MAY 15 — A new ‘ism’ was born yesterday when our Prime Minister, Najib Razak gave a speech on how ‘Human Rights-ism’ goes against Islam. I concede that the issue of human rights may manifest as a political ideology in itself (i.e. Human Rights-ism) but to say it goes Islam requires a long stretch of the imagination. Perhaps our dear Prime Minister was catering to the audience, presumably the religious crowd at the opening of the Musabaqah competition, who knows? In any case, his speech echoed the rhetoric of Islamofascist groups such as Hizb ut-Tahrir and Al-Muhajiroun who actively seek for a global Islamic Khilafah, a superstate aimed at enslaving the world in the name of Islam. Najib is playing with fire even though he may not know it.
Do the notions of human rights go against Islam? I would contend that on the contrary they go against Islamofascist values such as supremacism, oppression, misogyny and the like. But as for Islamic values which are supported by the Quran, no. I do not believe they contradict at all. Granted the Quran does not actually have the term ‘human rights’ (huquq an-naas in Arabic) but it most certainly contains the notions of human rights.
In the very first call to Bani Israil (The Quran Chapter 2, Verse 40), Allah tells us that we should fulfil our covenant with Him and He will fulfil it with us. This would therefore be a promise made by Allah and thus be binding upon Him (according to His own declaration). In Ch 30 Vs 47, we are told that it is essentially a right (haqqa) upon Him to help those who adhere to his clarifications. Therefore the notion of human rights upon Allah is not alien to the Quran although the actual phrase is.
It is the same with same concepts such as secularism, humanism and liberalism which Najib mentioned as well as threats to Islam. Secularism (ilmaniyah in Arabic) obviously does not appear in the Quran being a relatively modern term. However, the notions of secularism – that is to say, the idea that religious convictions should not matter in the public sphere – is very much supported by the Quran. Ch 4 Vs 58 calls on us to judge fairly between people, thus precluding any kind of favouritism. Islamofascist Shariah law actually goes against this because in a Shariah state, Muslims are kept in a social apartheid like condition (anyone who wants to marry them must convert and the children must be Muslims) and given special privileges (such as becoming soldiers, judges, heads of state). Our Malaysian unspoken notion that only Malays can be the Prime Minister is very much like this but ironically, not what the Quran teaches.
Humanism espouses values such as rationality, critical thinking and evidence as well as love and compassion between human beings. This again runs parallel with the Quran which calls those who do not continuously think as the worst of beats (8/22) and even worse than cattle (7/179) and tells us we will be questioned for what we follow so we should be listening, observing and thinking (17/36). The Quran also tells us that the Prophet was a ‘mercy to the worlds’ (21/107) which is often quoted by Islamic propagationists although they miss the point completely, preferring to recourse to Shariah law which is often devoid of compassion and mercy.
Liberalism is perhaps the most ironic of what has been mentioned so far. From what Islamofascism has been doing to the world, a person without any knowledge about Islam would never expect the Quran and liberalism to have any kind of similarities. On the contrary, the Quran gives absolute freedom of belief and even chides the Prophet for daring to think he can force people to believe (10/99). Muslim may call the people to the path of their Lord with wisdom and give beautiful arguments (16/125) but can never act like tyrants. The Prophet himself was cautioned never to be a compeller but simply to remind with the Quran (50/45). Therefore, it is the religious officials in our country who are going against the teachings of Islam.
Islamofascists who speak out against human rights, liberalism, humanism and secularism always claim that these are ‘man-made’ ideologies based on reason and desires and must therefore be rejected by Muslims since they have ‘divine teachings’. This is simply a convenient manoeuvre to forget the reality of interpretation. Shariah law is very much a human product. Even its proponents cannot agree on its sources, let alone its provisions. What they are protecting by condemning these ideologies is their own right to dominate and rule. Najib mentioned Human Rights-ism follows desires but one must ask, what about an ideology which refuses to give women even the right to travel by herself? Isn’t that feeding into the desire of men to control women? That is what Shariah law teaches yet its proponents claim it’s divine.
I sincerely hope the PM would awaken to these surreptitious strategies used by the Islamofascists before they take over government and consign Malaysian to a permanent Taliban-hell. Shariah law must be severely limited if not extinguished altogether. It is the man-made ideology in this dialogue and one which runs contrary to the Quran at that. Although it is far from perfect, Human Rights-ism is a far better choice than the barbaric Islamofascist Shariah law of today.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malay Mail Online.
