Very good points Mr Camara. If you would allow me I would like to say a word
or two.
This Nigerian saga is a very disturbing piece of news for all Muslims,
moreover for those living in non-Sharia countries. But this should not
detach us from seeing Sharia as a potential alternative legal system. To be
able to do this, there should be some serious discussion among Islamic
scholars of today and the ordinary people alike.
Sharia has a purpose, and I believe that this purpose is very genuine and
important. But what we should not do, is to see Sharia as a legal system
brought down to us by God, but rather a man made law like any other law,
made to govern the society and the relationship of the people living in it.
With Sharia it is done with the help of the holy Qur’an as the guarding
principle. To be able to discuss this issue, we have to separate between the
words from God (the Holy Qur’an) and the man-made interpretation, Sharia.
This means that we should all be able to discuss Sharia, without fearing
that we are criticising the words of God.
Sharia has its historical, social and traditional, as well as economical
reasons. Like any other legal system, it was written in a certain place and
at a certain time in history. As time goes by, societies change, and so
should the laws that are meant to regulate the life in that society.
In order to make Sharia what it is meant to achieve, we have to ask
ourselves some very important questions. Questions such as, who are the
people making the Sharia-translations? And who are the people benefiting
from all this?
I do not think that it is enough to just try to save the life of the
Nigerian lady. What we should be doing, is getting involved in the
definition of what Sharia is and is not. The definition should not be left
to the Imams and the Islamic scholars alone, for they are not the only ones
effected. Making it a case by case discussion will lead us nowhere.
All legal systems are there to control and regulate the society, among
others to protect private properties. If we keep ourselves to the discussion
of Sharia, the question will be who are to be protected and from whom? Who
are the property owners and what are their properties?
According to several legal systems women were, and still are in some
societies, seen as the properties of their husbands. The rich are to be
protected from the poor and the poor have to be controlled. It is obvious
that one group is gaining from these kind of laws, and therefore it is only
fair to say that this certain group made these laws; the rich and powerful
men.
No wonder some scholars are telling us that, if two men wish to marry a
woman and they are both equally religious, the woman should choose the
richer one. This implies that the rich man can marry the rich and poor alike
but a poor man will hardly be able to marry a richer woman. This is some
form of social control that favours neither the poor nor the women. Where is
the feeling of loving someone, poor or rich?
Hanging, cutting hands, stoning or lashing people is another form of social
control. It might have been the norm once upon the time, but it certainly
does not have to be unquestionably accepted today. Since we live in a
different time and place, it might not be so surprising that these actions
do not get a mass-support. One thing seems to remain unchanged; these
actions are mostly applied on women and poor people.
Let us look very closely at what the woman was accused of, something they
say she deserved to be stoned for. She went to bed with a man, she had a
baby and the father was not known. Now the question is, to whom did she do
wrong to, and was the act done by her and only her alone?
Clearly she did not do it alone, and she offended nobody. In fact, she is
the only one who could have been offended in this case. She had the baby all
by herself to take care of, even though she did not do the work alone. When
she needed a person to comfort her, marry her, there was nobody in a land of
millions to come to her rescue. And now all they are talking about is to
take her life, because she broke the laws of God. Right!
Are we not all going to be judged by God in the next life? Is it not only
God who is to decide when a person should die? If so, then killing someone
for what he or she did to God is to be playing God. When we make Sharia laws
today, we are not making the laws of God but the laws of the people in a
diverse society. So it is not a question for the Imams or Islamic scholars,
but for all the parties involved. No disrespect to the Imams or the
Scholars.
Punishing by death can be found in many other religions and societies, so
Sharia is not alone in that regard. What we need to do with the help of the
Islamic scholars is to find generally more accepted forms of punishments.
This is my take on this topic!
Thanks
Modou
>From: Momodou Camara <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Nigerian State Washes Its Hands of Stoning Sentence
>Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:31:04 +0200
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
