DRAWING THE RIGHT LINE

The widespread protests across the Muslim world over the publication in Europe of the Prophet Mohammed’s cartoons provides us with an opportunity to examine closely the concept of freedom as practiced in various parts of the world.

How does one demarcate the boundaries between freedom of expression versus religious offence?

For example, while the Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik expressed the opinion that European Union leaders have a responsibility to “clearly condemn” insult to any religion, the French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy declared that he preferred “an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship.” A German daily argued that a “right to blasphemy” was anchored in democratic freedom.

The idea of freedom is a difficult one to understand because it has a broad range of application - from a total absence of restraint to merely a sense of not being unduly hampered or frustrated.

To some, freedom is seen as the right to do anything regardless of the consequence of the action taken.
To others, freedom comes with a sense of responsibility and accountability.

The 12 cartoons provoked strong reaction in the Muslim world because the representation of Allah and his prophet Muhammad is strictly prohibited.

This fact was known to the Jyllands-Posten, the largest newspaper in Denmark which approached 40 artists to depict the prophet for this project. Last September, a Danish author could not find any illustrator to illustrate a book on the prophet because the illustrators approached were aware that artistic representation of Prophet Mohammed and God were forbidden in Islam. The president for the Danish Writer Union perceived this as a threat to free speech and Jyllands-Posten responded by embarking on this project.

In this instance, not embarking on it would not be seen as censorship or curtailing democratic freedom but demonstrating a sense of responsibility and sensitivity to others.

However, by embarking on his project - knowing the stand of Islam on this issue - demonstrated a lack of accountability.

Perhaps this incident will allow the European press to reflect on how they should handle this freedom. They might even want to learn a lesson from Singapore.

The Mari Hertogh incident in 1950 is a case in point. Publishing the picture of a Muslim girl praying in front of the Blessed Virgin Mary sparked off a riot in Singapore. A picture is open to more interpretation than a newspaper report.
In a report, issues can be explained, ideas can be discussed while in a picture or a cartoon, the creator does not have much control of the viewer’s response.

Since the Maria Hertogh incident, the press in Singapore has played a more responsible role and there is a general consensus that freedom of speech must be accompanied by a sense of accountability.

Indeed, if being free includes the right to blasphemy, the right to hurl insults and the right to provoke, I would rather not have that right.

This article first appeared in TODAY on 6th February 2006