Blasphemy Laws: A Comparative Analysis Between Pakistan, India And UK
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 21
- 2 min read
Apoorva Singh, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi
Sidhanth Singh, Campus Law Centre, Delhi University
ABSTRACT
This study examines the intricate relationship between freedom of speech and blasphemy laws, examining the ways in which various legal frameworks try to balance democratic rights with religious sensitivity. The study looks at three different countries India, Pakistan, and the UK to show how historical, constitutional, and sociopolitical factors influence how religious offenses are treated in the law. While freedom of expression and religion are guaranteed in India under Article 19(1)(a) and Article 25 of the Constitution, restrictions are put in place to maintain public order by laws like Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code. From Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Maharashtra to Ramji Lal Modi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, judicial interpretation demonstrates an attempt to strike a balance between respect for faith and freedom of expression.
However, as demonstrated in the Asia Bibi case, blasphemy laws in Pakistan, such as Sections 295-298 of the Pakistan Penal Code, have developed into tools of coercion that are frequently used against minorities and dissenters. On the other hand, the UK has moved away from blasphemy laws, as seen by Whitehouse v. Lemon, and toward a secular, rights-based framework that prioritizes protections for hate speech over religious purity. The article makes the case that laws should shield people from incitement rather than from criticism of their beliefs, drawing on international agreements such as the ICCPR and the Rabat Plan of Action. In the end, it comes to the conclusion that upholding freedom and protecting faith are not antagonistic objectives; rather, they must coexist through legal frameworks based on respect for human dignity, tolerance, and reason.
