(To receive a Word copy of this report, please email: cmdr@sifre.org.uk)
The Archbishop
of Canterbury's observer at the United Nations, Archdeacon Taimalelagi
Fagamalama Tuatagaloa-Matalavea from Somoa, (Tai) asked for guidance concerning
the attitudes of Muslims and Christians respectively to democracy, governance
and citizenship and other related issues.
How much shared understanding was there? Would there be a clash of cultures? In response to Tai's request, Amedee Turner QC, former MEP for
Suffolk, and a member of Tai's support group, arranged Round Table Discussions
(RTDs) in various parts of USA and in the UK.
To find
out how much agreement actually exists between the Muslim and the Christian
world-views in the area of global relations.
To
identify appropriate ways of expressing ideas, in language which is equally
congenial to Christians and Muslims.
To offer
the insights gained through the discussions to Tai, to inform her work as an
Observer at the United Nations.
The
topics listed include: democracy, freedom and self-government, civil society,
human rights, globally consistent justice and equity, respect for law and the
rule of law, materialism, cultural specificity.
Amadee
Turner approached James Atwell, Dean of Bury St. Edmunds with a proposal to set
up Christian/Muslim discussions on these themes in Suffolk. They held a meeting on 27 January 2004 with
Elizabeth Moore, Lay Education and Training Adviser of the Diocese of St.
Edmundsbury and Ipswich, and Cynthia Capey, Hon. Faiths Officer of Suffolk Inter-Faith
Resource who agreed to draw up an appropriate scheme together.
Although
the initiative for these particular Christian/Muslim discussions came through
Amadee Turner at the behest of the Archbishop of Canterbury's observer at the
United Nations, Cynthia and Elizabeth felt it was important to appreciate the
local context and to integrate this initiative into the inter-faith work that
was already going on in Suffolk. They
proposed to have 2 groups for Suffolk (one in Bury and one in Ipswich),
commencing in the Autumn 2004. The
Ipswich discussions would build on existing dialogue between interested bodies
and would connect to the regular Forums of Faith. The Bury ones would seek to draw in new people as speakers and
participants and to involve Churches Together in Bury and the St. Edmundsbury
Borough Council as partners.
The
subject matter would be approached under four main topics
Each
session would be introduced by speakers with a competence in the subject
matter, to stimulate informed debate.
Participants would include Muslims from various backgrounds, and
Anglicans together with representatives of other Christian groups. It was hoped that there would be some degree
of continuity between the 2 groups and that it would be possible to set up
joint focus groups in the Autumn of 2005 to follow through particular interests
and concerns.
The
Ipswich series was launched by a Forum of Faiths public seminar on "What
do the Faiths teach about Justice" in the Crown Courts, Ipswich. It was followed up by 2 discussion groups on
Democracy and Human Rights and culminated in a Forum of Faiths seminar on
"What do the Faiths Teach about Democracy?" This was held in the Council Chamber of Endeavour House (HQ of
Suffolk County Council). The Ipswich
series aimed at a wider audience in order to reflect the multi-faith nature of
the community within which any Muslim/Christian dialogue takes place. Two
booklets have been published by SIFRE which contain the texts of the speakers
at the two Forums of Faith.
The Bury
group met on 4 Tuesday evenings in the early summer 2005 and the series was
incorporated into the programme of the Cathedral Education Group. Keynote speakers, Muslim and Christian,
introduced the topics. Panel members
from both faiths were invited to question and 'draw out' the speakers. Questions and discussion followed from the
audience.
The
keynote speakers came mostly from the Bury area of West Suffolk, but Muslims
from Ipswich were involved as keynote speakers and on the panel. Churches Together in Bury St. Edmunds also
provided panel members. The overall
audience came from a wide area of the county and included people of many
different churches and of several faiths. Well over 100 people were involved.
q Speakers' Profiles
q Notes on Session 1 - Globalisation and Consumerism
q Notes on Session 2 - Governance and Democratic Society
q Notes on Session 3 - Human Rights
q Notes on Session 4 - Justice and the Rule of Law
q Some Conclusions
q Islam and Its Peaceful Treatment of People of Other Faiths
Sue
Young is the World
Development Adviser for the Anglican Diocese of St. Edmundsbury and Ipswich. In
this voluntary role she is active in encouraging the church to campaign for a
fair deal for the world's poor. She is
a long time supporter of the Campaign for Trade Justice, Jubilee Debt Campaign,
Christian Aid and the World Development Movement. Sue's career has been in town planning, most recently developing
regional transport policy for the East of England Regional Assembly.
Asaf
Hussain is
currently Assistant Headteacher at Ixworth Middle School where he teaches 9-13
year olds a mixture of Mathematics, History and Geography. He has a degree in
Economics and Geography. He was born and raised in Bradford, West Yorkshire but
has worked and lived in Suffolk since 1995. His primary interests are in the
fields of Development Geography and in the global 'North/South' divide.
Mike
Dawson is the
Corporate Director for Community at St Edmundsbury Borough Council with
responsibility for the management of the Council's Environmental Health,
Strategic Housing and Leisure Services, he is also the lead officer for the
Council's Diversity agenda. Part of
Mike's role at St Edmundsbury is to encourage all communities to fully engage
in the governance issues relating to local community affairs and service
provision. He is also keen to facilitate people and communities to reach their
full potential and has recently established within the Community Directorate,
the Community Development Unit to lead this work.
Mojlum
Khan has a degree
in Business and Social Policy and work experience in retail management and
public transport. He is the manager of
the Bangladeshi Support Centre in Ipswich and visiting Imam at Hollesley Bay
Prison. He is a writer and literary
critic and a regular lecturer in Islam for SIFRE. Mojlum studied Islamic Sciences and Qur'anic Arabic at the Hijaz
College and is currently writing a book on Islamic Intellectual History.
Muhammad
Manwar Ali,
popularly known as Abu Muntasir in the Islamic community, has a B.Sc.(Hons) and
M.Sc.in Computer Science from London University and has worked in the IT
industry for around 25 years. Manwar
has also been involved in Islamic work for over 20 years across the country and
has extensive experience in teaching and Muslim social affairs. He is
especially loved by university students' Islamic Societies. His work has led to the establishment of the
UK Charity JIMAS (www.jimas.org) which reflects his activities in detail. He has successfully balanced professional
and voluntary Islamic activities while being blessed with a large family.
Gitti
Dunham works in
the field of human rights as a voluntary activist. She is on the International Issues Sub-committee of the Board of
Amnesty International UK and has a specific responsibility for the Central Asian
Republics. She also interprets for
Kurdish Asylum Seekers. She is a
convert from Islam to Christianity and attempts to relate her work in the field
of human rights to her faith as a Christian.
Graeme
Garden is a
Methodist Local Preacher. He was a Magistrate for 32 years, a member of the
Board of Visitors of Highpoint Prison, and Member of the Board of Suffolk
Probation. Since 1988 he has been a Member of the Commonwealth Magistrates and
Judges Association. He has recently
been appointed to HM Courts Board with effect from 1st April 2005.
Ahmed
Elsharkawy has a
degree in Medical Biochemistry and Islamic qualifications obtained from Egypt.
He is currently a full-time Imam at Highpoint Prison in Newmarket and member of
the trustees board of Ar-Rahman Academy for Cultural and Religious Activities
based in London. He is a reader on
Islam and science with a particular interest in Qur'anic Sciences.
|
Hosting: |
Andrew
Todd, Cathedral Education Group and Sub-Dean of St Edmundsbury Cathedral |
|
Chair: |
Liz
Pichon, Honorary Deputy Faiths Officer, SIFRE |
|
Speakers: |
Sue Young, World Development Adviser for the Anglican Diocese
of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich |
|
Panel: |
Claudia Pichon and Andrew Banbury, pupils of County
Upper School |
|
Guest: |
Amedee
Turner QC |
Amedee Turner
introduced the discussions, which have been set up as dialogues between lay
Muslims and Christians, discussing issues of global justice, democracy and the
rule of law. 80 of these discussions have been set up around the world, and the
results will form the basis of a report to the UN on whether there is evidence
for a so-called 'clash of civilizations' between Islam and the West.
The
speakers were introduced by Liz Pichon and the format explained: each speaker
would give a 15 minute presentation on the topic of Globalisation and
Consumerism and questions would follow from the panel and the floor.
She has
been asked to define Consumerism and Globalisation, their interrelationship and
importance in society and the relevance of Christian beliefs and values in
considering them.
From her
perspective as an economist, she defines Globalisation in terms of the
developments in technology, transport and communication which have taken place
over recent years. There is also the
definition used loosely by the general public that Globalisation expresses the
general idea that the world has become a 'small place'.
Globalisation
and Consumerism do interrelate in our world but it is not necessary or
inevitable that they should go hand in hand.
It is in theory possible to have one without the other.
There is
a tendency to think of Globalisation as inevitable but in SY's opinion it is a
result of deliberate policy which proceeds from neo-liberal ideology, as
promoted by the G8 countries which form 12% of the world's population, the
World Bank and the IMF.
Positives:
ease of communication around the world, food transport etc.
Negatives:
fragility of the financial market has a destabilizing influence, manufacturing
jobs moved out of the UK, small subsistence farmers dependent on large
multinationals, spread of contagious diseases such as SARS, the environmental
impact of global travel.
The
losers are the poor who are vulnerable to shifts in international prices. In recent years the number living on 1$ per
day has grown from 1.1 billion to 1.3 billion.
We are
involved in these issues through our shopping and travel choices.
Consumerism
is selfishness which causes the problems of Globalisation - she sees
Consumerism as worse than Globalisation.
We should perhaps be thinking in terms of sufficiency of consumption.
Lastly,
the effect of Globalisation can be exaggerated. A lot of communities live at the purely local level and this
number is increasing. They are isolated
from the rest of the world.
On
Consumerism - in the Bible it is clear that our role is to love God and our
neighbour, and the Bible has a bias for the poor. We are encouraged to build up our treasure in heaven and share the
world's gifts with each other.
We need
more of a people-centred, spiritual approach.
On
Globalisation - we are told the importance of our neighbour, defined as anyone
who needs our love. We should think of
how our behaviour affects others, buying coffee, investing, etc. More importantly, we should speak out about
the impact on the poor of the speed by which money is moved around the world,
e.g. by moving a call centre from one country to another. The poor are vulnerable to such changes and
also to changes in the environment. We
should remember the prophetic tradition in the Bible - should consider how
these violent swings could be counterbalanced.
The
doctrine of the universality of the Church already embraces the idea that we
should 'think globally, act locally'.
Jesus is the true vine and we are the branches, connected to Christ and
to each other.
Christian
roles include advocacy for the poor, prayer, and sacramental action by local
action against injustice (Jesus driving out money changers, relating to the
outcast - lepers, women, children).
1. If
Globalisation has sufficient safety nets is it acceptable or should it be
abandoned for another model? How strong
should the nets be? We should reform
the IMF, World Bank and the rules of international trade - the rich nations
shouldn't impose their trade rules on the whole world. More power should be given to the UN to
arrange global redistribution of wealth, as this is done within nations and
smaller communities.
2.
Deglobalisation? Concentrate on
production for local communities rather than for export, social security,
micro-credit systems and local currencies.
We can engage with this on a local level.
AH has
lived in Suffolk for ten years and so speaks as a member of the local community
and also a member of the (small) Muslim community in Bury St Edmunds.
He began
his presentation with a quotation from the beginning of the Koran:
In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate
Praise belongs to God, the Lord of all Being,
the All-merciful, the All-compassionate,
the Master of the Day of Doom.
Thee only we serve; to Thee alone we pray for succour.
Guide us in the straight path,
the path of those whom Thou has blessed,
not of those against whom Thou art wrathful,
nor of those who are astray.
1. the
increase in trade around the world, especially large companies trading in many
different countries;
2. the
goods and services and social and cultural influences being the same all over
the world.
Consumerism
is the preoccupation of society with the acquisition of goods as the chief
object.
Consumerism
(or should it be hedonism) is not seen so much as a matter for debate.
Globalisation
is more controversial, with negative and positive views of it. He defines it as the increased flow of
capital from the South (or developing world) to the North (the rich nations).
Consumerism
is exemplified in the 'bling' culture of extreme consumption and show, e.g. big
jewellery, expensive cars etc.
It is
possible to view this positively if there is fair and just trade. However, this isn't the case. Large Northern operations have the advantage
over the Southern ones. There is a huge
difference between the cost of raw materials and the cost of the finished
product on the open market. The rise of
the multinational companies brings the profits back to the North.
Islam is
suspicious of global governance, e.g. GATT, the IMF, and the World Bank.
The
Koran stresses the importance of community.
Consumerism
is anathema to Islam. The Prophet lived
a simple life, which is seen as the ideal, with few material goods, which can
become idols.
The
world cannot support consumerism. Western
technology exploits the other 90% of the world.
Consumerism
has created an artificial demand - advertising tells people what they need and
they believe it.
Consumerism's
creed is that we live to consume.
Islam
teaches about the responsibility of businesses. The 'Hadith' - sayings of the Prophet - emphasize righteous
trade.
Big
businesses and governments have created the environment for Globalisation,
which has its roots in colonisation.
Globalisation
is not about goods flowing outwards to the rest of the world but capital
flowing inwards to a few control centres.
q Communication - technology has made it cheaper and easier
q Foreign Direct Investment - it has helped to reduce poverty where people have been able to take advantage of it.
q Environmental degradation - unrestrained logging
q Bigger poverty disparities
q People more materialistic
q Global Consumerism now forming a homogenous global culture
q Education is management and skills based - traditional academic subjects are neglected, as is morality
q Double standards in the way Western governments deal with human rights
q Diseases such as TB more rampant
Sura 83
v1-26
q the wicked will be called to account - those who use false measures
q a record will be kept of sins
q there will be a Day of Judgement
q the wicked will go to hell
q the good will be rewarded
Sura 2
v282
q Deals with the practicalities of trade
q provisions for writing down and witnessing contracts
q protecting the vulnerable from exploitation
q transactions take place in the presence of God.
In Islam
trade is strongly advocated - the Prophet was a trader. Trade should be fair and just.
Islamic
rules about trade include a tax of 2.5% on income and the practice of usury - charging
interest - is not permitted. This is
relevant when considering world debt - there is no safety net for the poor.
From the
panel:
CP: (To
AH) Does Islam teach that if someone cannot pay back a debt it should be
written off?
AH: It
depends on the context. Originally, if
the money for the loan was from the public treasury, then this might happen.
CP: Is
the prohibition about charging interest reflected in the laws of Muslim
countries?
AH: Pure
Islam would teach this. However,
colonialism has changed the financial systems of many Islamic countries in
relation to charging interest.
AB: (To
SY) Should Christians tithe (i.e. give one tenth of their income to the church
or to charity)?
SY: Yes,
this is a good idea on a personal level and should work as a minimum. However, it is not generally put forward in
churches. The Church is nervous about
talking about giving money.
Q from the floor:
Does the prohibition of usury have the potential to cause a clash
of civilizations?
AH: The
practice is different from the theory in Islam in relation to usury. No Islamic government prohibits usury
absolutely. The potential for a clash
of civilizations is there but it is not very strong, considering that the five
major banks are developing Islamic finance products.
Q from the floor:
Not
a question but a comment: the two presentations we have heard are very similar
- almost interchangeable, apart from the quotations from the Bible and the
Qur'an.
AH: Yes,
there is a lot of common ground on this issue - I'm not sure about the other
three topics.
AT: Islam
and Christianity teach about lowering our standard of living - how do we
respond to our position of being compromised?
AH: Islam
has seen both sides of this - both luxurious living and very plain living - I think
we should aim to take the middle road.
Q from the floor:
There
is a difference here between personal morality and public policy. We should make our own decisions on an
individual basis about this and not let small groups control public policy.
SY: I
agree that personal morality is important but I would disagree with the view
that we shouldn't try to stop things where we don't see them working. At the moment the market is in control.
Same questioner:
In
that case we should not vote for the EU as they have protectionist policies in
place. I am just warning about the harm
that can come from interfering in the market.
Q from the floor:
We
have influence when we work together.
Different denominations should seek common cause with each other in
working together on these issues.
Q from the floor:
Consumerism
is surely not all bad when the development of the fair trade movement shows
that the consumer can influence Globalisation.
SY: Fair
trade is only a part of the picture - we should also be looking at supporting
local trade because of the environmental impact of transporting goods.
AH: Fair
trade is only chipping away at the edges of the problem. We should make sure every trade is just and
businesses should be held to account.
Elizabeth Moore:
Do
any other countries manage better than the UK in giving people higher values to
live for?
AH: There
are Scandinavian countries such as Norway.
Huge amounts are given in aid to the South. Mostly groups rather than nations. Most countries are based on the capitalist model.
SY: The
UK is a culprit in protectionism. Poor
countries are forced to open their borders to international trade.
Q from the floor:
Is
the West guilty of thinking that we know what other people want? Islam represents the opposite ideal -
couldn't the countries in the Middle East exert pressure on the West by pulling
the plug on the oil supply?
AH: It's
more complicated than that because the Saudis have a lot of money invested in
the US economy. But yes, some Muslims
are worried about the seduction of Western materialism.
Other members of the panel were
invited to give final comments.
Elahe Mojdehi:
I
don't think there is a clash of civilizations, but a misunderstanding. We
should be civilized towards each other.
It is good that there are dialogues between Christians and Muslims.
AE: Muslims
and Christians agree that by the laws of God we need to live in a fair
society. Muslims refer to Christians
and Jews as people of God, people of the Book.
They recognize the same God and have many things in common. There is no clash of civilizations. Globalisation and Consumerism have been
introduced by secular systems. We
should go back to the law of God.
|
Hosting: |
Very
Revd James Atwell, Dean of the Cathedral of St James |
|
Chair: |
Cynthia
Capey, Honorary Faiths Officer, Suffolk Inter-Faith Resource (SIFRE) |
|
Speakers: |
Mojlum
Khan, Manager of Bangladeshi Support Centre, Imam for Hollesley Bay |
|
Panel: |
Elahe
Mojdehi, SIFRE Community Liaison Officer |
|
Guest: |
Amedee
Turner QC |
The Very
Revd James Atwell, Dean of the Cathedral of St James, welcomed participants.
Amedee Turner spoke briefly to explain the origins of the Dialogues and the
international process of which they are part, which he had initiated. He noted
that he had not come across any Dialogue which involved as many people as ours
in Bury! Cynthia Capey introduced
herself as Chairman, and introduced speakers and panel members.
Mojlum
prefaced his talk with some Arabic words from the Koran, where Moses asks God
to make him a good speaker so that he can go and persuade Pharaoh.
Mojlum
began by trying to define the words Governance and Democracy. He reminded us
that democracy comes from Greek words meaning rule of the people. Governance is
then the practical implementation of that.
Democracy and governance are tools for how people want to be ruled, and
how they interact with their leaders. Democracy is a mechanism for ensuring
checks and balances; Islam has no objections to that. There is no single 'right'
system of government and no single style of democracy - even in the Western
world systems of democracy differ. So it is hard to be clear about what is
meant when we speak of democracy being introduced to Iraq, Iran etc.
Mohammed
did not nominate a successor or lay down structures or institutions for
government. His guidelines. His successors were elected through a process of
consultation, with people chosen for their ability, rectitude and piety, not
because of their wealth, creed or family background.
Mojlum
emphasised that there has always been a gap between ideal and reality. There is
a good deal of chaos in some Muslim countries. However, although Muslims have
not practised democracy, they have not stopped thinking deeply about the
processes of government, and he gave examples of Muslim scholars and
philosophers who had explored these themes.
Mojlum
said that Islam sees law as a divine injunction. There are some fundamental
principles which are regarded as absolute. The judiciary is separate from the executive
in Islam.
Many
Muslims are struggling to come to terms with modernity and need help with
relating contemporary experience to the values and principles of their faith.
Mike
explained that he was speaking from the perspective of a local government
officer. We take for granted a democratic system in the UK though we may not
understand it fully, nor realise how it is different from other forms of
democracy.
Mike
emphasised the importance of engagement. He quoted Pericles in ancient Athens
who defined a citizen as someone who is interested not just in his own affairs
but in the affairs of state. Engagement means we must listen to people and meet
their needs. National and local issues may not be given the same importance eg
in newsreels, but it is the local ones which impact on people's daily lives.
In
trying to define the task of Governance, Mike suggested it involves 4 things:
Engaging with a community to establish its values, needs and vision; The
provision of services; Working in Partnership with a range of agencies; The
provision of systems of local government.
Mike
quoted from James Atwell who had said on recent TV programme that the ability
to practise faith in this country is a birthright. Mike suggested it remains so
only in so far as people go on believing this is important - this is an example
of engagement, or the danger from a lack of it.
Faith
issues can get complicated when they overlap with cultural issues; also those
of faith need to be aware of those who have no faith, and of those who have
faith but a distorted and damaging version of it.
Panel-Christine Surely when any 'absolute' has to
be put into practice that involves interpretation, and then it can no longer be
absolute, ie the same every time and for everywhere.
(second
question) In a multi-faith multi-cultural society how can you implement values
which matter deeply to people of faith but are not shared with others of
different/no faith?
Mojlum Muslims are well aware of the
mutability of human beings and their environment, that all is in a state of
flux. However there are certain things which do not change. These values are
not necessarily peculiar to Muslims.
(Chair: Please give an example) An example is how I should treat my
neighbour - the Islamic understanding is that I serve my neighbour not from any
selfish motive but from a desire to become closer to God. Stealing is wrong,
not just because I might get caught but because of the 'policeman in my heart'.
Panel-Elahe European countries and Islamic
countries all have some way to go in their practice of democracy.
Panel-Sarah Although there is no democratic
Muslim country, democracy and Islam are not in conflict.
Mike Democracy provides a forum for a
robust exchange of views. But to work,
this needs not just a system but an awareness of others in the system that
differ from you. The differences between those in the audience are not
fundamental differences.
How
history is taught in schools is significant; we too often teach history from
our own viewpoint and ignore others'
history, eg the contribution of Islamic countries to matters of public
health.
Q Would the panel agree that it is
essential to have a clear separation between state and religion in a multi
cultural society?
Mojlum Much of mediaeval Western world
was a theocracy. Muslim world for most of its history has had a hereditary
kingship. The relationship between
church and state seems to work OK in
the UK
Q But in the UK we are not governed
by religious law.
Mike But every Act of Parliament is
prefaced by a reference to the lords temporal and spiritual.
Q Whether or not law if of divine
origin, the question of interpretation is always at the heart of it. Eg what
'killing' means is interpreted in various ways so that some forms of killing
are 'accepted' in our society.
Q Following on from the question of
engagement - what would the Panel suggest Muslims and Christians can contribute
to society to enrich it from the best of their own traditions?
Panel
Martin William
Penn berated those who wanted to leave their society for a purer place. Issues
of morality keep bubbling up; there is a question about how far people of faith
should get involved in political processes and advise their faithful how to
vote
Mojlum There is nothing to prevent Christians
and Muslims working together for the common good.
Q that is good to hear, because there
is concern about Christian minorities being persecuted in some places, and this
gives hope for resolving this.
Q What do we mean by 'the people'?
Is there such a thing? Haven't we become completely individualistic? How can we
declare the 'will of the people;' in our own culture? Compared with (say) the
black peoples of S Africa, and the West Indians in S London who have a strong
sense of belonging to a people.
Mike Individualism has grown in many
places and structures for building community have to be introduced to them, but
in some parts of rural E Anglia there is still community spirit.
Q Serving our neighbour is a
principle which could be used positively in Government. It is a pity that
rulers mostly appeal to our own self-interest, eg in current pre-election
period.
Mojlum In his last sermon Mohammed
reminded people that they are all descended from Adam and that Adam came from
clay. We are related not just by blood but by our divine origin. This is like
invisible glue which holds us all together. The height of aspiration is not
wealth but closeness to God.
Q We should not speak about two
worlds but our one world. The Iraqis' passionate commitment to vote was
impressive.
Q Differences between Muslims
culture and our own are not so great as those between our values and those
emanating from Brussels: there is a worrying anti-religious movement there,
evidenced in attitudes to euthanasia, and the lack of disabled people visible
in the community in Belgium.
The
Chairman expressed appreciation to the speakers, and the panel and the audience
for their contributions and reminded people of the 3rd Dialogue the following
week.
|
Hosting: |
Philip
Webber of the Cathedral Education Group |
|
Chair: |
Cynthia
Capey, Honorary Faiths Officer, Suffolk Inter-Faith Resource (SIFRE) |
|
Speakers: |
M.
Manwar Ali, President of Jimas, Muslim Education Charity |
|
Panel: |
Elahe
Mojdehi, SIFRE Community Liaison Officer |
A member
of the Cathedral Education Group welcomed participants. Cynthia briefly explained the background to
the dialogue for the benefit of newcomers and introduced the speakers and the
panel.
Human
Rights derive from the inherent dignity and worth of the human person. They are universal, inalienable and equal.
This
means that they are inherent in every human being: they cannot be taken away
from, or surrendered by, any person.
Everyone has these rights in the same measure - regardless of race,
colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, poverty, birth or status.
These
rights are enshrined in international and regional laws, the most famous and
most globally applicable being the United Nations Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. Every member country of
the United Nations (there are currently 191 member states) on signing the
Charter of the United Nations, which is a legally binding treaty, has also
agreed in principal to uphold the Universal Declaration of HR.
This
Declaration, which contains 30 articles, was adopted by the United Nations
General Assembly on 10th December 1948.
The date is commemorated every year, worldwide, as HR Day. The 30 articles establish the civil and
political, economic, social and cultural rights of all people.
The main
purpose of the Declaration of HR is to deal with a particular type of harm,
namely the abuse of power by the state and officials of the state. HR standards are intended to prevent people
from becoming victims of such abuse and to secure redress for them if they do
become victims. Some HR violations are
criminal acts in themselves, such as torture and unlawful killings by state
officials.
It is
important to emphasise that an HR violation is a particular category of harm
which can only be committed by a person dignified by the authority of the
state. Neither a criminal nor a
terrorist has that dignity.
When
criminals or terrorists injure or kill people, they commit serious criminal
offences, but they do not commit HR violations. It is against the background of international HR laws that
Amnesty International campaigns and holds states and their officials to
account.
During
the 20 years that I have been a member of Amnesty International, our mission
has expanded its boundaries, as has our global membership.
From
campaigning on prisoners of conscience, torture and the death penalty, we have
expanded our mission to include our current global campaigns, such as Stop
Violence Against Women, The Arms Trade and Corporate Responsibility.
As a
global movement, our membership is made up of people of many different
religious beliefs, including those who have no religious affiliations of any
kind. I am a HR activist because I
passionately believe that the violation of the rights of other directly
threatens the human dignity of the victim and dehumanises the perpetrator. But, equally passionately, I am a HR
activist because I believe it to be incumbent upon me as a Christian.
To
illustrate this, I am faced with the difficult task of unravelling before you
the contents of my faith which, I suppose, is something akin to the baring of
one's soul. Before doing so, I must
point out that I have no theological qualifications; neither do I presume to
speak for other Christians. Just as
each human consciousness is unique, so is each individual's understanding of
his or her faith.
The
great religions of the world lay down the fundamental doctrines of their
faiths, but each individual's understanding of them remains unique to that
person. This is particularly true of Christianity which, unlike Judaism and
Islam, is not based on law. This
exposes the mystical doctrines of the Christian faith more to individual
interpretation.
Those of
you here, who are familiar with the New Testament, do not require me to tell
you that Christ is represented as one who brings us liberation and that his
work and teachings are chiefly directed towards the poor, the needy, the
outcast and the marginalized. In
Matthew 25. v 35 He even identifies with them to the extent that He says:
"...when I was hungry, you gave me food;
when thirsty, you gave me drink;
when I was a stranger, you took me into your home'
when naked, you clothed me;
when I was ill you came to my help,
when in prison you visited me."
Rich
though the New Testament is with examples of Christ's mission to the weak and
the victim, in order to illustrate the link between my faith and my work in the
field of HR, I need to delve deeper into the most basic doctrines required of
any believer and without which there can be no orthodoxy. I need to demonstrate how my understanding
of the Christian revelation, compels me to do what I do. For this we will examine together some of
the fundamental doctrines of Christianity and the implications they have on how
we perceive the world and our place in it.
What are
some of these fundaments doctrines?
q That God is the creator of all things, seen and unseen and the his nature is love
q That God was incarnate in Jesus Christ
q That the Holy Spirit is ever present on earth, working in the affairs of men
q
That God's ultimate goal is to build His Kingdom on the
earth. Hence we pray: "Thy
Kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."
Each of
these statements, as I understand them, reveals a God who is intensely involved
in nature, in man, in the affairs of men and in the whole historical
process. Moreover, a God who gives
self-revelation through historical events.
A God
whose nature is love is forever active and creative; for love is not an
emotion, but a creative process, a process through which the creator has
forever placed Himself at risk through His creation. This makes the very act of creation a sacramental mystery. It means also that the creation of the world
not only initiates history, it initiates at the same time the human struggle
and, more importantly, the process of salvation. It is in time, in history and as man in Christ that God fulfils
his ultimate revelation and, creation in turn, acquires its full meaning.
The full
significance of God's action in history can be understood only when it is put
in the context of the eschatological promises, which are the elimination of
misery and exploitation as a sign of the coming of the Kingdom. Hence, the very struggle for a just world in
which there is no oppression or servitude is itself a process which proclaims
its approach. This task of building the
Kingdom on earth, which was initiated by Christ, has been entrusted to us. For we, with Christ, are joint heirs of it.
My
conclusion from this is not so much that one day, if we are worthy, we will
escape from the earth to be with God in heaven, but that God is willing,
desiring and active through history to establish His Kingdom here on earth,
with us as the chief architects of that kingdom. However,
this
eschatological promise cannot be fulfilled unless we are willing to become
involved in the task of building it.
Christ
is not just the Truth, He is also the Way.
The Truth is not just a matter for contemplation, for then it will
become static. The Truth must also be
the Way. The process of building the
Kingdom, of ridding the world of injustice and servitude requires a total involvement
with the human condition: humanity in
the context of history. This demands an
identification with those who suffer, as Christ himself did, even unto death.
The true
Eucharistic feast is partaking of the broken body of humanity with which God
has already identified through the broken body of Christ. Otherwise, the memorial service of the
Eucharist of which we partake symbolically in the church will remain nothing
more than just a symbol.
Cynthia
thanked Gitti and observed that the Human Rights of Asylum Seekers were not
fully respected in the UK. As an example,
midwives were reporting that some mothers, made destitute by our asylum system,
were then having their babies removed from them because they were homeless and
couldn't care for them!
(Manwar's
talk was based on this paper, prepared by himself. We are printing it in full here.)
In the
Name of Allah the Most Kind the Most Merciful
Human
Rights as a phrase came into use over a long history of human development and
experience against injustices of many kinds and proportions. In dialogues with
Judaism, Christianity and Islam we do find certain principles and practices
enshrined in them that offer justice, mercy and rights to mankind, but none of
them codify them as a separate institution under the rubric of Human Rights.
Some
people claim that the world first derived the concept of basic human rights
from the Magna Carta of Britain which was drawn up 600 years after the advent
of Islam. The truth is until the 17th century no one argued that the Magna
Carta contained the principles of trial by jury, Habeas Corpus and control by
Parliament of the right of taxation.
Human
rights in the context of Islam are those that are granted by Allah.
In Islam
ensuring what is good and beneficial is of paramount significance. Benefits are
understood to accrue if the objectives of the Islamic Law (Shariah) are met.
The objectives are generally five:
q faith or religion
q life
q reason
q family & descendants
q property
Whatever
assures the preservation of these five goals is deemed beneficial and whatever
fails to preserve them is corruption and wickedness and its removal is
beneficial.
It is a
significant and obvious fact of history that religion has always been the
primary source of mankind's knowledge of morality. No age ever ignored it
except this one.
In Islam
all that is in the Qur'an and the Sunna is, per se, in accordance with human
interest, at large, for the Creator knows, and wants, what is best for human
beings.
Islam is
a complete way of life based on a distinct creed in total submission to Allah.
The outcome one hopes for thereby is success and being blessed in life and
eternal happiness in Paradise avoiding Hell altogether. Islam promotes social
justice, fair distribution of wealth, and acknowledge attempts that make human
agency dominant while at the same time pay respect to God's sovereignty.
To
follow the path prescribed by Allah is for our intelligence what the natural
order is for all the other elements.
If
anyone slew a person -
unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land -
it would be as if he slew the whole people.
[Chapter al-Maidah (5): 32]
Say:
"Come, I will rehearse what Allah has (really) prohibited you from":
do not join anything as equal with Him;
be good to your parents;
do not kill your children on a plea of want -
We provide sustenance for you and for them -
do not come near to shameful deeds, whether open or secret;
do not take not life, which Allah has made sacred,
except by way of justice and law:
thus does He command you, that you may learn wisdom.
[Chapter al-An'am (6): 151]
The word
nafs used in these verses is general and applies to any human being
whatever the person's religion, nationality or race.
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "One
who kills a man under covenant will not even smell the fragrance of
Paradise." [Bukhari]
If any
one saved a life, it would be as if
he saved the life of the whole people.
[Chapter al-Maidah (5): 32]
O you
who believe! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible):
for suspicion in some cases is a sin:
and do not spy on each other.
[Chapter al-Hujurat (49): 12]
O you
who believe! Do not enter houses other than your own,
until you have asked permission and saluted those in them:
that is best for you, in order that you may heed (what is seemly).
[Chapter an-Nur (24): 27]
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) went to the extent
of instructing Muslims that a man should not enter even his own house suddenly
at inopportune time without indicating so that he may avoid seeing e.g., his
mother, sister or daughter in a condition they would not like to be seen.
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) forbade the people
reading others letters.
Protection
of Honour Especially Respect for the Chastity of Women
O ye who
believe! Let not some men among you laugh at others:
it may be that the (latter) are better than the (former):
nor let some women laugh at others:
it may be that the (latter) are better than the (former):
nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other,
nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames:
ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness,
(to be used of one) after he has believed:
and those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong.
O ye who believe! avoid suspicion as much (as possible):
for suspicion in some cases is a sin:
and spy not on each other,
nor speak ill of each other behind their backs.
Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother?
Nay, you would abhor it.
But fear Allah: for Allah is Oft-Returning, Most-Merciful.
[Chapter al-Hujurat (49): 11-12]
Contrast
the above with how the law of defamation works in our society.
A Muslim
must not abuse a woman of any kind, no matter what her religion or camp she
belongs.
Do not come near to adultery:
for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils).
[Chapter
al-Isra (17): 32]
And in
their wealth and possessions (was remembered)
the right of the (needy), him who asked,
and him who (for some reason) was prevented (from asking).
[Chapter adh-dhariyat (51): 19]
This
injunction was given in Makkah where there was not any Muslim society.
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "It
(zakat) will be taken from their rich and given to those in the community in
need." [Bukhari & Muslim]
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "The
ruler is the guardian of him who has nobody to support him." [Abu Dawud]
All
human rights activism in the modern world properly traces its origins back to
the campaigns to abolish the slave trade and then slavery itself.
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "I
shall myself be a plaintiff against three kinds of people on the Day of
Judgment. Of these three, one is he who enslaves a free man, then sells him and
eats (from) this money." [Bukhari]
After
the occupation of America and the West Indies, traffic in slave trade continued
for 350 years. Ports in Africa came to be known as the Slave Coast. According to British authors around 20
million free people were enslaved for the British Colonies between 1680 and
1786. 75,000 alone were sent in 1790 as slave labour. Chained, one on top of
another, on planks 18 inches wide, they were shipped worse than cattle. During
the journey 20% painfully perished. Altogether around a 100 million slaves were
traded by the European countries.
By the
time of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, all the old slaves of Arabia had been
liberated.
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) freed as many as
63 slaves. Aisha freed 67, Abbas liberated 70, Ibn Umar liberated 1000 and Abdur-Rahman
purchased 30,000 and set them all free. The problem of slavery was solved
within 40 years in Arabia.
"The
reason slave trading stopped has nothing to do with a moral crusade or
righteousness, but simply because people felt that the profits to be gained
from not having it far outweighed those ever gained with it. As a result, in
1807, The Abolition of Slave Trade Act was passed, followed in 1833 by the
Abolition of Slavery Act, freeing all slaves in the British Empire and bringing
to an end one of the not so glorious British institutions."
[http://britishhistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa060400a.htm]
It is
well known and clearly understood that in Islam no one can be imprisoned except
in pursuance of justice.
The
Kharijites used to abuse Ali openly and threaten him with murder. Ali would set
them free and tell his officers, "As long as they do not perpetrate
offences against the state, the mere use of abusive language or the threat of
use of force are not such offences for which they can be imprisoned." Abu
Hanifah said that Ali said, "As long as they do not set out on armed
rebellion, the caliph of the faithful will not interfere with them."
No
bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another.
[Chapter
al-An'am (6): 164]
Do not
let the hatred of some people
in (once) shutting you out of the Sacred Mosque
lead you to transgression (and hostility on your part).
[Chapter al-Maidah (5): 2]
O you
who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah,
as witnesses to fair dealing,
and let not the hatred of others to you
make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice.
Be just: that is next to Piety: and fear Allah.
For Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do.
[Chapter al-Maidah (5): 8]
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "I have
been ordered by Allah to dispense justice between you."
No one is above the Law but are equal
in front of it
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "The
nations that lived before you were destroyed by Allah because they punished the
common man for their offences and let their dignitaries go unpunished for their
crimes. I swear by Him in whose Hands is my life, even if Fatima the daughter
of Muhammad had committed this crime (of theft) then I would have amputated her
hand."
O
mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female,
and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other.
Indeed the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah
is (he who is) the most righteous (and heedful) of you.
[Chapter al-Hujurat (49): 13]
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "No
Arab has any superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any
superiority over a black man, or the black man any superiority over the white
man. You are all the children of Adam, and Adam was created from clay."
[Baihaqi]
Islam
recognizes the Right to Co-operate and not, the Right of Association, the Right
to Protest, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Conscience and Conviction,
Protection of Religious Sentiments and the Right to Avoid Sin. The way they are
guarded, permitted or constrained do not necessarily coincide with how they are
preserved in secular constitutions, but as to which system affords them in a
better way is debatable. There is also the vast area of the Rights of Enemies
in Islam which is complete, precise and fully accommodates the goals of the
Shariah outlined earlier. All of these aspects can be readily proven from the
Qur'an and explained through the Sunnah with great clarity.
1) It is
a creed without God - Fifty years after its proclamation, the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights has become the sacred text of what Elie Wiesel has
called a "world-wide secular religion." UN Secretary-General Kofi
Annan has called the Declaration the "yardstick by which we measure human
progress." Human rights has become the major article of faith of a secular
culture that fears it believes in nothing else. If idolatry consists in
elevating any purely human principle into unquestioned absolute, then human
rights look like idolatry.
2) Human
Rights can be suspended and used as a fighting creed. The armed forces of the
Western powers have been busier since 1989 than they ever were during the Cold
War, and the legitimising language for this activity has been the defence of
human rights. The gulf in international law between the non-intervention
language of the UN charter and the interventionist implications of the human
rights covenants has never been bridged. It is now viewed by many as nothing
more than a justification for Western moral imperialism. Economic globalisation
steamrolls over local economies, and moral globalisation - human rights - follows
behind as the legitimising ideology of the global capitalism.
3) In
the secular context we never know why we have them. The way it stands, it only
protects the core of negative freedom, (abuse, oppression, cruelty), it is an
account of what is right not what is good, it is individualistic, and does not
explain why we have human rights. The right to subsistence is as necessary for
human agency as a right against torture.
Article
1 of the Universal Declaration: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity
and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards
one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
It briefly declares many foundations:
Free and equal personhood
Equal dignity
Equal creation or endowment
Equal brotherhood
Human agency
The
Messenger of Allah (upon whom be peace and blessings of God) said, "Each
child is born in a state of fitra, but his parents make him a Jew or a
Christian. It is like the way an animal gives birth to a normal offspring. Have
you ever noticed any (young animal) born mutilated before you mutilate
them?" [Bukhari and Muslim]
We have
bestowed dignity on the children of Adam [...]
and conferred on them special favours, above a great part of Our creation.
[Chapter (17): 70]
4) A
secular defence of human rights depends on the idea of moral reciprocity: that
we judge human actions by the simple test of whether we would wish to be on the
receiving end. Human rights doctrines appear to assume that if the punishments
and incentives of governed societies are taken away, human rights norms will
remind people of the requirements of natural decency. But this assumes that the
capacity to behave decently is a natural attribute. Where is the empirical
evidence that this is the case?
If
reason rationalised the Holocaust, so the argument goes, then only an ethics
deriving its ultimate authority from a higher source than reason can prevent a
Holocaust in the future.
Likewise,
in 1959, Isaiah Berlin argued that in the post-Holocaust era awareness of the
necessity of a moral law is sustained no longer by belief in reason but by the
memory of horror.
5) The
crisis of human rights relates to:
first of
all to our failure to be consistent - to apply human rights criteria to the
strong as well as to the weak;
second to
our related failure to reconcile individual human rights with our commitment to
self-determination and state sovereignty; and
third to
our inability, once we intervene on human rights grounds, to successfully
create the legitimate institutions that alone are the best guarantee of human
rights protection.
6) Human
rights need a theology in order to explain, in the first place, why human
beings have "the right to have rights." Max Stackhouse, a Princeton
theologian, argues that the idea of human rights has to be grounded in the idea
of "transcendent moral laws."
Michael
Perry, a legal philosopher at Wake Forest University, argues, for example, that
the idea of human rights is "ineliminably religious." Unless you
think, he says, that the human beings are sacred, there seems no persuasive
reason to believe that their dignity should be protected with rights. Only a
religious conception of human beings as the handiwork of God can sustain a
notion that individuals should have inviolable natural rights.
What do
we feel we can do as a local community?
"The loud silence of the international community is more powerful
than the bullets."
Silence
means complicity.
We must
use our public space more to bring things out into the open. We must deal with our local communities
before turning our attention to the international scene. Muslims do not mix enough with non-Muslims. My Asian school friends were racist against
whites. We need to break barriers and
build bridges. Our people have not
understood (come to terms with) our presence here.
This
highlights the significance of raising awareness. Christians are being humiliated in Africa, yet Islam gives
freedom to practise any religion. The
Quran recognises this even when the religion concerned is opposed to Islam!
In what
ways does the application of Shariah rely on particular rulers? Does Shariah violate Human Rights when a
hand is chopped off?
That is
a violation of human rights!
A true Islamic
state does not yet exist.
Human
Rights allow everyone to believe what they choose.
Saudi
Arabia, where Shariah law is followed, has the lowest rate of crime. We have to follow the rules of God if we are
to live in a secure environment.
The
problem is the misapplication of penal law.
There are checks and balances within Islam. The Khalif (or the prophet?) suspended hand chopping in time of
famine. Shariah and checks and balances
are close to Human Rights. In Saudi
Arabia the crime rate may be the lowest, but the law is used
discriminately. Penal Law should be
suspended until it is clear how it should be applied. There can be too much influence from foreign scholars.
Jewish
law was similarly severe but there had to be witnesses to crimes in order for a
conviction leading to punishment. (The
example of stoning adulterers had been brought up.)
Human
Rights are confirmed by the law or taken away by the state. They are not eternal. Muslim law is open to interpretation. Christian Law is internal, through the
conscience.
Human
Rights are a secular moral statement, and they are not acceptable to all
people. With regard to stoning, there
is the gospel story of the woman who was caught in adultery. She was brought to Jesus and he challenged
those without sin to cast the first stone.
They all went away. Judaism no
longer upholds stoning as a punishment.
Israel
today does not adhere to Human Rights!
I would
like to explain the original meaning of "Habeas Corpus" - the body
had to be produced as evidence in cases of murder.
Reference
was made to issues surrounding capital punishment in the USA.
Regarding
the laws about an eye for eye, hand cutting etc in the Judeo-Christian
tradition, they can be interpreted as symbolic rather than to be taken
literally; they are affirming the need for fair redress. Is this so in Islam?
I
understand it symbolically - a strong statement to stop people in their tracks.
Human
Rights are limited to the individual in relation to the state and do not cover
economic and social inequalities. They
do not apply to multi-nationals. Human
Rights need reforming as times change.
The European Convention is more comprehensive than the Declaration of
Human Rights.
In the
Ipswich series of Muslim/Christian dialogue it was pointed out that in Islam
there is more stress on human responsibility than on Human Rights. Muslims are called to reflect the compassion
of the Creator God. In the Jewish
Bible/Christian OT, the ruler has the responsibility of a shepherd, to care for
his people. In Paul's letter to the
Romans in the New Testament he says that Christians are called to share in the
birth pangs of the new creation, to accept the pain of working with God for the
healing of the world. This is echoed in
the Breaking of Bread at the Eucharist.
All three Abrahamic faiths seem to me to be best understood at a
sacramental level. Unfortunately some
of our texts are interpreted by people in ways which exclude others rather than
including them.
When the
police and criminal justice bill was pushed through, the clause about religious
hatred was dropped. Would it have
helped?
No - we
must not restrict free discussion.
Things must come out into the open if we are to deal with them. Through globalisation national states have
been reduced to economic entities. The
religious hatred clause was to assist globalisation!
What is
going on in schools?
Wonderful
things! RE is not evangelistic - it is
about making people think. Children are
challenged to go deeply into matters of life and death and human experience as
religious issues. 12/13 year olds are
dealing with the spiritual concepts of light and darkness. Human Rights are examined in detail.
"Evil
prevails when good men do nothing."
It is better to be open and honest and face up to difficult issues.
The
chairman brought the evening to a formal close, but many people stayed on to
continue the discussion, as in the previous sessions.
|
Hosting: |
Canon
Andrew Todd, Sub-Dean of the Cathedral |
|
Chair: |
Liz
Pichon, Deputy Faiths Officer, Suffolk Inter-Faith Resource (SIFRE) |
|
Speakers: |
Ahmed
Elsharkawy, Imam of Highpoint Prison |
|
Panel: |
Elahe
Mojdehi, SIFRE Community Liaison Officer |
Andrew
Todd welcomed participants. Liz
explained the arrangements for the evening and introduced the speakers and the
panel.
"God
enjoins justice and kindness, and giving to kinsfolk, and forbids indecency and
abomination and wickedness." [surah Nahl; 16:90]
There
are a number of Quranic injunctions commanding Muslims to do justice. Right
from the beginning, Allah had sent Prophets and messengers with three things
which aim at rendering justice and guiding the entire human society to the path
of peace. The first of these is Revelation, which commands Good and forbids
Evil. The second is Justice, which gives to each person his due. The third is
the strong arm of the law which maintains sanctions for evil-doers.
Justice
is a command of God and whoever violates it faces grievous punishment. God says
in the Holy Qur'an: "Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and giving
to Kith and Kin, and He forbids all indecent deeds, and evil and
rebellion"
Prophet
Mohammed (PBUH) was asked by God to do justice. God says: "Say: My Lord
has commanded justice"
Islam
stresses that justice must be done equally to all, even if it's to be done
against one's self, or one's parent or relatives. There must be no difference
between rich and poor. All are servants of God, and must be judged according to
the Book of God.
Some people may be inclined to favour the rich, because they expect something from them. Some people may be inclined to favour the poor because they are generally helpless. Partiality in either case is wrong. We are asked to be just, without fear or favour. Both the