|
Gender and Human Rights, Traditional and Modern Islamic Participation
Sunday December 10th 2006
Preface
The universal principles of human rights in Muslim societies have encountered serious obstacles that have been created by Islamic scholars’ (foghaha) different interpretations of Islam. In Islamic societies, the political and social power of the conservative and fundamentalist Islamic scholars (foghaha) is still more than of those scholars who are more moderate and modern to the point that even the ruling governments could not overcome the power and authority of the fundamental foghaha.
In previous decades, the encounter and opposition of Universal principals of Human Rights and Islamic Law was not a topic in international debates. However, today topics related to the Muslim world have in fact created serious debates among the international community for reasons such as social reforms, development of communication, and the increasing rate of Muslims’ interactions with the West. In addition, the attacks of September 11th, 2001 put the Islamic fundamentalism in the spotlight of political and academic debates in the West. Today, many Western governments define their plan for national security by prioritizing the strict control of Islamic fundamentalism as the central and crucial part of their security and intelligence strategies. These western strategies leave Muslims in a situation where they have to think of effective and logical defensive ways in order to defend themselves in the western societies.
Over the past few centuries, the Islamic and theology schools have been engaged in debates over modern interpretations of Islam and religious temperance. However, the debates would never go beyond the Islamic schools and would not become general and public debates. Nowadays, those views and opinions that promote Islamic temperance and moderation are breaking the boundaries of the Islamic schools and are reaching a greater audience throughout the world, through the world of technology and the internet.
I can argue that the expansion of the debate over Islamic moderation is in fact a method of defense for Muslims around the world, who are trying to separate themselves and their beliefs from Islamic fundamentalism that is tied with terrorism. It is still too early to evaluate the effects of the dynamics and structure of the aforementioned defensive debates. In the Western academia, however, the topic of Islamic modernism has expanded to the degree that it creates some level of hope and optimism within the world of academia. The level of optimism and hope becomes even higher if those thinkers who promote the religious moderation and modernism are given the freedom within the academic setting to introduce modern interpretations of Islam to the Western academia. Such opportunities, I believe, will help the global peace.
In Muslim societies, it happens often that Islamic scholars and specialists who are affiliated with religious centers for Islamic moderation do not have the freedom and security to express their opinions and views freely. They often receive threats from the fundamentalists. Thus, the investments of the Western academia could indeed have fruitful results. The expansion of Islamic debates could help Islamic moderate thinkers to promote and publish their new interpretations and agendas for Islamic reform before Islamic fundamentalists force them into silence or to join the fundamental organizations. Therefore, as we can see, the establishment of various centers within the Western academia could help the Islamic scholars and intellectuals to gradually overcome the fundamentalists’ power by promoting their studies in democratic atmospheres.
Challenges in Muslim Societies
Today Muslim societies are encountering different challenges that are caused by the clash between supporters of Islamic fundamentalism and defenders of Islamic moderation and abiding the human rights principles. These challenges are more severe in countries such as Iran where the ruling regime could be categorized as a theocracy. In these countries, religious obstacles inherently become political and social obstacles and as a result, these societies are experiencing even more tension than other Muslim societies. It is now years since the clash between the quest for respecting human rights and the fundamentalist centers of the theological regimes have caused oppression and catastrophes. Islamic fundamentalists do not tolerate the idea of Muslims and non-Muslims adopting the principles of human rights in their interactions. In Iran, some religious specialists say, “In our opinion, in the present day, the Muslims’ Islam is to avoid the establishments of authoritarian regimes and to seriously accept the principles of human rights and democracy that have grown from the realities of our time. In the new Muslim societies like other new societies of the world, the acceptance of human rights is the only way of respecting justice and ethics in modern societies. It is only through establishing regimes that are based on human rights that Muslims could remain faithful to Islam, their beliefs, justice, ethics and kindness…” (See Shabestari, Mohamad, Mojtahed. A Critique of the Official Interpretation of Religion [Naghdi bar Ghera’at-eh Rasmi az Din, Tehran], p. 297)
Mohamad Mojtahed Shabestari, the author of the abovementioned excerpt writes, “It is not included in any of prophets’ words that god will be unsatisfied with humans if one day they decide to abide by various forms of freedom and equalities that have been stated under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its amendments. It is, in fact, encouraged in prophets’ lessons to establish such societies and working towards having such societies is considered ‘evolutionary action’…” ( Shabestari, Mohamad, Mojtahed, p. 318)
In the same Muslim societies, the representatives of fundamentalists who are greatly organized, mobilized, wealthy and powerful in all the crucial centers of decision-making, lobbying and legislation deny the possibilities of social and political reform. The attempts of individuals like Shabestari who wish to bring human rights standards into the process and context of legislation in Islamic societies like Iran, have not yet resulted in any promising changes. The reason for this lack of success is the power of fundamentalists over more moderate forces within the government and religious arenas.
Women’s rights
The Most Significant Topic of the Challenge
Women’s rights is indeed the most controversial and significant factor in the challenge the Muslim societies are facing. Even those Muslim leaders who from time to time show flexibility in regards to the necessity of the presence of human rights in the legislation, do not compromise when it comes to women’s rights. The topic of women’s sports could serve as a good example of such challenges. For years the clash between fundamentalist views and moderate and modern views in regards to women’s sport has prevented women to have satisfactory athletic opportunities in Muslim societies. Due to the interference of an Iranian Muslim woman, Fa’ezeh Hashemi, the condition of women in sports caused political debates in Iran for many years. Mrs. Fa’ezeh Hashemi, the executive director of the ‘Muslim Women’s Games’ in Iran explains that due to Islamic restrictions in terms of media coverage of the games, these annual events remain unpopular. Due to the fact that female athletes might not be having the complete Islamic veil, the usage of cameras is not allowed during the games. These restrictions prevent the events to be more widely announced and openly covered by the media. Such restrictions do not allow women to be regarded as equal and live equal lives as men.
The restrictions that women are facing in Iran are not only limited to the world of sports. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, these limitations have been put in place in all aspects of women’s lives in Iran. Fundamentalists and moderates have constantly debated and argued over the issue of women’s rights throughout the years. The laws in Iran allow us to say that the fundamentalists have been more successful in achieving their goals during the post-revolutionary years in Iran. It is, however fair to say that with the assistance of domestic and international forces, the moderates and modernists have been able to receive approval votes within the legislative branch and improve a few laws in regards to women’s legal status.
Introducing the Fundamentalist View in Regards to Women’s Rights
The fundamentalist view has always been present in the social and political history of Iran and it has been an obstacle for improvements in women’s rights. The fundamentalist view, however gained authority and power over the legislative branch after the Islamic Revolution of 197 when the fundamentalists gain the right to veto bills throughout the legislation process.
After the Revolution, an new section was added to the legislative branch called the Guardian Council which includes six Islamic jurists (faghih) and six Islamic lawyers. The Islamic jurists are appointed by the Supreme Leader. Thus, the Supreme Leader can indirectly veto those bills that are not fully in collaboration with the fundamentalist ideology. The bills could be vetoed by the members of the Guardian Council for not being in complete agreement with Islamic principles and rules. It is note worthy that the Supreme Leader has never chosen a moderate representative to this council. Therefore, it is clear that the bills regarding women’s rights with have been evaluated with dogmatism and inflexibility of fundamentalists.
Since the beginning of the Revolution, Islamic fundamentalists have tried to prevent women from becoming active members of the society and to keep them domesticated as much as possible. It is interesting, however, that women have always been given unquestionable right to vote since the first days of the Revolution. In fact, the authorities announced that not only voting is a right, but it is rather an Islamic duty. This is while Islamic fundamentalists blamed the Shah for years for having granted women the right to vote. Nevertheless, the fundamentalists used women’s right to vote as a method of gaining legitimacy in the number of votes.
|
