ABSTRACT
The right to religious freedom is viewed as the shield that protects citizens from religious persecution. But the liberal constitutional concept protecting religious beliefs nonetheless acknowledges that the practice of those beliefs may be regulated by the state in the name of public order. How is one to enjoy the right to religious freedom if the practice of your faith is considered heresy? I compare the status of Ahmadis in Pakistan and Indonesia and the Bahá’í in Egypt to show how the management of religious practice has become entangled with the liberal constitutional framework protecting minority rights in ways that renders these groups without either the safeguards provided to religious minorities by premodern Islamic jurisprudence or the rights guaranteed to all citizens regardless of their religious affiliation by a liberal constitutional state. Paradoxically, Turkey and Tunisia, ruled by Islamists, provide a more workable approach toward the management of the contesting claims of blasphemy and freedom of speech.
