Raja Petra Kamarudin
It appears like the Turkish Prime Minister is in trouble with Turkey’s court. They have accused him of being anti-secular, which is a crime in Turkey. They say the Prime Minister want to abolish or remove the anti-tudung law, which means Turkey’s citizens will no longer be forced NOT to wear the tudung. If you remember, recently, a Turkish lady Member of Parliament was evicted from parliament for insisting that she wear her tudung in the building. University student too must remove their tudung before they enter the university gate.
Turkey is on the other extreme of Afghanistan where the “religious police” would throw acid on faces of women who do not wear the tudung.
Malaysia of 2008 is a far cry from Malaysia of 1958, the first Anniversary of Merdeka. Then, skirts and bare-backs were the order of the day and the tudung was a rare thing at best, the more “decent” Malay women would wear a selendang wit the front hair revealed. Today, women who wear bare-back clothes are arrested.
What happened over those 50 years? Have Malays become more religious and more conscious of their Islamic duties? Over the last month, three women have been charged for corruption and fraud. All are pretty senior Malay government officers. And all wear the tudung. So, the wearing of the tudung can’t be equated with being more religious or being a better Muslim. If not, they would not accept bribes or cheat. Wearing the tudung is merely a symbol. It is a symbol that you are very Islamic. But this does not mean you really are.
Malays, today, talk about restoring the Caliphate and implementing Islamic laws. In short, rejecting a Secular State in favour of a Theology State – meaning an Islamic State of course. But do these some people know what an Islamic State is? And do these people also know how the many experiments of Islamic States have gone horribly wrong and the new “Islamic” government was worse than the old government it replaced?
In a nutshell a Secular State or Theology State is just a name. Names are not crucial. What is would be the function rather than form. Form must follow functions, and not the other way round.
Let us examine some of the failed experiments. Some predominantly Muslim countries have flirted with the idea of changing their government and have discovered that the newly installed Muslim leaders were no better, or worse, that the “kafir” leaders. Millions have died because of this, Muslims killed at the hand of Muslims.
Kurdistan, Afghanistan, Armenia, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Morocco, Sudan, Pakistan, Serbia, Gratis, Syria, Bosnia – just think of any country where either Muslims, Christians or Jews make up the majority population and I will show you a tragedy. No, theology is not the answer. We can’t solve problems by replacing a Secular State with a Theology State. History has shown us that, in fact, more damage is caused. The system is not the solution. It is those behind the system that matter.
A year after the end of the Second World War the Algerians wanted the French Colonialists out of their country. The eight-year war led to the loss of more than a million lives. Both sides wee equally guilty of the barbaric killings where old folks, babies and women were not spared. Finally, in 1962, the French decided to go home. But until today the killings continue; except now it is not Muslims killing Christians but Islamists killing Secularists – and vice versa.
The Turks too wanted the kafir out, so millions of Armenians were massacred. The Kurds were the willing servants to rape and murder the Armenians. This was ethic cleansing of the kind perpetuated by the Germans during World War 2; though maybe only a quarter in number died compared to the Jews.
Later the Kurds were themselves exterminated by the Iraqis and Turks. And the same went for the Afghans where they first killed each other to establish an Islamic State and then the Islamic State killed off as many as the previous “kafir” state did. In Iran, too, more died in the new Islamic State than in the Shah’s “kafir” state.
An Islamic State is no guarantee that you would get a good government. Neither would a Secular State. So it is best that the rhetoric and setting up an Islamic State be discarded and instead we focus on the issue of the setting up of a just state of whatever kind.
We have seen too many deaths over the last 60 years, people killed in the name of Islam. Tens of millions have been killed. Two million in Afghanistan. One million in Iran. One million in Iraq. One million in Turkey. More than one million in Algeria. Many more millions in other Muslim countries. The list goes on.
The Iranians say: those Iranians who died fighting Iraqis are going to heaven as the Iraqis are “kafir”. The Iraqis say: those Iraqis who died fighting Iranians are going to heaven as the Iranians are “kafir”. So, both Iranians and Iraqis are “kafir”. Or is it both Iranians and Iraqis who kill each other are going to heaven since both kill and die in the name of Islam?
With all this killing and the tens of millions of deaths over the last 60 years, all the so-called “Islamic States” are nothing short of failed states whereas “God-less” states like Sweden are heaven on earth.
Maybe you need to choose an Islamic State to go to heaven. But thus far all the Islamic States have proven to be hell. Maybe this is because they talk more about life after death rather than about life itself.
By Selcuk Gokoluk and Ibon Villelabeitia
ANKARA (Reuters) - Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan was involved in anti-secular activities, a top court said on Friday, explaining a decision to fine his AK Party that could reignite political tensions in the EU applicant country.
The constitutional court's legal reasoning marks the first time a sitting prime minister in predominantly Muslim Turkey has been blamed by the court for undermining the country's secular principles.
The ruling could put pressure on Erdogan to sack some members of his cabinet in an expected reshuffle.
The court, the highest judicial body in Turkey, decided in a close vote in July to fine the Islamist-rooted AK Party for Islamist activities, but dismissed a prosecutor's case to have it closed down and Erdogan and other leading members barred from politics for five years.
"It was found that the head of the party Recep Tayyip Erdogan, member of the party and former parliament speaker Bulent Arinc, Education Minister Huseyin Celik...were involved in determined and intense activities which were against article 68 of the constitution," it said.
In a 370-page legal explanation, the court singled out Erdogan and other senior members of the AK Party for attempts to lift a ban on the Muslim headscarf at university and efforts to lower the age at which students can attend Koran classes.
It also mentioned statements made by Erdogan in the past, including one in which he said "religion is the cement of Turkish society" and an interview to a Malaysian newspaper in which he described Turkey as a "modern Islamic state."
"Erdogan made it clear that his opinions on freedom of belief were aimed at creating an unlimited freedom for political Islam. This point of view was reflected in Erdogan's and other prominent party members' words and activities. There was an attempt to transform and restructure the state within the framework of the rules of a certain religion," it said.
The court, however, said it voted against banning the AK Party because it had not incited violence and because of its EU reforms, including giving more rights to minorities and to women.
Turkish markets are largely focussed on the global economic crisis and shrugged off the court's legal reasoning.
WARNING
Analysts said the court's ruling was a further warning to Erdogan, whose party is locked in a power struggle with the powerful secularist establishment, including judges and the military.
Secularists say the party is seeking to bring back religion to public life. The AK Party, which has its roots in political Islam, denies the charges and points to its liberal record since it first came to power in 2002.
"This shows the AK Party escaped closure very narrowly. The court is telling the party it must regulate itself and stay away from provocative policies such as the headscarf," said Yusuf Kanli, a veteran Turkish columnist.
"It is also telling the party that the court might be compelled to ban it if it continues with its present trend," he said.
Erdogan said on Thursday he might seek to trim the powers of the court after a ruling in June overturned an amendment to lift the restriction on wearing headscarves at university.
The AK Party, which includes former Islamists, conservatives and pro-business liberals, won a sweeping re-election last year. (Editing by Diana Abdallah)
No comments:
Post a Comment