Denmark’s parliament has approved a pioneering legislation aimed at preventing the public burning and desecration of religious texts, specifically targeting protests related to the disrespect of the Holy Quran in Muslim nations.
The legislation, which garnered 94 votes in favor and faced opposition from 77 members in the 179-seat Folketing, focuses on curbing the disrespectful treatment of significant religious writings. Its primary objective is to halt public acts of burning, tearing, or defilement of holy texts, including dissemination through videos.
Pending formal approval by Queen Margrethe later this month, the law entails fines or up to two years in prison for offenders. This legislation aims to counteract what has been described as “systematic mockery,” contributing to an increased terrorism threat in Denmark, especially after incidents involving the burning of the Holy Quran earlier this year.
Denmark documented 483 incidents of book or flag burnings between July 21 and October 24, prompting the introduction of this bill in August. Amendments were carefully incorporated to strike a balance between safeguarding freedom of expression and addressing national security concerns.
While critics, including Inger Stojberg of the Denmark Democrats party, express concerns that religious criticism restrictions could erode hard-won liberal freedoms, the centrist coalition government emphasizes that this law will have minimal impact on free speech. It highlights that other forms of criticizing religion will remain legally permissible.
This legislative action follows Denmark’s 2006 controversy when a newspaper published cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad, triggering widespread outrage in the Muslim world. Meanwhile, neighboring Sweden is exploring various approaches to address Quran desecration, contemplating the role of national security in police decisions during public protests.
Denmark’s step towards protecting religious texts signals a significant move in upholding respect for diverse beliefs while navigating the delicate balance between freedom of expression and safeguarding against actions that incite tensions and threaten security.
