Pregnant sudanese woman condemned to death for apostate.

Last week Sudan’s government condemned Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, a 27 year old pregnant woman, for declaring herself a Christian while her government considers her a Muslim- following her father’s religion.

Islam fundamentalist asking for death sentence to the apostates.Photo from:

Islam fundamentalist asking for death sentence to the apostates.Photo from:

Unfortunately, even nowadays, this is not the first case in which religion choices leads to death sentences. In this case, she has been condemned under the crime of apostasy. In addition, she was sentenced to a 100 lashes due to her marriage with a Christian isn’t valid to Sudan and having two kids with him is consider adultery. Some interpretations of Muslim law in Sudan claim illegal the conversions out of Islam. Taking into a count the last events, the international community has been having an increasing interest over this issue, trying to abolish the judge’s decision. The sentence will be put in practice in two years from now, due to the article of the Sudanese constitution that reads that no pregnant woman shall be punished before waiting two years of lactancy.

Going back to Sudan’s constitution, it is to notice the first article:

“The Republic of the Sudan is an independent, sovereign State. It is a democratic, decentralized, multi-cultural, multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multi-lingual country where such diversities co-exist.”

Having considered this point, it is reasonable to affirm that last week’s events and the court’s decision, surrounding Meriam’s case, is not following their own constitution.

Now the next question is: What can the international community do about it? A direct intervention is discarded as no one is willing to compromise human lives and resources for this issue. Another way of solving it could be  through legal means, but although a non-profit organization has found this punishment illegal – by the proper Sudanese constitution- prosecutors have decide not to take it into account.

Another difficulty is that despite the fact that this sentence goes against international treaties, signed by them in 1956, it is valid according to the Islam human rights law. As the article 10 reads: “Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion or to atheism”.

There is a big contradiction between national laws and international law and finally a summed up law depending the religion. Like some Imam said “the interpretation of Mahoma words can be controversial for the understanding of life.” The ranges of opinion can vary depending their education social clash and environment.


From the international point of view and the national constitution, the act of crime should be punished but the sentence shall follow the law.However, Omar Hasan Ahmad al-Bashir, Sudan president, has been warned several times by its brutal national persecution to small ethnic groups of the country, making a division of its territory in 2011 done by the other religious group, Christians.

Sudanese cant life this type of systematic torture depending your cultural history or present, the international court should act in the word of the international community in which Sudanese president ratified all the conventions since 1956.




Los comentarios están cerrados.

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: