Christians Who Convert to Islam Cannot convert back

Egyptian Court in Controversial Ruling:  

A public debate has been underway in Egypt over the regime's treatment of
the country's Christians. This debate emerged following lawsuits by
Christians who had converted to Islam and then reconverted to Christianity,
and who were now demanding that the Egyptian Interior Ministry issue them
new official documents in their original names and with "Christian" in the
"religion" entry field.

In April 2007, the Egyptian administrative court rejected an appeal by
Christians who had converted to Islam and then reverted to Christianity, and
also accused them of apostasy against Islam - the punishment for which is
death, according to the common interpretation.

Two months after the court ruling, the plaintiffs' appeal was accepted. The
Supreme Administrative Court instructed the Interior Ministry to permit the
plaintiffs to have their identity cards again denote them as Christians, and
called for a new law banning "playing" with religions. Further ruling in the
case was postponed until September 2007.(1)

The Egyptian religious establishment backed up the court's rulings, and at
the same time argued that repeated conversion creates confusion that
endangers societal stability. The Egyptian press published articles with a
similar view, claiming that religion should not be changed with the aim of
obtaining material aims. In protest, representatives of the Christian
community and human rights organizations in Egypt called this discrimination
and violation of freedom of religion.

The following is a review of responses in the Egyptian press to the court
ruling:

Egyptian Court: A Christian Who Converts to Islam and Reverts to
Christianity is Murtadd(2)

In December 2005, Bashi Razaq Bashi, a Christian who converted to Islam,
changing his name to Muhammad Razaq Mahdi, and who subsequently reverted to
Christianity, filed a lawsuit against the Egyptian interior minister and the
head of the civil affairs department for refusing to issue him an identity
card and birth certificate in his original name and with his original
religion in the "religion" entry field.(3) The court also had dozens of
similar cases awaiting decisions.(4)

The court explained its actions by stating that Egypt's constitution
guaranteed the principle of equality of public rights and obligations and
freedom of belief and worship, which are also anchored in the international
conventions, without discrimination as to gender, origin, language,
religion, or belief, as long as this did not harm the public order. At the
same time, the court decided that shari'a law took precedence over
international convention and the Egyptian constitution in establishing
freedom of belief, stating that "there is no coercion in religion [Koran
2:256]."

However, the court ruling went on to state: "There is a big difference
between freedom of belief and worship and the freedom that some seek to play
with belief by moving between one religion and another for material aims.
This game has two stages: first, playing with the [Christian] religion that
[a person] adopts and in the name of which he receives official documents
from the Interior Ministry and conducts social relations with the rest of
the citizens, and second, playing with the religion [of Islam] to which he
devoted himself for part of his life and during which he conducted social
relations with others, with the intent of reverting to his first religion...
"

Another explanation presented by the court ruling was: "The laws of Islam,
to which anyone who joins it agrees, forbid someone born a Muslim, or
someone who [begins] to believe in Islam [at some point in his life] of his
own free will, to rebel against Islam and to move to any other religion...
Anyone who leaves his Christian religion in order not to return to it and
enters the religion of Islam entirely of his own free will and without
coercion is committed to its laws and principles, including not harboring
any intentions to deny Islam or to leave it afterwards... Islam does not
permit anyone who enters it of his own free will to leave it... for the sake
of a particular aim or to change his religion as the wind changes
direction..."(5)

Playing With Religions Sparks Civil War

Senior officials in Egypt's religious establishment stated that the issue
must be examined with an eye to the extent of the damage caused to society
by the transition between religions, and that such examination must be
carried out by an Egyptian court. Egyptian Mufti Dr. 'Ali Gum'ah explained
that shari'a forbids a Muslim to change his religion, but that the
punishment for this crime cannot be meted out in this world, rather by Allah
on Judgment Day - because this is a matter of conscience between the
individual and his God. He said that only if the apostasy constitutes a
danger to the public must the matter be brought to the court, which will
determine the required punishment.

Referring to the first ruling by the Egyptian court on a lawsuit to change
the denotation of religion in an identity card, Gum'ah said: "These
Christians, even if they have denied Islam [as defined by Islamic] religious
law, their civil rights when they deny Islam... are a matter for the state
apparatuses... with no connection to religious rulings on the matter."(6)

Even after the plaintiffs' appeal was accepted, Gum'ah backed the judicial
system. He said that religious belief is a personal matter, in which society
intervenes only when it becomes a public matter that threatens the good of
society: "The essential question before us is, can a person who is Muslim
choose a religion other than Islam? The answer is yes, they can, because the
Koran says, 'Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion [109:6],' and
'Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve
[18:29],' and 'There is no coercion in religion [2:256]'. However, from the
standpoint of religion, a person's abandoning his faith is a sin for which
he will be punished by Allah on Judgment Day... If the case in question is
one of merely rejecting faith, then there is no worldly punishment. If,
however, the crime of undermining the foundations of the society is added to
the sin of apostasy, then the case must be referred to a judicial system
whose role is to protect the integrity of society..." (7)

Dr. Abd Al-Mu'ati Bayoumi, member of the Academy for Islamic Research at
Al-Azhar, explained that a Christian who converted to Islam and wanted to
revert to Christianity was a threat to society, and that the judicial system
was obligated to bring him to trial. In an article in the Egyptian
government weekly Al-Misawar, Bayoumi wrote: "In an era of actual clash
[between] civilizations, of rivalry between ideologies that harms the
sanctity of the beliefs and of the religions and does not shun any means of
buying supporters with bribes, incitement against the holy places, and
abandoning the homeland, the murtadd should be treated in accordance with
[the extent of] the danger he poses to the public order and to society... He
must pass a strict test as to whether he endangers society and is likely to
spark civil war. If he [does indeed] constitute the head of the arrow in
inciting civil war, he must be treated according to Islamic religious law,
and the safety of the national community must be protected - because in such
a case the murtadd is like anyone spying for the enemy...

"[The plaintiffs'] abandonment of Christianity means that the Christian
faith did not give them spiritual wholeness and internal [tranquility].
Also, their turning to Islam and then leaving it means that Islam did not
give them spiritual wholeness and [emotional] security. Thus, they are
restless, abnormal individuals... [and] their insistence on returning to
Christianity is illogical... They need therapy more than they need a change
to their [identity] card.

"If an examination of their mental and emotional state finds that they are
not ill, then they are necessarily toying first with Christianity, and then
with Islam. Playing games with faiths is outside of [what] freedom
[permits]... it sparks civil war..."(8)

Former Editor of Government Religious Weekly: There Must Be No Playing With
or Trading In Religions

Al-Sayyed 'Abd Al-Raouf, former editor of the Egyptian government weekly for
religious affairs 'Akidati, expressed support for the court's decision to
prevent Christians who converted to Islam from officially reverting to
Christianity. He wrote: "[This phenomenon] appears to be a kind of game, and
pursuit of private interests and personal aims - whether in the case of
adopting Islam or in the case of abandoning it. Or, some of them [i.e., the
plaintiffs] were subject to pressures that forced them to return to their
[original] religion, whether family pressure or pressures from another
source.

"The court has uprooted the game [of moving between religions], by ruling
that the Interior Ministry has the right not to permit conversion in the
[official] personal documents of Christians who converted to Islam and then
converted back - because this should be seen as a toying with religion.
While we believe in the right of the individual, whoever he may be, to adopt
any religion, we [also] believe that playing with religion must not be
permitted. We believe that no one should be allowed to trade in religions,
and to use this as a means of obtaining dishonorable profit or to spark
ethnic war [between Christians and Muslims]..."(9)

The Coptic Community: Court Ruling Contradicts Democracy

Members of the Egyptian Coptic Church expressed protest over the first
ruling (i.e. against changes to religion and name in identification
documents). Coptic Church Patriarch Shinoda sent a memo to Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak demanding that repression of Copts end, that the
sections of the constitution concerning citizenship be implemented, and that
the ruling that a Christian who converts to Islam cannot officially revert
to Christianity be revised by the court.(10)

The bishop of the Coptic community in the Al-Ma'adi district said that the
ruling contravened democracy as well as human and civil rights. He added:
"This ruling muddies the close Muslim-Copt relations. [Why] does this
freedom go only one way? When a citizen chooses Islam, everything goes
easily, while the opposite [action] is called riddah..." He said that this
logic was against the principle of tolerance in which Islam took such pride,
and called for real change in the laws so that they would be compatible with
the international conventions to which Egypt was a signatory.

Coptic intellectual Dr. Wasim Al-Sisi said that Egypt would gain nothing
from this ruling, except for defamation abroad. He called for changing
Article 2 of the Egyptian constitution, which states that shari'a is the
primary source of legislation in Egypt, and proposed that the laws of all
the monotheistic religions be considered additional sources of
legislation.(11)

Coptic researcher Hani Labib wrote: "This ruling [banning reversion to
Christianity] reflects trends that are contrary to recent constitutional
amendments, including placing the primacy of the principle of citizenship as
the first article of the constitution. These trends are against the overall
Egyptian tendency to stress the values of the civil state and the principles
of freedom for every citizen. In addition, rulings such as this bring Egypt
into conflict with the outside world, because they contradict many of the
international treaties and conventions to which Egypt is committed by law...
particularly in light of the fact that in the past, the administrative court
issued rulings [in similar issues] that contradict this ruling [that is
causing such an uproar]...(12)

Egyptian Human Rights Organizations: Stop Religious Discrimination

Criticism of the ruling came also from Egypt's human rights organization.
The Egyptians Against Discrimination organization even called for abolishing
the "religion" entry in the national identity card altogether. In a
communiqué addressed to the People's Council, the Egyptian government, and
the civil society organizations, 150 Egyptian intellectuals called for at
least making the "religion" entry in the national identity card optional.
The communiqué stated that in light of the rise in the number of rulings
prohibiting Egyptian citizens from having their religion noted on personal
documents, a national committee should be established for examining Egyptian
laws that harm Egyptian citizens' right to choose their own religion. These
rulings, it noted, were unconstitutional, since the constitution prohibits
discrimination among citizens and assures freedom of belief and worship for
all.(13)

In a communiqué, the Egyptian Union for Human Rights stated: "This ruling
constitutes a violation of the constitution and of the public order."(14)
Organization chairman and legal advisor to Patriarch Shinoda, attorney Nagib
Gabra'ail, who also represented the plaintiffs in the trial, added: "The
ruling shamed the country in the international community, and presented it
as forcing people to adopt beliefs that they do not advocate..."(15)

The Egyptian Initiative for Individual Rights organization also issued a
communiqué denouncing the ruling. It stated that the organization regretted
that there was no recognition of citizens' right to revert to Christianity
after converting to Islam, and added: "This ruling is a kind of additional
regression in the stance of the State Council with regard to the
constitutional and legal protection of the right of freedom of religion and
belief."(16)

Endnotes:
(1) Al-Misriyoun (Egypt), July 2, 2007.
(2) The 'ulamaa agree that someone who has left Islam is a murtadd. With
regard to the punishment of a murtadd, it is customary to differentiate
between two situations: 1) If he changed his belief in his heart without
changing his belief or behavior in public - he must not be punished, and his
punishment is in the hands of Allah, and 2) if he declared publicly that he
was abandoning Islam, and did not recant within a few days - he must be
punished. Opinions regarding the proper punishment in the latter case are
mixed. According to the prevailing interpretation, the punishment of a
Muslim who has publicly renounced Islam is death. This tradition dates back
to the Prophet Muhammad, who said: "Whoever changes his religion must be
executed." According to a minority opinion, the punishment of such an
individual must be decided by a court, which discusses each case on an
individual basis. October (Egypt), May 6, 2007.
(3) Roz Al-Yousef (Egypt), May 11, 2007.
(4) Al-Masri Al-Yawm, Al-Wafd (Egypt), April 26, 2007.
(5) Roz Al-Yousef (Egypt), April 13, 2007, May 11, 2007.
(6) www.alarabiya.net , May 14, 2007.
(7) Gumah's statements were published in English on the "On Faith: Muslims
Speak Out" blog belonging to Newsweek and The Washington Post.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/muslims_speak_out/2007/07/sheikh_ali_gomah.html,
July 21, 2007. The Egyptian daily Al-Masri Al-Yawm quoted some of these
statements (May 24, 2007). The next day, Guma'ah's office contacted the
paper to complain that the quotes were inaccurate, and sent the full Arabic
version for publication.
(8) Al-Misawar (Egypt), May 4, 2007.
(9) Akidati (Egypt), May 1, 2007.
(10) Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), May 29, 2007.
(11) Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), April 27, 2007.
(12) Roz Al-Yousef (Egypt), May 18, 2007.
(13) Al-Qahira (Egypt), May 15, 2007.
(14) Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), April 27, 2007.
(15) Al-Misriyoun (Egypt), June 18, 2007.
(16) www.alarabiya.net, May 14, 2007.