Kuwaiti professor of philosophy charged with blasphemy for arguing that the Constitution supercedes the Qur’an

April 14, 2016 • 2:00 pm

Here is a brave woman. In this video, reported by the BBC and placed by MEMRI on Facebook, Kuwaiti professor of philosophy Sheikha Al-Jassem discussed Islamic extremism in a show broadcast March 8th on Kuwait’s Al-Shahed TV. Because of what Al-Jassem said—that the constitution of Kuwait should supercede Qur’anic sharia law—she was called into the prosecutor’s office and may be tried. As the BBC reports:

Her remarks provoked a storm of attacks against her, spearheaded by Islamist members of Kuwait’s parliament.

“They were terrifying me – everywhere, not just from Kuwait, even from Saudi Arabia,” she told the BBC. “They were talking against me, they were saying bad things, they were ridiculing me. But I’m used to it now.

Calls were made for Ms Jassem’s dismissal from Kuwait University, where she is a professor of philosophy. and a legal complaint was issued against her.

The public prosecutor told her that the complainant said he had been psychologically damaged by her remarks.

Other legal complaints may also be filed.

Ms Jassem faces charges of blasphemy but it is up to the public prosecutor to decide whether to proceed to trial. If convicted, she could be jailed for one year.

But she is undaunted, buoyed by the support she has received as well as abuse.

Here’s the video; the exchange that got her in trouble begins at 3:18. At about 3:52 she really gets into it.

So much for a supposedly “liberal” Muslim country.  And don’t pin this form of censorship on Western colonialism. It’s purely a result of religion. The concept of “blasphemy” is not one that we exported to the Middle East.

h/t: Kenan Malik

48 thoughts on “Kuwaiti professor of philosophy charged with blasphemy for arguing that the Constitution supercedes the Qur’an”

  1. “And don’t pin this form of censorship on Western colonialism.”

    Not at all, after all they are the US best friend in the area second only to the human rights paragon Saudi Arabia and received US support:

    http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35876.htm
    “The United States provides military and defense technical assistance to Kuwait from both foreign military sales and commercial sources. U.S. personnel assist the Kuwait military with training, education, readiness, and war fighting.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/kuwait-top-ally-on-syria-is-also-the-leading-funder-of-extremist-rebels/2014/04/25/10142b9a-ca48-11e3-a75e-463587891b57_story.html
    “Kuwait, a U.S. ally whose aid to besieged Syrian civilians has been surpassed only by the United States this year, is also the leading source of funding for al-Qaeda-linked terrorists fighting in Syria’s civil war, according to Obama administration officials.

    The amount of money that has flowed from Kuwaiti individuals and through organized charities to Syrian rebel groups such as Jabhat al-Nusra totals in the hundreds of millions of dollars, according to experts whose estimates are endorsed by the Treasury Department.”

    Of course, with friends like that why should one complain about trivialities.

    1. Sorry, Peter, but you haven’t put a dent in the argument that the blasphemy accusations in Kuwait can’t come from colonialism. All you’ve said is that it’s an ally of the U.S. and gets assistance from it. How can you possibly use that to say that this woman being charged with blasphemy is the FAULT of the U.S.?

      It always amazes me that people like you can blame ANY malfeasance by any Muslim country on the U.S. This kind of post facto confabulation is akin to theology. Are you bucking for the Noam Chomsky Prize?

      1. Of course I am not saying that this has anything to do with colonialism.
        I am however utterly incensed of the unequivocal support that the US gives their “allies” despite their regressive policies as the almost unequivocal support of the goons of house of Saud and the Kuweitis.

        I don’t blame their malfeasance on the US, I blame continued support by the US on their continued ability of supression of civil society.

        2. Sounds like a reasonable but very non sequitur point to make. You’re incensed by our support of Monarchic/autocratic regimes with poor human rights records. Okay. What does that have to do with the topic of the post?

        3. It’s not just the US but the entire West that supports Saudi Arabia, the country that not only regularly executes its citizens for “blasphemy crimes” and has its own religious police, but also has supported and financed radical Islamists the world over.

          But, I think with ISIS, Saudi Arabia now has to deal with the problem of extremism it has helped create.

          1. My country, Canada, recently sold weapons to Saudi Arabia.

            As long as there is money to be made off the Gulf states, Western nations will only pay lip service in criticism of the human rights violations enacted by these states.

          2. Our Country is set to make some billions of dollars by selling armoured fighting vehicles (whatever they may be)to the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
            What do we Canadians think of that?

          3. You’d be surprised how many arms Canada supplies to war zones in Africa, the Middle East etc. Everything from small assault rifles on up.

          5. This Canadian is outraged.

            (SA will be using them to flatten Yemen, almost certainly, so they cannot even claim it is for “internal affairs”.)

        4. Conditions that western imperialism created can also radicalize extremist views, even if no ideology is exported per se. When intervening in a different country, it is necessary to research the possible outcomes of intervention with as much local input as possible, and any effort towards reconstruction should bring together as many elements of society as possible.

          The US has a right to disagree with religious fundamentalism, but it should not dismiss it, at the risk of making it more intransigent.

      2. Perhaps Peter’s point, if he actually made one, is that outside secular influence causes an internal religious backlash. Even if that were true, it’s still religion that is 100% to blame for blasphemy laws.

        1. He did make a point. It was just non-sequitur with respect to the OP. Not sure why he thought it appropriate except to demonstrate that he believes that what he thinks is the most grievous issue is the right answer and therefore anyone criticizing other issues is morally deficient or stupid.

          No multitasking please. Otherwise that whole passive aggressive thing of using a non sequitur to imply that others don’t care about your more important cause, or are even against it, wouldn’t work.

  3. Brave woman – I would say so. She sounds like the James Madison or Jefferson of Kuwait.
    I was thinking we should bring her to the U.S. as an example for us.

    1. In light of the charges against her, it was sad to hear her talk of the lack of free speech, and the need to speak in code. The host says “But look, we have free speech, you can say anything you want, I am not holding you back, you are holding yourself back.” Yah, right.

  4. Islam is holding back the progress of society in those countries where it is the dominant religion. And that’s a fact.

    1. In fairness, Christianity has quite the history – and present – of doing the same thing. Consider how many states voted in the last decade to keep gay marriage illegal, or the consistent rolling back of abortion access/rights.

      1. The U.S. does have its failings regarding unequal distribution of basic equality due to religious nonsense. We should always press, press, press for the correction of these problems here.
        But the problems over there make us look like Norway high on ecstasy.

        1. Maybe so but I read the news from FFRF and there seems to be no shortage of work for those folks. The problem with the religious in this country is they really believe that freedom of religion means they are free to put it wherever they want – in the public schools, in government, and any place they see fit. If you interfere with this, well, there goes their religious freedom.

      2. Could we please just stop with these absurd deflections to Christianity? No one is being prosecuted for suggesting the Bible is subordinate to national law anywhere in Christendom. When that happens, let alone in a Christian nation of wealth and education comparable to Kuwait, then you can trot out an equivalency.

        1. Christianity has done me far more harm than Islam has. I think I’m justified in focusing my attention on it. I’m not saying Islam isn’t more barbaric – it is – but frankly, outside of my country freaking out about it, it’s not got much impact on my life.

      3. Theology is always a scary thing when it influences state decisions because it uses dogma to inform these decisions and dogma has no ability to change or adapt when presented with new information.

        However, adherents to Christiantiy are free to keep on trying to make America the Kuwait of North America but it won’t happen because unlike Kuwait, there are guaranteed freedoms and separation of church and state. Americans just have to make sure they keep it this way!

      4. No disagreement there. Of course my comment cannot be construed as privileging Christianity in that regard. All religions hold us back from becoming truly civilized.

  5. Perhaps Kuwait can become more secular if government officials are convinced that islam is a possible danger to the state, instead of an ally. In the West, we learned that lesson a long time ago.

    I hope professor Jassem won’t be prosecuted.

  6. Fantastic and smart woman – and the slippery host knew exactly what he was doing. Why does she waste her life living in that place?

    1. I wouldn’t call it waste. I think Western countries are now civilized due to the deeds of people like her in the past (plus maybe a little bit of luck here and there). Now, Third World countries are, as Brecht put it, the unhappy countries that need heroes.

    2. Maybe she wishes to be close to, and be able to look after and care for as necessary, her parents, for as long as they live. But there are limits to even those sorts of obligations, speaking from my own experience.

    3. To borrow from yet another cultural tradition, there’s a Confucian saying that of course a _ru_ can live amongst uncouth barbarians, because with an example things might be/get better. (To put it slightly less optimistically than the original)

  7. ‘The public prosecutor told her that the complainant said he had been psychologically damaged by her remarks.’
    The complainant has indeed been psychologically damaged. Unbeknownst to him, however, the damage was caused by religious indoctrination and caused the inability of comprehending a rational approach to politics and government as provided by the professor.

    1. “”‘The public prosecutor told her that the complainant said he had been psychologically damaged by her remarks.’””

      A different kind of regressive, but still a regressive.

      They are all the same, aren’t they. Hurt feelings become a blunt instrument with which to bludgeon those who dare to disagree.

      1. The voice of reason grows quiet where faith settles down. And if the powerful are not reasonable, it may be systematically suppressed to the point where speaking truth becomes a punishable offence.

  9. ‘The public prosecutor told her that the complainant said he had been psychologically damaged by her remarks.’

    Sounds much like an extreme version of what is happening on college campuses in efforts to provide “safe” zones in which speech that may harm the psyches of the oppressed isn’t permitted. Here’s to a very brave lady who is sorely needed where she is. May she be safe.

  10. “The public prosecutor told her that the complainant said he had been psychologically damaged by her remarks.”

    Well, a U.S. university snowflake kindred spirit is able to survive in the hot, arid Middle East.

    I’m waiting to hear from you, Ben Affleck and Nicholas Kristof, et al.

  11. I wonder if, in this complainant’s mind, there is any substantive difference between being “offended” and being “psychologically damaged”?

  12. wow, supposedly western-friendly Kuwait notwithstanding, for a woman in the middle est to say that, that’s what I call courage.

  13. She’s very brave. I hope there are many in her society who listen and understand what she is saying, and I hope no harm comes to her.

  14. Brave young woman ,I really hope the lunatics don’t get their way, probably a good time to get on a Plane.

    1. You’re probably right, which is a real shame since Kuwait would probably do well to hear more voices like hers. Blasphemy laws are just such a terrible idea.

Comments are closed.