Shock and anger have greeted Pakistan’s Supreme Court decision to uphold the conviction and death sentence of a Christian man accused of blasphemy against Prophet Muhammad.

The ruling has raised concerns about human rights, religious freedom and Pakistan’s international standing. The country was ranked among the top 10 nations where Christians face the most extreme persecution in the Open Doors 2026 World Watch List.

CeCe Heil, senior counsel and international legal director of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), told Fox News Digital that the case against brothers Amoon and Qaisar Ayub began in 2014.

Qaisar was arrested after a WordPress website displayed the brothers’ contact information and published content deemed insulting to Prophet Muhammad. Amoon was arrested the following year.

According to Heil, despite 12 years of legal proceedings, the Pakistani legal system has not presented evidence proving that either brother was affiliated with the website in question.

The ACLJ, through its Pakistani counterpart, the Organisation for Legal Aid (OLA), began representing Amoon shortly after his arrest in 2015. Both brothers were sentenced to death in 2018.

Their appeals were dismissed by the Lahore High Court in 2022. Following further proceedings at the Supreme Court in 2025, Qaisar also sought representation from the OLA.

After years of legal arguments and 13 postponed hearings, the Supreme Court, in a verdict delivered on October 7, acquitted Amoon after approximately 10 years in prison but upheld Qaisar’s conviction and death sentence.

Heil said blasphemy hearings in Pakistan are increasingly taking place in a threatening atmosphere, with mobs allegedly gathering in courtrooms to pressure judges.

She recounted an incident in which a group filmed themselves threatening to kill a judge if he failed to enforce a death sentence by hanging.

Heil also cited a video showing a prominent lawyer involved in several blasphemy cases celebrating the legal proceedings that culminated in Qaisar’s sentencing.

A translation of the description accompanying the video read: “There is only one punishment for one who insults the Prophet: The death penalty for Qaisar Ayub.”

According to Heil, the Supreme Court’s decision could have implications for other people facing blasphemy charges in Pakistan, including at least three OLA clients.

Among them is Shahzad Masih, who was 16 when he was accused of blasphemy in 2017 and sentenced to death in 2022. His appeal hearings have repeatedly been postponed since 2022.

Another Christian, Intizar Masih, is awaiting trial over an allegedly blasphemous post he reportedly shared on WhatsApp in 2023.

Ahsan Masih was accused of posting blasphemous content on TikTok in 2023 and sentenced to death the following year. His appeal hearings have also been postponed.

The OLA plans to file a review petition at the Supreme Court, challenging the lack of evidence against Qaisar. The organisation also intends to appeal directly to the Pakistani government for assistance, including a presidential pardon.

Heil expressed concern over what she described as a contradiction between Pakistan’s efforts to present itself as a more tolerant negotiator in the ongoing Iran conflict and its handling of religious freedom at home.

The Pakistani Embassy in Washington, DC, did not respond to Fox News Digital’s questions about the possibility of a presidential pardon for Qaisar, the potential international implications of the ruling or the challenges of securing justice in courtrooms where judges face threats from onlookers.

A US State Department spokesperson, however, told the publication that Washington was concerned about religious freedom in Pakistan and globally, adding that the issue was regularly discussed with the Pakistani government.

Heil also disclosed that the ACLJ had asked Morris Tidball-Binz, the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, to intervene on Qaisar’s behalf.

Although Tidball-Binz did not respond to questions about the Supreme Court’s ruling, the UN Human Rights Council secretariat provided a letter written by him and other UN officials to the Pakistani government in September 2025.

The letter expressed grave concern over the death sentences imposed on Shahzad Masih and the Ayub brothers, citing an apparent lack of conclusive evidence and questioning whether the alleged offences met the threshold of “most serious crimes” required for the imposition of the death penalty under international human rights standards.

The officials warned that, if the allegations were established, the cases could violate the men’s rights to life, liberty, a fair hearing, freedom of religion and expression, and equal protection under the law.

In its response earlier this year, the Pakistani government maintained that such matters fell within the judicial domain under the country’s Constitution and that the executive was constitutionally prohibited from intervening in individual cases.

Heil said that although Amoon had been spared the death penalty, efforts were continuing to protect him from possible reprisals.