, asked him to get it printed. Now the cleric says he didn't read it and was tricked. By whom?
If you read both the stories I linked to, you will get a clearer picture of the situation in Afghanistan, and it undoubtedly has a LOT to do with why the Taliban can still operate with impunity there and in Pakistan.
They were NOT expressing themselves. They did not make alterations to the holy book. It was a straightforward translation.
But this does have a lot to do with separation of religion and government.
at 14:55 on February 7th, 2009
Please note that the man facing death, Zalmai, only printed this edition at the request of his longtime-friend, the mullah, who now disclaims all knowledge. He did not make the translation.
at 15:21 on February 7th, 2009
Yeah, they had the courage to express themselves, or at least not follow orthodoxy and they have had to pay for this in a way which has historic precedent.
Yes, this has occurred in all major religions, but right now the major crisis of the Catholic Church is over the pope's pardoning of a Holocaust denier.
Contrast those two stories: the first one is about orthodoxy's monopoly on expression and the authorities win the war on this round, whereas the pope is in real hot water because no one buys the idea that he didn't know who that bishop was when the pope pardoned that excommunicated bishop.
So, where is the hate?
at 15:24 on February 7th, 2009
NowPublic has banned accidentaljournalist stories concerning the suffering in Gaza. is NowPublic becoming a rag? let web2.0 decide when all the mails received by NowPublic members are released with screenshots, and now a ban.
NowPublic is not citizen journalist and its ethics are way below average. It supports War against Gaza. accidentaljournalist, and it is becoming clear, at least 2 other peace activist NowPublic members have been banned, their information removed.
Act up! Thanks.
JewishVoicesforPeace.org
at 16:21 on February 7th, 2009
Arbitrary accusation. There's been plenty of support for Gaza on NP. They must have been banned for other reasons. and this story is about Afghanistan, not Gaza.
at 15:26 on February 8th, 2009
Source: citizenwarrior.com
at 07:45 on March 12th, 2009
I think the whole idea of punishment and banning of this translation, is that the mullahs do not want the people of Afghanistan to actually know what is in the Koran. There might be change of hearts, and that is unacceptable to them.
at 17:44 on March 12th, 2009
good point Rene
at 10:02 on April 10th, 2009
Some experts say that it is mandatory that Quaran must be read only in Arabic. I am quoting to personel opinions - one is supporting this saying and another one is not supporting .
They may or may not reflect the truth. I am merely quoting them.
Source: seyed.com
Against
Source: islam-watch.org
.Agent.