The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> From COL [repost] need your immediate re

From COL [repost] need your immediate re

Posted by Jeff (Guest) jeff@attoz.com - Wednesday, October 22 2003, 22:22:23 (EDT)
from 69.14.23.37 - d14-69-37-23.try.wideopenwest.com

Commercial -

Windows XP -

Netscape
Website:
Website title:

Need Your Immediate Response

[ Chaldeans Discussion Forum ]

Written by Joseph T. Kassab on 20 Oct 2003 20:51:16:

October 20, 2003

To: Joseph Kassab

From: Nina Shea, Center For Religious Freedom, Washington D.C.

Re: Iraq Constitution

Dear Joseph:

Regarding Iraq’s constitution drafting process, the contest is on.

In Iraq’s 1925 Constitution, which Mr. Bremer told me is likely to be a model on religion for the new constitution, religion is addressed in
Article 13. This article states that: 1) “Islam is the official religion of the State.” And, 2) that everyone has “freedom of conscience and freedom
to practise the various forms of worship, in conformity with accepted customs.”

It emphatically does not grant the individual right to religious freedom – as defined in international law. Both of these issues entail important
concepts about freedom. Most people, including apparently Mr. Bremer, think of religious freedom as being a group right to worship only.

Here are some talking points:

· There is no set meaning for the declaration “Islam is the state religion.” It is interpreted different ways in each Muslim state. It is used to
justify a whole spectrum of policies for Islamization – everything from discrimination against Christians and non-Muslims in history and cultural
textbooks, and in government employment opportunities and benefits, to the outright application of sharia law and state-sanctioned persecution of
religious minorities, like in Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan. It will be a portal for entry by the Shiite fundamentalists. Comparing this construct with
established religion in the UK today is a false analogy: Muslims in the UK have equal rights as citizens in every way (outside of being monarch),
the UK is a liberal democracy, and Christianity has had its Reformation. The same cannot be said of the Arab countries that specify Islam as the
state religion. There is no good model that upholds religious freedom among the states that specify Islam as the state religion – all violate the
basic human rights of non-Muslims. President Bush has articulated a vision in which Iraq is to be the new paradigm for the Arab Middle East; full
rights to religious freedom will be the lynchpin of this new paradigm of democracy and freedom. We should not be copying the language of the
constitutions of the other Arab states.

· While all Arab states (except Lebanon and Syria) have constitutions specifying Islam as the state religion, a number of other Muslim states do
not, including, not coincidentally, the most free and democratic -- Turkey and Indonesia.

· While the US is not an imperial force, our officials have already laid down the law on a number of issues. They have insisted that the Kurds
take no action to antagonize Turkey; that Shiites and Sunnis work together on the Governing Council; and that the country adopt a constitution
before holding governmental elections. The issue of religious freedom fits into this category. We should make it non-negotiable.

· Some of our policy makers think of religious freedom as amounting to no more than freedom of various religious groups to worship. US
Coalition administrators are now reportedly insisting that “religious tolerance” be stated in the constitution. This is not adequate. Religious
freedom, under international as well as US law, means far more: for example, the freedoms to distribute and print literature, to educate children
in a faith of the parent’s choosing, to travel to international conferences, to meet with co-religionists from abroad, to raise money, freedom from
discrimination, etc.

· Virtually every Christian religious leader, Chaldeans and Assyrians alike, interviewed by Dr. Paul Marshall, the Senior Fellow of the Center
for Religious Freedom, in Iraq last summer told him that a guarantee of mere freedom of worship, and not full religious freedom, is
unacceptable. They want the Constitution to guarantee full rights to religious freedom for all individuals.

· Some think of religious freedom as an issue that in Muslim societies is only relevant to Christian minorities. (As a key State Department
official last year asked me about Afghanistan, “Why worry about religious freedom, Afghanistan is 99.9% Muslim.”) Chaldean and Assyrian
Christians as well as the other minority religious groups that comprise three percent of Iraq’s population do indeed have a great interest in
ensuring their rights. But it is also crucially important that Muslims be given religious freedom and it is directly related to our own security.

· Islamic law has never clearly differentiated between a dissenter, a heretic and an apostate. The very ambiguity of the definition of blasphemy
serves as a useful device for the state to exert absolute power. In Saudi Arabia, criticism of Islam is forbidden, apostasy a capital crime, and
members of the Shia minority branch of Islam have been beheaded for blasphemy. But the problem is not just with the Wahhabis. In Sudan, an
influential Muslim reformer, Mahmoud Muhammad Taha, was executed for apostasy, and an entire ethnic group, the moderate, pluralistic-minded
Nuba Mountain Muslims were declared apostate for failing to take up the government’s jihad against Sudan’s non-Muslim south and ordered
killed. Last year, Hashem Aghajari, a leading voice in Iran’s reform movement, was convicted of blasphemy for calling for moderation of that
sharia system. Pakistan’s blasphemy law, with a mandatory death penalty, is notorious for victimizing dissident Muslims and Christians.
Unbelievably in Afghanistan last summer, the US-supported government brought blasphemy charges against two Afghan journalists who wrote an
article critically examining the concept of “Islamic democracy,” and last year its Supreme Court charged one of Pres. Karzai’s cabinet ministers
with blasphemy for objecting to Islamic law, forcing her to leave her post. We must ensure that Iraq’s Muslims have the freedom to debate
issues such as sharia, Islamic democracy, women’s rights, pluralism, etc., without being branded heretics or blasphemers and
punished. Without individual rights to religious freedom – the right to change one’s beliefs – Muslims in the Middle East may never
be able to initiate the evolution of a more tolerant, pluralistic, pro-American Islam. This is why religious freedom is the lynchpin of
the whole enterprise.

· It is just as important to insist that certain statements on Islam be kept out of the Constitution. For example, the draft of Afghanistan’s
constitution (like in Iran) states something to the effect that “no law may conflict with Islam.” This would be devastating to our project in
rebuilding Iraq as a democracy because it would allow non-elected Islamic jurists or clerics to veto laws by duly elected representatives.

***

There should be no language qualifying religious freedom except that which is specified under
international law, such as are necessary for public order, general welfare, etc. Iraq needs a
strong statement guaranteeing religious freedom in its bill of rights section of the Constitution.
It is bewildering to think that the U.S. allowed Afghanistan’s new constitution to be drafted (with
U.S. taxpayer support) without a religious freedom provision in its bill of rights! This must not
happen in Iraq, too! The best language would be article 18 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. It also has the benefit of being internationally accepted by the UN. Article 18
was drafted by the Lebanese intellectual Charles Malik. But, the issue is more complicated than
simply asserting religious freedom. Other provisions in the constitution cannot be drafted to
undermine the bill of rights provisions. There is also the question of whether to include Art. 18’s
reference to “chang[ing] religion or belief; ” there is the concern that this would raise a red flag
to the Shiite fundamentalists and it is not included explicitly in other constitutions around the
world. Perhaps it would be more strategic to drop the “changing religion or belief” clause and
instead include a specific provision barring the criminalization of blasphemy.

I aim to hold a conference of Iraqi Christians in Washington on Oct 29 or 30 to discuss these matters
further. I hope you will participate.

Article 18
Universal Declaration of Human Rights

“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and
freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and
observance.”

---------------------
-- Jeff

- BACK TO INDEX - REPLY - QUOTE - EDIT - DELETE -

The full topic:
No replies.

Accept: text/xml,application/xml,application/xhtml+xml,text/html;q=0.9,text/plain;q=0.8,video/x-mng,image/png,image/jpeg,image/g...
Accept-charset: ISO-8859-1, utf-8;q=0.66, *;q=0.66
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate, compress;q=0.9
Accept-language: en-us, en;q=0.50
Connection: keep-alive
Content-length: 9714
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Keep-alive: 300
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf/rkvsf_core.php?.5gqu.
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02