Abstract The member states of the United Nations General Assembly in 2005 unanimously adopted the resolution on Responsibility to Protect (R2P) to save citizens from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Since adoption, the norm has been invoked in Libya, South Sudan, Yemen, and Syria, nonetheless, the UN refrains to respond to the genocide committed in the Jammu & Kashmir and triggering a greater sense of anxiety. In this context, the present paper elucidates the factors behind the UN failure. It asks why the UN failed to call R2P despite systematic crimes against humanity in Kashmir. What factors or forces preclude the UN to invoke R2P? The paper argues that the inability of the UN to invoke R2P is a consequence of systemic and domestic factors. The Indo-US strategic partnership, materialism, and New Delhi’s influence in the international system are obstructing the UN’s ability to play a decisive role. Meanwhile, the economic and military potential of India and its regional influence forbid the international community to dissuade India not to commit genocide in Jammu & Kashmir. So the high politics of materialism and national interests override the norm of human rights and humanity.
{"title":"Genocide in Kashmir and the United Nations Failure to Invoke Responsibility to Protect (R2P): Causes and Consequences","authors":"Mehmood Hussain, Sumara Mehmood","doi":"10.1515/MWJHR-2020-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/MWJHR-2020-0017","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The member states of the United Nations General Assembly in 2005 unanimously adopted the resolution on Responsibility to Protect (R2P) to save citizens from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Since adoption, the norm has been invoked in Libya, South Sudan, Yemen, and Syria, nonetheless, the UN refrains to respond to the genocide committed in the Jammu & Kashmir and triggering a greater sense of anxiety. In this context, the present paper elucidates the factors behind the UN failure. It asks why the UN failed to call R2P despite systematic crimes against humanity in Kashmir. What factors or forces preclude the UN to invoke R2P? The paper argues that the inability of the UN to invoke R2P is a consequence of systemic and domestic factors. The Indo-US strategic partnership, materialism, and New Delhi’s influence in the international system are obstructing the UN’s ability to play a decisive role. Meanwhile, the economic and military potential of India and its regional influence forbid the international community to dissuade India not to commit genocide in Jammu & Kashmir. So the high politics of materialism and national interests override the norm of human rights and humanity.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/MWJHR-2020-0017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49407874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Blasphemy law (BL) has become a central issue for the international community in various parts of the world in the last three decades. In almost every case involving the BL, especially in Muslim countries, such as Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia, they are always responded with violence or threats of attack that cause many victims, loss of homes, damage to places of worship, evictions, stigma of being heretical, severe punishments, or extra-judicial killings. When international human rights law (IHLR) and declaration of the right to peace are adopted by the international community, at the same time, the number of violence related to the application of BL continues to increase. This paper aims to examine the ambiguity of the concept of the BL in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia, and how its lead to the weak of enforcement that creates social injustice and inequality. Then, referring to Galtung’s theory of structural violence and other experts of peace studies, this paper argues that blasphemy law should be included as a form of structural violence. Therefore its challenges these States to reform their BL in which its provisions accommodate the state’s neutrality and content high legal standards. Thus, through guarantee the fully enjoyment of human rights for everyone may support the States to achieve sustainable peace.
{"title":"Blasphemy Law as a Structural Violence: A Challenge for Maintaining Sustainable Peace","authors":"Cekli S. Pratiwi, S. Sunaryo","doi":"10.1515/MWJHR-2020-0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/MWJHR-2020-0019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Blasphemy law (BL) has become a central issue for the international community in various parts of the world in the last three decades. In almost every case involving the BL, especially in Muslim countries, such as Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia, they are always responded with violence or threats of attack that cause many victims, loss of homes, damage to places of worship, evictions, stigma of being heretical, severe punishments, or extra-judicial killings. When international human rights law (IHLR) and declaration of the right to peace are adopted by the international community, at the same time, the number of violence related to the application of BL continues to increase. This paper aims to examine the ambiguity of the concept of the BL in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia, and how its lead to the weak of enforcement that creates social injustice and inequality. Then, referring to Galtung’s theory of structural violence and other experts of peace studies, this paper argues that blasphemy law should be included as a form of structural violence. Therefore its challenges these States to reform their BL in which its provisions accommodate the state’s neutrality and content high legal standards. Thus, through guarantee the fully enjoyment of human rights for everyone may support the States to achieve sustainable peace.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/MWJHR-2020-0019","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44104330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article considers the four eyewitness threshold for zinā’ in Islamic criminal law. In some Muslim-majority countries where zinā’ remains an offence, judiciaries have by-passed the threshold by accepting singular confessions from male fornicators or, otherwise, inferring fornication from pregnancy outside of marriage. As a result, a disproportionate number of women have been prosecuted, convicted, and even punished for zinā’. I assert that the four-eyewitness threshold allows for an alternative way to view zinā’ that can result in a different set of consequences. If the threshold is taken seriously such that it becomes the only evidentiary basis upon which a zinā’ conviction can be entered, it will create an effective or de facto exemption where alleged perpetrators can never be convicted, except in the rarest cases where four independent eyewitnesses can be corralled. If adopted, this approach would provide a principled basis to reject opportunistic confessions that deflect punishment to accused female fornicators. And as an ‘internal’ solution that arises within the framework of the sharī’a, a de facto exemption approach is more likely to be perceived as legitimate when compared with proposed solutions that find their basis in international human rights legal instruments.
{"title":"Re-Assessing the Evidentiary Threshold for Zinā’ in Islamic Criminal Law: A De Facto Exemption Proposal","authors":"Hassan Ahmad","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0021","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article considers the four eyewitness threshold for zinā’ in Islamic criminal law. In some Muslim-majority countries where zinā’ remains an offence, judiciaries have by-passed the threshold by accepting singular confessions from male fornicators or, otherwise, inferring fornication from pregnancy outside of marriage. As a result, a disproportionate number of women have been prosecuted, convicted, and even punished for zinā’. I assert that the four-eyewitness threshold allows for an alternative way to view zinā’ that can result in a different set of consequences. If the threshold is taken seriously such that it becomes the only evidentiary basis upon which a zinā’ conviction can be entered, it will create an effective or de facto exemption where alleged perpetrators can never be convicted, except in the rarest cases where four independent eyewitnesses can be corralled. If adopted, this approach would provide a principled basis to reject opportunistic confessions that deflect punishment to accused female fornicators. And as an ‘internal’ solution that arises within the framework of the sharī’a, a de facto exemption approach is more likely to be perceived as legitimate when compared with proposed solutions that find their basis in international human rights legal instruments.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0021","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47841288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1515/mwjhr-2020-frontmatter1
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2020-frontmatter1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-frontmatter1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-frontmatter1","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67053786","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In 1979, following a military coup, President Zia-ul-Haq sought to foment his power by ‘Islamizing’ Pakistan. Among other policies, he enacted the Hudood Ordinances to codify classical Islamic fiqh on criminal law, including the controversial Zina Ordinance (“Ordinance”) which criminalizes sex outside of marriage. Shortly after its passing, the Ordinance led to the unjust incarceration of thousands of low-income women across the country. Decrying the law as violence against women, human rights supporters around the world demanded reform. Finally, in 2006, Pakistan passed the Protection of Women Act (PWA) that amended the Ordinance, rendering the law procedurally toothless. Still, reforms left the substance of the Ordinance intact, giving men license to take the law into their own hands with effective impunity, leading to a rise in honor killings. Given the need for repeal of the Ordinance, this paper looks to lessons learned from the successes and failures of the 2006 reform to propose a strategy for the future. The 2006 reform adopted an apologetic ‘pragmatic reformist’ approach, building a coalition of conservative Islamists and secularists behind an incremental policy shift. This paper proposes that for a more substantive change that is still effective, the women’s rights movement should shift away from the purely secular or purely Islamic approach to espouse secularism and human rights but using an Islamic rationale, shifting societal attitudes from within the tradition. Doing this, I echo arguments made by reformist-activists Abdullahi An’Naim and Ziba Mir-Hosseini among others as well as adopt the approach of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the High Courts, and the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) themselves in their attempts to reconcile Pakistan’s constitutional commitments to both human rights and Islamic law. Such a strategy, I posit, is slow but both effective and long-lasting.
1979年，在一场军事政变之后，齐亚哈克总统试图通过“伊斯兰化”巴基斯坦来煽动他的权力。在其他政策中，他颁布了《胡杜德法令》，将经典的伊斯兰教法编纂成刑法，包括有争议的《吉娜法令》(“法令”)，将婚外性行为定为犯罪。该法令通过后不久，导致全国数千名低收入妇女被不公正地监禁。世界各地的人权支持者谴责这项法律是对妇女的暴力，要求改革。最后，在2006年，巴基斯坦通过了《保护妇女法》(PWA)，修改了该条例，使法律在程序上失去了效力。尽管如此，改革并未改变该条例的实质内容，允许男性在不受惩罚的情况下自行行使法律，这导致了荣誉谋杀的上升。鉴于有必要废除该条例，本文从2006年改革的成功和失败中吸取教训，提出未来的策略。2006年的改革采取了一种道歉的“务实的改革派”方法，在渐进式的政策转变背后建立了保守的伊斯兰主义者和世俗主义者的联盟。本文提出，为了实现更实质性的、仍然有效的变革，妇女权利运动应该从纯粹世俗或纯粹伊斯兰的方式转向支持世俗主义和人权，但使用伊斯兰的基本原理，改变传统内部的社会态度。为此，我赞同改革派活动人士Abdullahi An 'Naim和Ziba Mir-Hosseini等人的观点，并采纳巴基斯坦最高法院、高等法院和联邦伊斯兰法院(FSC)自己的做法，试图调和巴基斯坦宪法对人权和伊斯兰法律的承诺。我认为，这种策略是缓慢的，但既有效又持久。
{"title":"Win the Battle, Lose the War?: Strategies for Repealing the Zina Ordinance in Pakistan","authors":"Beenish Riaz","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0009","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 1979, following a military coup, President Zia-ul-Haq sought to foment his power by ‘Islamizing’ Pakistan. Among other policies, he enacted the Hudood Ordinances to codify classical Islamic fiqh on criminal law, including the controversial Zina Ordinance (“Ordinance”) which criminalizes sex outside of marriage. Shortly after its passing, the Ordinance led to the unjust incarceration of thousands of low-income women across the country. Decrying the law as violence against women, human rights supporters around the world demanded reform. Finally, in 2006, Pakistan passed the Protection of Women Act (PWA) that amended the Ordinance, rendering the law procedurally toothless. Still, reforms left the substance of the Ordinance intact, giving men license to take the law into their own hands with effective impunity, leading to a rise in honor killings. Given the need for repeal of the Ordinance, this paper looks to lessons learned from the successes and failures of the 2006 reform to propose a strategy for the future. The 2006 reform adopted an apologetic ‘pragmatic reformist’ approach, building a coalition of conservative Islamists and secularists behind an incremental policy shift. This paper proposes that for a more substantive change that is still effective, the women’s rights movement should shift away from the purely secular or purely Islamic approach to espouse secularism and human rights but using an Islamic rationale, shifting societal attitudes from within the tradition. Doing this, I echo arguments made by reformist-activists Abdullahi An’Naim and Ziba Mir-Hosseini among others as well as adopt the approach of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the High Courts, and the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) themselves in their attempts to reconcile Pakistan’s constitutional commitments to both human rights and Islamic law. Such a strategy, I posit, is slow but both effective and long-lasting.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45080458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The phenomenon of mass surveillance has confronted legal systems throughout the world with significant challenges to their fundamental norms and values. These dilemmas have been most extensively studied and discussed in relation to the kind of privacy cultures that exist in Europe and North America. Although mass surveillance creates the same kinds of challenges in Muslim countries, the phenomenon has rarely been discussed from the perspective of Shari’a. This article seeks to demonstrate that this neglect of mass surveillance and other similar phenomena by Shari’a scholars is unjustified. Firstly, the article will address objections that Shari’a does not contain legal norms that are relevant to the modern practice of state surveillance and that, if these exist, they are not binding on rulers and will also seek to show that, whatever terminology is employed, significant aspects of the protection of privacy and personal data that exists in other legal systems is also be found deeply-rooted in Shari’a. Secondly, it will assess the specific requirements that it makes in relation to such intrusion on private spaces and private conduct and how far it can benefit from an exception to the general prohibition on spying. Finally, it is concluded that mass surveillance is unlikely to meet these Shari’a requirements and that only targeted surveillance can generally do so.
{"title":"The Shari’a Approach to Contemporary Problems of Mass Surveillance","authors":"S. Almutairi","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The phenomenon of mass surveillance has confronted legal systems throughout the world with significant challenges to their fundamental norms and values. These dilemmas have been most extensively studied and discussed in relation to the kind of privacy cultures that exist in Europe and North America. Although mass surveillance creates the same kinds of challenges in Muslim countries, the phenomenon has rarely been discussed from the perspective of Shari’a. This article seeks to demonstrate that this neglect of mass surveillance and other similar phenomena by Shari’a scholars is unjustified. Firstly, the article will address objections that Shari’a does not contain legal norms that are relevant to the modern practice of state surveillance and that, if these exist, they are not binding on rulers and will also seek to show that, whatever terminology is employed, significant aspects of the protection of privacy and personal data that exists in other legal systems is also be found deeply-rooted in Shari’a. Secondly, it will assess the specific requirements that it makes in relation to such intrusion on private spaces and private conduct and how far it can benefit from an exception to the general prohibition on spying. Finally, it is concluded that mass surveillance is unlikely to meet these Shari’a requirements and that only targeted surveillance can generally do so.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43043071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Since the mid-nineteenth century, women in Europe, North America and elsewhere have played an increasing role in the workforce. Women started pursuing jobs in factories, offices and businesses instead of being dependent on men for their livelihood. However, along with this significant improvement in the status of women, they still face obstacles, such as the gender pay gab and harassment in the workplace. Although both males and females experience harassment, the available literature clearly suggests that females are more likely to be harassed. Much of the research concerning workplace harassment against women has been conducted in the West while little is known about this phenomenon in workplaces across the Arab and Muslim countries. In fact, gender relations and the nature of workplaces in Arab countries vary significantly from the Western workplace due to religious, social and cultural traditions. Muslim women live in the midst of patriarchal cultures where women’s honour is believed to be sacred. The ideology of women’s seclusion and subordination resulted in the restriction of their ability to participate in the labour force even where females are in urgent need of earned income. In this regard, harassment considers a crucial subject on various international agendas. The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) for instance, reinforces the implementation of legislation that protects women against gender discrimination. Islam in a similar manner respects women and acknowledges their major role within a society. Therefore, as women living in Muslim communities where issues related to sexuality are sensitive, and people are reluctant to discuss such questions in public, this paper aims to discuss women seclusion, the situation of Muslim women with regard to harassment in the workplace, how international human rights deals with harassment as well as the relation between the Islamic jurisprudence and the international human rights with regard harassment in the workplace.
{"title":"Harassment, Seclusion and the Status of Women in the Workplace: An Islamic and International Human Rights Perspective","authors":"Sarah Balto","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0004","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since the mid-nineteenth century, women in Europe, North America and elsewhere have played an increasing role in the workforce. Women started pursuing jobs in factories, offices and businesses instead of being dependent on men for their livelihood. However, along with this significant improvement in the status of women, they still face obstacles, such as the gender pay gab and harassment in the workplace. Although both males and females experience harassment, the available literature clearly suggests that females are more likely to be harassed. Much of the research concerning workplace harassment against women has been conducted in the West while little is known about this phenomenon in workplaces across the Arab and Muslim countries. In fact, gender relations and the nature of workplaces in Arab countries vary significantly from the Western workplace due to religious, social and cultural traditions. Muslim women live in the midst of patriarchal cultures where women’s honour is believed to be sacred. The ideology of women’s seclusion and subordination resulted in the restriction of their ability to participate in the labour force even where females are in urgent need of earned income. In this regard, harassment considers a crucial subject on various international agendas. The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) for instance, reinforces the implementation of legislation that protects women against gender discrimination. Islam in a similar manner respects women and acknowledges their major role within a society. Therefore, as women living in Muslim communities where issues related to sexuality are sensitive, and people are reluctant to discuss such questions in public, this paper aims to discuss women seclusion, the situation of Muslim women with regard to harassment in the workplace, how international human rights deals with harassment as well as the relation between the Islamic jurisprudence and the international human rights with regard harassment in the workplace.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2020-0004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49003386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The Islamic Republic of Iran is unsecular and follows religious interpretations from Shia Islam in deciding the laws of the land. In recent decades, the strengthening of civil society in the country has shaped various political debates on human rights among secular intellectuals and reflected in the discourse of some religious figures as well. While the regime has officially adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI) since 1990, different views on the Islamic human rights and its social implications still exist among the conservative and reformist Shia clergy within the country. This paper examines the view of an influential conservative pro-regime clergy, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, who has been concerned about the Western interpretation of human rights and engaged in its theorization based on his interpretation of Shia Islam. He has criticized the theoretical and philosophical foundations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and its each single item and has also proposed his own version of the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights and Obligations. While Islamic fundamentalists have no concrete theoretical support for their negative view of the Western conceptions regarding human rights, Mesbah Yazdi’s approach is based on a reading of Shia theology and Sadraean ontology. He engages in a dialogue with the Western ideologies and rejects UDHR after philosophical and theological reasoning. His stance can be viewed as a reflection of the unsecular political Shia Islam as the main characteristic of the conservative faction within the Islamic Republic of Iran which results in serious policy and social implications on the rights of the people living in the country.
{"title":"Between Universalism and Fundamentalism: A Critique on the Position of Conservative Shia Clergy on Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran","authors":"Jalal Peykani, M. Khalili","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0015","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Islamic Republic of Iran is unsecular and follows religious interpretations from Shia Islam in deciding the laws of the land. In recent decades, the strengthening of civil society in the country has shaped various political debates on human rights among secular intellectuals and reflected in the discourse of some religious figures as well. While the regime has officially adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI) since 1990, different views on the Islamic human rights and its social implications still exist among the conservative and reformist Shia clergy within the country. This paper examines the view of an influential conservative pro-regime clergy, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, who has been concerned about the Western interpretation of human rights and engaged in its theorization based on his interpretation of Shia Islam. He has criticized the theoretical and philosophical foundations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and its each single item and has also proposed his own version of the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights and Obligations. While Islamic fundamentalists have no concrete theoretical support for their negative view of the Western conceptions regarding human rights, Mesbah Yazdi’s approach is based on a reading of Shia theology and Sadraean ontology. He engages in a dialogue with the Western ideologies and rejects UDHR after philosophical and theological reasoning. His stance can be viewed as a reflection of the unsecular political Shia Islam as the main characteristic of the conservative faction within the Islamic Republic of Iran which results in serious policy and social implications on the rights of the people living in the country.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49080385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The paper seeks to understand India’s evolving rights framework in the backdrop of cow vigilantism. To that end it discusses the human right to food and nutrition, international discussion on minority rights issues in India and the relevant legal and constitutional discussion in India. It finds that India’s rights framework has evolved since proclamation of India as a Republic in 1950 based on the supremacy of its written constitution containing fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy interpreted finally by its Supreme Court. The government took a wise step by not challenging a judicial rebalancing of the rights framework in response to certain executive measures and the Supreme Court interpreted the right to life to include not only the right to the choice of food but also the right to privacy and thereby underscored the obligation of the State to compensate the victims of cow vigilante violence. However, a constitutional polity and secular state would do all well if it did any further necessary to better guard against any recurrence of the breach of civil peace, much less violence, on purely secular issues, including by strengthening and increasing dialogue with all representative communities in all its decision-making on such matters.
{"title":"Cow Vigilantism and India’s Evolving Human Rights Framework","authors":"R. Pratap","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper seeks to understand India’s evolving rights framework in the backdrop of cow vigilantism. To that end it discusses the human right to food and nutrition, international discussion on minority rights issues in India and the relevant legal and constitutional discussion in India. It finds that India’s rights framework has evolved since proclamation of India as a Republic in 1950 based on the supremacy of its written constitution containing fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy interpreted finally by its Supreme Court. The government took a wise step by not challenging a judicial rebalancing of the rights framework in response to certain executive measures and the Supreme Court interpreted the right to life to include not only the right to the choice of food but also the right to privacy and thereby underscored the obligation of the State to compensate the victims of cow vigilante violence. However, a constitutional polity and secular state would do all well if it did any further necessary to better guard against any recurrence of the breach of civil peace, much less violence, on purely secular issues, including by strengthening and increasing dialogue with all representative communities in all its decision-making on such matters.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0019","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45284935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article looks at the human rights protection in transitional post-uprising Tunisia, from 2011 to 2017, offering insights into the willingness to both protect human rights and build capacity in Tunisia. It focuses on the establishment of an adequate legal framework in Tunisia, with particular attention being paid to the constitution-making process and, on the establishment, the strengthening of certain institutional capacities, such as the constitutional court and the Truth and Dignity Commission. The article first gives a brief historical overview of the human rights situation in Tunisia. This is followed by an analysis of the willingness and capacity to protect human rights in post-uprising transitional Tunisia, in both the 2011–2014 and 2014–2017 periods.This article is based on evidence from a series of semi-structured interviews I conducted with the key political actors from various political parties, and actors from NGOs working on human rights, during field research in Tunisia in October-November 2017, supplemented by secondary literature.
{"title":"The Protection of Human Rights in Transitional Tunisia","authors":"M. Saral","doi":"10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0005","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article looks at the human rights protection in transitional post-uprising Tunisia, from 2011 to 2017, offering insights into the willingness to both protect human rights and build capacity in Tunisia. It focuses on the establishment of an adequate legal framework in Tunisia, with particular attention being paid to the constitution-making process and, on the establishment, the strengthening of certain institutional capacities, such as the constitutional court and the Truth and Dignity Commission. The article first gives a brief historical overview of the human rights situation in Tunisia. This is followed by an analysis of the willingness and capacity to protect human rights in post-uprising transitional Tunisia, in both the 2011–2014 and 2014–2017 periods.This article is based on evidence from a series of semi-structured interviews I conducted with the key political actors from various political parties, and actors from NGOs working on human rights, during field research in Tunisia in October-November 2017, supplemented by secondary literature.","PeriodicalId":35445,"journal":{"name":"Muslim World Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/mwjhr-2019-0005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49650637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：