‘GREATER PUNISHMENT’

Imposing the death penalty on someone who mocks or denounces the Prophet of Islam is futile. Such an act of killing does not refute the objections raised by the individual. Instead, it creates the perception that since there was no logical or scholarly response to the strong objection, fanatics resorted to the easier option of killing. Throughout history, many truthful and remarkable individuals have been killed by the tyrants of their time. In this historical context, people tend to associate the victim of violence with righteous individuals who stand for truth. They elevate the victim to the status of a hero, recognizing that the same fate that befell Truth has also befallen the murdered person. Thus, being killed by opponents adds them to the list of “Martyrs of Truth.” This is not a mere assumption. On the contrary, it is precisely what occurred after the announcement of the death penalty for Salman Rushdie. For instance, a leading article titled “Censored by Religion” was prominently published in the ‘The Times of India’ (March 5, 1989), highlighting the repercussions of such censorship. In the above article, Salman Rushdie is being compared to historical figures who were either murdered or faced attempts on their lives by their opponents. Examples include Socrates, Galileo, Martin Luther, and even the Prophet of Islam, whom the people of Makkah sought to kill. The article highlights the plight of the famous scientist Galileo in his final days, stating: “Galileo was confined to his villa under strict house arrest for the rest of his life, a fate that could well be Rushdie’s in a different manner today.”