Muddy waters on blasphemy law
Monday July 27 2009
KEVIN Myers in his commentary on the Defamation Bill 2006 (Irish Independent, July 24) stated: "The Ahern law on blasphemy must be the first law ever whose instigator is desperately hoping that it will never be invoked."
Perhaps Mr Myers might take some comfort in Senator Dan Boyle's assertion in the Senate that this law, as now passed, “ . . . nullifies the existence of blasphemy even though it is codified in our system”.
But Mr Boyle did not explain why the nullification of the existence of blasphemy requires a hefty financial penalty of up to € 25,000 for this offence rather than a token fine.
However, rather than trying to nullify the offence of blasphemy, Justice Minister Dermot Ahern has explained that the level of potential penalty is designed to ensure there is no trivialisation of the constitutional position.
He also stated that “Until the Constitution is amended, it is necessary that blasphemy remain a crime and that the relevant legislation must make provision for punishment of this crime”.
To muddy the waters even further, Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin stated in the Dail in April that he was “concerned about a number of human rights issues in Pakistan including the blasphemy laws”. So, does our new blasphemy law mean we are no longer concerned about blasphemy laws in Pakistan and is the Dan Boyle theory of “nullification” or the Dermot Ahern theory of “non trivialisation” the correct interpretation of this legislation?
GEAROID O DUBHAIN
ROCHESTOWN, CO CORK
