Gillian Gibbons and the Sudanese Judiciary
Gillian Gibbons has today been charged with blasphemy, inciting hatred and insulting Islam in Sudan for allegedly naming a class teddy bear Mohamed.
Blasphemy is a crime on the statute book of Sudan, as it is in many countries governed by Islamic law. It is usually synonymous with apostasy (the rejection of one's religion). An apostate is identified by blasphemy against Allah or Muhammad or by insurrection against the Islamic state.
Mrs Gibbons, who is not a Muslim, however cannot be charged with apostasy, which in some countries carries the death penalty. The Commission for the Rights of Non-Muslims was set up in Khatoum in February this year to protect the rights of non-Muslims living under Islamic law, nevertheless Mrs Gibbons has fallen foul of the implementation of Sharia in the Northern part of Sudan.
The charges brought against Mrs Gibbons are based on a Sunnah (act or saying of the prophet) rather than a verse of the Koran.
Sharia, implemented in Northern Sudan in 1991, is made up of the Koran and the Sunnah and judges in the country are charged with interpreting and implementing Sharia in light of the facts of the case.
This is the constitution of Sudan. Article 39 (1) guarantees Freedom of Opinion and Expression but is subject to restrictions in accordance the law of the land and public morals. State legislation on blasphemy is intended to deter people from insulting Allah or Muhammad and overrides the right to Freedom of Opinion or Expression.
The exact punishment for someone who insults Allah or Muhammad is not set out in Sharia, but is decided by individual judges in each case. It would appear that Mrs Gibbons is the victim of a particularly harsh interpretation of the Blasphemy law and in another Islamic country or under another judge the case may have been dismissed.
The Sudanese Judiciary site explains the levels of courts in the country that Mrs Gibbons may go through. And here is a Human Rights group for Sudan. This article however argues that the Sudanese Judiciary are key to stability and peace and democracy in the troubled region.
The International Religious Freedom report 2007 on Sudan explains the differing approaches to religious freedom in the Northern and Southern regions of the country.
The Muslim Council of Britain has come out in strong condemnation of the charges.
Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, an imam in Leicester and chair of the Muslim Council of Britain's Interfaith Council, said: "If someone were to intentionally blaspheme then the judicial process would be set in motion but Mrs Gibbons didn't go out to insult Islam and it should have been for the school to deal with."
Joanna Sugden


Blasphemy is illegal in the UK as well. There is a petition online trying to change this: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/revokeblasphemy/
Posted by: Toby Scott | 28 Nov 2007 20:49:25
Good for she and others who are already there in Sudan and other Islamic countries. This ought to teach you westerners a lesson that Muslims are generally beyond hope and help. Why don´t you just leave them as they are [in their 'holy' land] and let them suffer and perish?
Posted by: Kong Kek Kuat | 28 Nov 2007 23:49:51
she is not guilty and must be released without conditions.she chose faris.20 pupils chose muhammad.she is not fully aware of this 'referring' matter.
islamic law=based on both Sunnah (act of the prophet) and verse of the Quran
christian also have practised law on blasphemy:
In 2005 Marithé and François Girbaud's parodied Leonardo's religious painting The Last Supper ...The Catholic church initiated a controversial lawsuit against the Girbauds...The judge qualified the poster as "an insult to Christians."
A British evangelical organisation, Christian Voice led street protests against the BBC screening of Jerry Springer “ The Opera, in which Jesus wearing a nappy...Christian Voice published the home addresses and telephone numbers of several BBC executives on their web site. This led to one of these people receiving death threats. Another organisation, the Christian Institute attempted to level blasphemy charges against the BBC
Christian Voice says the show is deliberately offensive and provocative to Christians.
The BBC received more than 60,000 complaints over the broadcast of the hit stage show in January
More than 7,940 people complained to the media regulator Ofcom before it was shown on BBC Two, followed by a further 8,860 afterwards.
" Blasphemy laws in England...person in Britain to be imprisoned for blasphemy was John William Gott on 9 December 1921. He had three previous convictions for blasphemy...comparing Jesus to a circus clown. He was sentenced to nine months' hard labour. In 1977, Denis Lemon...found guilty of blasphemous libel...fined 500 pound... nine months imprisonment..."
In march 2005...Moscow court...January 2003 organisers of an art exhibition guilty of inciting religious hatred and fined them 100,000 roubles (£2,000) each...The Russian Orthodox Church had condemned director Yuri Samodurov and his colleague Lyudmila Vasilovskaya...court ruling the show was "openly insulting and blasphemous''...Coca-Cola logo with Jesus' face shown next to it, with the words: "This is my blood"...was also a sculpture of a church made from vodka bottles.
Posted by: shair | 29 Nov 2007 02:19:36
I was surprised by the reaction; there is a long tradition of bears in Islam, indeed one was even considered a prophet in his own right, according to tradition: http://www.tektonics.org/guest/pooh.html
Posted by: Iqbal | 29 Nov 2007 06:35:16
I am dismayed at such and interpretaion of anyone in the 21st century. I think these people are crazy and I feel sorry for the teacher. I would suggest that all foriegn personal quit all Arab countries and let them get on with their own education as we seem world apart and justice doesn't exist there.
Posted by: renny | 29 Nov 2007 10:22:30
No the MCB has not 'come out strongly against', it calls it a 'silly affair', it is an absolute outrage, and brings the Koran out into the open for what it really is, a very ancient tribal text in need of radical reformation.
And this affair reveals the outrage done to the South of Sudan: having Sharia law imposed on a non muslim population was sheer oppression, and the UK government was responsible for failing to make the South a seperate state from the Arab North. Instead it gave the South to Islamists, bequeathing death, slavery and destruction on a vast scale.
Posted by: Fati | 29 Nov 2007 12:23:34
Why on earth are we pouring money into Sudan? It appears that the country is so fragmented and extreem that all we are doing is assisting in the cultivation of hatred of anyone white or Christian.
Posted by: November Mike | 29 Nov 2007 12:38:28
Why did You go to Khartoum to teach when so many need you here in the UK?The ludicrously contrived Shar'ia Law now has you victim of your simplicity and innocence.The wickedness of your convicted punishment defies belief.Allah is merciful,but His political exponents leave mercy to be desired.
In their terms,May Allah deliver you from the contrived machinations of his manifestly unworthy "servants",persons of entirely malicious and political intent.Given your freedom leave at once.Sudan is eminently malignant in every way.
J.P.Walsh.
Posted by: J.P.Walsh. | 29 Nov 2007 12:45:54
Dear Ahmadinajed, Greetings.Simply to advise You that,as soon as you have an Iranian nuclear weapon should You exploit it in any direction,You and your Iranian population will,within fifteen minutes, be circling our World stratospherically as Carbon-14 particles for the next five-thousand years.You get my meaning!
Please,Armadinajacket,Do be careful!
There is so much at stage,your very own life included
J.P. Walsh.
Posted by: J.P.Walsh. | 29 Nov 2007 12:59:59
We read so much in the press about school classes that are so rowdy as to be uncontrollable. But here was a case of a teacher who had her class in perfect control, and was allowing them to express their love for their culture through the medium of a cuddly toy, which any one of them would have happily hugged. If Gillian Gibbons is condemned, it will create deeper wounds in inter-cultural relations than any loony racists could have hoped for.
Posted by: Edmund Burke | 29 Nov 2007 13:39:25
I work in Dubai with mostly Arab, Palestinian and Lebanese. Almost all are Muslim. We were talking about this case in the office this afternoon and all are appalled at the utter stupidity of this case and how it makes their religion appear Medieval.
As many said, 'If it's blashpemous to name your Teddybear Mohammed, then what about all those Muslim men who are called Mohammed?' Should their parents be stoned to death too.
Interestingly, many of my colleagues think that the age of Islamic fundamentalism is coming to an end. The shameful violence in Iraq and the wealth-enhancing effects of rising oil prices will alientate the remaining trogolytes from the majority who are now joining the global economy and realising that's it's a wonderful place to be.
I hope they are right.
Posted by: mark mcfarland | 29 Nov 2007 14:15:27
The Sudanese judiciary (and by implication sharia law) have made fools of themselves, and the Wahhabists have lost another skirmish in the battle for hearts and minds in the West. If anyone harms a hair in that poor, naive, humane woman's head during her fifteen days in prison I hope the true (that is, non-jihadist) Muslim world will condemn it as a disgrace and aberration from the true Islamic religion. I say this in sorrow, having worked in Sudan and loved the country and its people before it was taken over by jihadists.
Posted by: William | 29 Nov 2007 18:55:11
This woman was completely innocent and obviously well-meaning - there was nothing to defend.
The result is a glowing example of the Medieval norm epitomising Islam and the Muslim religion's intolerance - it makes a mockery of our own tolerance, indeed interest, that is promulgated in our schools and generally throughout our country, despite huge provocation (ie. veils in schools, preachers of hate/ intolerance, suicide bombers).
It beggars belief that Labour are continuing to attempt to further stifle free speech ( "hate laws "etc.)when we have massive evidence of Islamic intolerance towards any other religion or way of life ( ie. Democracy).
It also highlights the paucity of common sense and basic intelligence, and lack of any sense of humanity, on the part of the Sudanese Islamic authorities,who, in the name of Islam are appearing to be utterly bigoted, idiotic and puerile - children naming a teddy bear with a commonly heard and used name, for sound educational use, is in no way a threat to anyone in the 21st Century.
The hypocrisy is illuminating, and will have increased further the negative perception of the Muslim faith by Western observers - we see bigotry, intolerance, continuous fanaticism, aggressiveness, "Stone-Age" thinking and discrimination, and brain-washing of the gullible, to mention just a few negatives.
Let's hope our Archbishop speaks out against real evil rather than slating the USA and Israel.
( I wonder if there will be any cartoons re teddy bears,teachers and Mohammed - there certainly should be.
Posted by: Paul Butler | 29 Nov 2007 19:09:35
This is Just more Reason Christians Worldwide need to Take a Stand For The Only True God The King of Kings The King of All Glory...Jesus Christ!!
Posted by: | 29 Nov 2007 22:15:08
I have mixed feelings about this. I'm really sorry for the poor woman but the whole thing is outrageously funny. It's straight out of Life of Brian. All we need now is for Osama to declare a Jihad against Crusading and Zionist teddy bears.
I suspect the Sudanese have done us all a favour by demonstrating just how desperate some Muslims are to take offence.
Posted by: Mike | 29 Nov 2007 22:27:57
Islamism is political rather than religious. It uses and abuses the Koran & Sunnah via pronouncements from pliable, compromised clerics to serve it's political purposes.
Joanna Sugden displays a stunning ignorance of the reality of Sudan by her talk of the constitution, courts and free speech. This is a dictatorship where the mass murdering, genocidal regime decides what is allowed and what is not. The media is totally state owned, subservient to the Govt, so any notion of free speech is absurd.
Posted by: Harlan Leyside | 29 Nov 2007 22:50:55
There is no god, there is no allah. Religious holy books are all fiction. Their adherents chase smoke and myth. The fact billions of people adhere to religions is an indictment of humanity. They can never solve any problem or address any real issue because their entire world view is phony. The religious of the world are a millstone around the neck of everyone who believes in truth, reason, logic and science.
Posted by: Keith Bentham | 30 Nov 2007 09:22:27
Recently it was suggested that this hassle is due to a misunderstanding not about the intentions of the teacher, but rather about the western significance of the teddy bear. In regards to this, it's rather interesting to read this article about whether Winnie-The-Pooh is a good muslim: http://www.tektonics.org/guest/pooh.html
Posted by: Andrew Clarke | 30 Nov 2007 11:12:52
"This is Just more Reason Christians Worldwide need to Take a Stand For The Only True God The King of Kings The King of All Glory...Jesus Christ!!"
I'd like to take a stand against the needless use of capitals at the beginning of words that are not the first words of a sentence, proper nouns or any other word that requires their use!
Posted by: Carl Waring | 30 Nov 2007 12:04:09
This whole sorry episode underlines why no other country outside a hard line Muslim country should have any dealings with Sudan. You can not help people with any sort of aid or hand of friendship if they do not wish it and only wish to harm others. I am sure if the supposedly more civilised world ignored Sudan politically & economically it would bring the Sudanese government and it's people to a sense of reality.
Posted by: alan holloway | 30 Nov 2007 14:45:23
yest more proof that religion is stupid. when will ever learn...
Posted by: garry White | 30 Nov 2007 16:24:39
All religions must be judged by their founders actions and teachings:
Mohammad killed the living, Jesus raised the dead.
Mohammad harmed the healthy, Jesus healed the sick.
Mohammad enslaved the free, Jesus released the oppressed.
In the Hadiths we read of Mohammad giving his close followers the death penalty for their shortcomings - so the "Christian" teacher got off lightly. Would Mohammad have been so lenient?
Posted by: | 30 Nov 2007 17:51:31
the only way to deal with fanatics of any type, relgious or political is to oppose them, negotiation is not an option,
Posted by: nick smith | 30 Nov 2007 18:07:49
Don't be so hard on these religious bigots. Don't forget "Christians" burnt witches at the stake in Christian 1428. In Muslim 1428 they only send them to prison for 15 days.
Religion - a man made ideology for the few to control the many.
Posted by: Nigel Meek | 30 Nov 2007 18:39:22
Maybe I am missing a point here - but aren't many people called Mohammed (or variations on the spelling). What argument/reasoning is used to justify such a use of the name? I am sure there will be some justification used - but surely this is the point - it's just about one person or group interpreting what can and cannot be said or done and seeking to impose their view on others.
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff | 30 Nov 2007 18:42:01