According to a verdict in the EU Court of Justice, The Prophet Muhammad may not be called paedophile. We asked Dr. Bill Warner, a leading expert on Islam, what this means for the 47 member states who hold to the European Convention on Human Rights.
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was sentenced to 480 euros in fines in her native country Austria because she said in a speech in 2009: “A 56-year-old and a 6-year-old, what is that if not paedophilia?” In a reference to Muhammad and one of his wives .
The speech was held at a seminar at the Austrian party FPÖ’s educational institute. The woman has since appealed the case in Austria without success, and to the EU Court of Justice where a seven-judge panel ruled that the verdict in Austria should remain.
The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
By Bill Warner, PhD
“Thus, by considering them [Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff’s statements about Mohammed being a paedophile for marrying a six year old and consummating the marriage at nine years old] as going beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate and classifying them as an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, which was capable of stirring up prejudice and putting at risk religious peace, the domestic courts had come to the conclusion that the facts at issue contained elements of incitement to religious intolerance.” —Ruling from the European Court of Human Rights, E.S. v. Austria – 38450/12, Judgment 25.10.2018 [Section V], Article 10-1 Freedom of expression.
One can from this statement that the ECHR is afraid of Islamic violent backlash and riots
According to the ECHR ruling, a person cannot call Mohammed a paedophile or commit an abusive attack on him. It does not say that a person can’t refer to the facts of history from Islam’s own doctrinal texts–the Koran, the Hadith (the words and deeds of Mohammed), and the Sira (Mohammed’s biography). At this point it is still legal to state the facts of the doctrine of Islam if there is no conclusion drawn or opinion being made.
It is important to note that there are two sub-texts here. The first is that the ruling does not use the name “Mohammed”. Since the ECHR refers to him as the Prophet of Islam, they are confirming that they agree he is a true prophet.
Sharia law has now been inserted into the laws of the 47 member states who hold to the European Convention on Human Rights
This is in essence the ECHR accepting the second half of the Shahada, the Islamic statement of faith that there is no god but Allah and Mo-hammed is his Prophet. To move to being a full Sharia court they only need to say the first part of the Shahada: “there is no god, but Allah”.
This leads to the second sub-text. The ECHR uses the phrase: “putting at risk religious peace”. One can from this statement that the ECHR is afraid of Islamic violent backlash and riots. Said another way, they are afraid of more jihad against the Kafirs.
Sharia law has now been inserted into the laws of the 47 member states who hold to the European Convention on Human Rights, an international treaty to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe. What an irony.
Dr. Bill Warner is an expert on the doctrine of Political Islam and has published 15 books the subject. His Center for the Study of Political Islam is headquartered in Brno, Czech Republic www.cspii.org. Bill Warner’s website is www.politicalislam.com where you can find his books, videos and newsletters.
SHARE THIS POST