Interesting perspectives from a friend in the Gambia...
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moves toward constitutional secularism in The Gambia - Some
Reflections



Muhammed Al-Ghazzali

Ethnicity and religion are amongst the most emotive terms. They arouse
passions to unprecedented levels. Many atrocities have, down the ages,
been and continue to be committed in the name of the tribe, the group
and religion. If patriotism, as is said, is the last refuge of the
scoundrel, religion and tribe too have not on occasions ceased to be the
shield for promoting secret and extraneous agendas. We in The Gambia have
however been blessed since the creation of this nation as a modern state
with interrelations and interethnic harmony. Muslims who constitute the vast
majority of the population continue to live peacefully and with respect and
dignity with their minority fellow Christians and adherents of other
religions. Religious harmony and tolerance have been the hallmark of our
community.  Do we not demonstrate our solidarity by joining each other in
our respective religious feasts and holidays? Intermarriage and peaceful
co-existence cut across ethnic and religious lines.

Until 1994 the issue of religion was largely irrelevant in national affairs
and in  individual relationships. Every Gambian must however be honest to
admit that since 22nd July 1994, religion has taken a higher and emotive
profile in an uneasy manner within our body politic. At an individual level
too, there appears with great regret to be greater individual insensitivity
to the religious  persuasion of self and others. The religions harmony and
respect of  old  is now being threatened by religious intolerance and
disrespect.

Letters  from private individuals in the correspondence columns of
newspapers  as well as newspaper headlines and reports bear testimony to
this  unfortunate and frightening development. The recent front-page
headline  in the Observer Monday 30th April ‘Fajikunda Muslims-Christians at
War over Convert’ is a case in point. I do not hold any particular
religious persuasion responsible for this state of affairs.

The blame for this dangerous state for affairs must be laid squarely  at the
doorsteps of the current administration. Many Muslims for  instance, despite
ironically the high profile public manifestation of Islamic  adherence on
the part of the President -the rosary beads, etc perceive a pro-Christian
and an anti-Islamic bias in the government.

They point to the disrespectful utterances of the President to the
effect that most thieves and criminals are Muslims, and in response
they  retort that in a country where the vast majority are Muslims, the laws
of statistics should ensure that that would not only be the case but that
also the majority of virtuous men and women would be Muslims. It is simply
statistics. Not a plus or minus for Christian or Muslims or others. They
point out to what they perceive as the President’s disrespectful treatment
of Muslim religious leaders televised on GRTS  for the benefit of all and
sundry when they call on him.

This is contrasted with private not public audiences with Christian  and
other leaders, which are said to be conducted discreetly and with all
protocols and respect observed. The Muslim critics again point out to the
irony of having a President who never ceases to manifest Islamic
symbols publicly when his regime has facilitated the ascendancy over   and
above any in the past of church leaders and Christians within the
establishment and state machinery out of all proportion to their numerical
strength in the country. Critics point out that with
Christians occupying the top echelons of the Office of the President,
the Education portfolio, Justice Department, Judiciary, Independent
Electoral Commission, Ombudsman and the Treasury the essential and
critical areas of the machinery of government have been hijacked from
the majority Muslims. Surely this, they argue, reflect at best a total
of balance and sensitivity and at worst a hidden agenda of promoting
the Christianization of the machinery of government. It is not, as it were
that there is a lack of qualified, competent Muslims, or persons of
other religious persuasions with the requisite experience. Again they
point to the laws of statistics, but more importantly to the demands  of
national unity and integrity, which call for ethnic and religious
balance without sacrificing merit and competence in appointments to  high
public office. With a small majority of Christians comprising no more than
twenty percent of the population controlling the reins of the
public service, the balance they say is hopelessly and dangerously
skewed. Many fear, citing examples elsewhere particularly of Sierra
Leone, that this is sowing the seeds for dangerous conflict in the   future.

The strong influence that local church leaders today wield in the
corridors of power from State House to the bottom of the state pyramid
and the sympathy with which they are received out of proportion to
their   numerical strength is very obvious to all keen observers of the
political scene.

The government has sometimes been sending confusing messages on
religious issues. Despite strong denials by the state media it is now
generally accepted that President Jammeh at his last Koriteh meeting
with Muslim elders at State House in Banjul did categorically promise
to introduce Sharia Law in The Gambia.

The verbatim record of his statement graciously reproduced in  subsequent
issues of The Point newspaper has corroborated initial reports of his
undertaking. The president has been busy putting up or encouraging the
construction of mosques in state institutions -  from State House to the
RVH, Medical School, - with little regard to the question whether people of
other religions -Christians, Buddhists etc are also entitled to do so.

Both these actions perceived as pro- Islamic are out of step with what was
regarded as his encouragement of the high-jacking of the state
machinery by the minority religions.

In this confusing and potentially troublesome context, the government
has now thrown in some proposed constitutional amendments, which
complicate matters further.

On Monday 30th April 2001 the Attorney General and Secretary of State
for Justice tabled before the National Assembly some proposals for
amending the 1997 constitution.

Ironically some of the proposals for amendment of the 1997 constitution
appear to be reverting the government to its true form, its critics argue.
This is first the proposal to drastically alter the structure of the Kadis
or Muslim Courts in a way that would remove them from the mainstream of the
legal system. Some regard this as a step toward diluting the role of Islamic
law, which governs the personal
transactions of a majority of Gambians. Until now the English Law, the
African Law and the Islamic Law have been administered by the same Law
System. Now the Islamic Courts are to be hived off.

And ignored?

The more serious proposal for amendment of the constitution is to make
The Gambia legally and constitutionally a Sovereign Secular Republic.

In its object and reasons the bill for this amendment of the
constitution justifies the secular proposed on the need to make The
Gambia a secular republic to re-assure citizens belonging to minority
religions. It is difficult to put it mildly for the general public to
reconcile a  proposal to go Sharia one moment and to go legally secular the
next. What precisely does this proposal mean? What is a secular state? Why
is the amendment being introduced now? Is there a need on the basic of  our
experience, for the protection or reassurance of minority religions in The
Gambia? What are the implications for introducing secularity as a legal
concept for our body politic and our personal relationships? The proposal is
not accompanied by any memorandum, which will clarify for a layperson the
necessity, for the objectives and possible practical implication of it.

I am not a lawyer. So I do not know what the legal and constitutional
meaning or implication of going secular means. But I entertain serious
doubts whether those responsible for framing such a serious
constitutional proposal have themselves fully thought out its
implications. The way it has been quietly inserted in the bill to amend
the constitution, the lack of publicity and public debate and
enlightenment leaves much to be desired.

Not being a member of the honourable profession, I can only seek
recourse to the dictionary to provide guidance. Chambers 20th Century
English Dictionary defines secular as pertaining to the present world   or
to things or matters not spiritual, as not being concerned with   religion.
Secularism is further defined as the belief that the state   should be
independent of religion. The Chambers dictionary’s  definition
of secularism leads me to the layman’s conclusion could Attorney  General
Joof please correct me if I am wrong that the constitutional amendment once
passed by the National Assembly would mean that The Gambian state must
firstly cease henceforth to be involved in religious matters.
Secondly it must treat all religions in the country equally  irrespective
of their numerical strength. Let me at once make my position clear. I do not
believe that secularism  is the best thing for this or any other country.

Every state must be based on certain moral values and premises
reflecting those espoused by the people of that country. Religion is
the  greatest value system of all times. Value systems constitute the
moorings upon which a state is anchored. Freed of those moorings the
state becomes a ship adrift at sea, without any proper control of
direction, the absence of secularism is not necessarily a bad thing to
be equated with suppression of minority religions. There are  sufficient
practical examples of intolerance of minority religions in legally
secular states. There are adequate examples of religious tolerance and
sympathy in states, which are legally religious states or recognise an
official religion. If secularism is so good and necessary for good
government etc why is the United Kingdom with Her Majesty the Queen as
both Head of State and Head of Church? Why is the Vatican State
officially and legally a Catholic state whose head of state is the  head
of the church and whose ambassadors and diplomatic envoys are all
members of the Catholic Clergy? Why is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
officially an Islamic State as is Pakistan, as is Morocco etc?

My focus here is not however to challenge the principle of secularism
and I do not wish to be side-tracked into that debate. But the point I  wish
to emphasise is that secularism is not necessarily an essential   or good
state of affairs. Some of its strongest proponents today come  from states
where it does not exist.

I do know however that whilst The Gambia may have since independence
been regarded as a secular state, it never really has been so legally or
constitutionally. No law or constitution of The Gambia has until now,
declared The Gambia to be a secular state, or even an Islamic or  Christian
state for that matter. That omission has not occasioned any  suppression or
maltreatment of minority religions or in any way  resulted  in
inter-religious conflict or disharmony.

There never has been any need in this country for protection or
reassurance of minority or other religions in this country. Why is  there
such a need now as stated in the proposed amendment? What are the
minority religions being protected against? What is there in our  national
experience that justifies such protection or reassurance?
Whose  freedom of worship has been denied in this country? Judging from the
existing imbalance, which I referred to earlier some would argue that it is
now the majority religions which need protection and assurance from the
minority!

If my understanding of secularism is right, the practical implication  of
the constitutional amendment, it would appear, have not been properly
adverted to, if at all. For instance could the Attorney General and
Secretary of State for Justice, or anyone else for that matter, advise
me on the following issues in the event that the proposal becomes law.

Will the Department of State for Religious Affairs be closed and its
staff laid off on the grounds that the state should not be involved in
religious matters?

Will religious instruction in state schools cease? What will happen to
Koranic teachers in primary and secondary schools? Will teaching cease
and teachers laid off?

Will government’s financial subvention/support of Christian mission  and
Muslim schools be able to continue? If so, will educational  institutions
belonging to other religions be entitled to similar facilities? Can a
secular state expend pubic funds on religious schools?

Will public funding continue to be available through the Gamworks  Agency
for construction of schools and training institutions belonging to religious
bodies given that this is a publicly funded agency?

What will happen to the involvement of the state in support of  religious
pilgrimages, whether to Saudi Arabia or to the Middle East? What would be
the fate of the Hajj Commission? If such involvement continues, will the
state be obliged to provide support for those who wish to make religious
trips in India (Buddhists) or elsewhere?

What of The Gambia’s membership of international organizations, which
have a religious basis such as the Islamic Conference Organisation? The
Islamic Development Bank? The Kuwait Fund? The Arab Bank or African
Economic Development? Would continued membership of such organisations be
compatible with our legal and constitutional secularity?

Some might well ask whether Easter and Christmas vacations for schools
will continue or be altered considering as their names imply and the
reality shows that they are essentially religious holidays? Or whether
we will now enjoy Tobaski and Koriteh school holidays as opposed to
the public holidays?

Will all the Arabic writings printed on public buildings since 1994  now
have to be erased?

Will all places of religious worship constructed in public/state  institutes
have to be demolished or in the name of equality of    religions will all
religions now have to have places of worship at such  institutions? If so,
at whose cost? Will State House now boast of a  church, a temple and a
synagogue to stand shoulder to shoulder with  the  Yahya Jammeh Mosque?

When we speak of religions in The Gambia one essentially has in mind
Islam and Christianity. But they are not the only religions. I am
certain that there is at least one Buddhist, one adherent of Judaism   etc.
what of the animists? are all these to be treated at par in The   Gambia in
the name of the equality that should flow from the proposed   secularity
irrespective of their numbers in the country?

What of appointments to the public service? Will there now need be
strict allocation on the basis of equality or equity or will religious
considerations be irrelevant? Or will it require that perceptions of
imbalance be addressed and remedied?

In The Gambia as in several other countries Saturday and Sunday are
officially non-working days. The rationale is that the former is the
Jewish Sabbath while the latter is the Christian Sabbath. There is no
doubt at all that religious considerations are the basis for these
official non-working days. If The Gambia goes constitutionally secular
will these be abolished and replaced with two other days in the week,
which are neutral in the religious sense? Or alternatively will    Friday,in
deference to the majority Muslim population, also be made a   non-working
day if not, why not? Once secularism is made a legal issue
are we not running the risk of dragging the courts into all these
questions? Will that be good for peace and harmony?

I do not know the answers to these questions. Nonetheless they appear
to  me to be pertinent to the issue of introducing legal secularism in The
Gambia. I do hope, even if I entertain some doubts in this respect, that our
policy makers have adverted their minds to them. Perhaps the
Attorney General would usefully explain to us the legal implications  of
the proposal in the context of our own national experience before the
Bill is approved and ratified by Parliament.

Many regard the move towards legal secularism combined with the    proposal
on the restricting of Islamic courts as is proposed in the same bill a step
towards legitimating the de facto tilt of the administration towards or its
hijacking by the minority religions. Or as enabling  such  minority
religions to exercise a veto power over the majority over all matters of
state in the name of equality and secularism? This may perhaps be an
extremist and alarmist position, which subsequent events may hopefully not
bear out.

Whatever the case, we run the risk of ushering in a period of  uncertainty
and possible conflict and description to the inter-religious tolerance and
harmony with which this country has been blessed since   independence. The
experience of legal secularism in countries such as Turkey and Lebanon do
not serve as an encouragement. We should tread  cautiously.

The government needs to suspend these proposals and think through
properly their possible implications on the peace tranquility and
cohesion of our body politic. Equally important is the need to give  time
and encouragement for a public debate on such an important issue. It is
amazing that extensive constitutional amendments such as these and
others are being tabled in Parliament with apparently very little effort
to sensitise and involve the general public in a healthy national  debate.

There seems to me little doubt that most Gambians are content to live  in a
state which is not officially or legally a religious state. Muslims,
Christians or what have you. At the same time however, they would wish
acknowledgement of the fact that this country is overwhelmingly   Muslim.
Government policies and decisions as well as the state of the law must
reflect that fact and accept it, without necessarily infringing on the right
of worship of all other religions.

The absence of secularity provision in the law from independence to date
has never impeded freedom of worship or led to suppression of minority
religions in The Gambia. On the other hand the introduction of
secularity provisions whose implication do not appear to have been
adequately considered appears to be fraught with dangers and with
potential for conflict.

I am equally convinced that the majority of Gambians, including myself
are content to live in a Gambia in which as at present the criminal
aspect of Sharia Law does not apply. But Sharia is not all about Criminal
law. Amputations, stoning or otherwise. The Sharia is a  comprehensive
system of divine justice, which covers all aspects of life and after life.
It is contrary to its vociferous and strident critics,  a humane system of
law and justice. But the fact is also that Muslims are   however entitled if
they so wish to have the Sharia Criminal law or other aspects of the Sharia
personal and commercial law apply to them.

It is not the business of their non- Muslim critics who continue to
denounce Islam and the Sharia mostly out of ignorance, prejudice and
hostility.

Where do we go from here? Firstly I urge the government to shelve its
proposed constitutional amendments altogether because of its potential
for conflict and turmoil. There is a great deal of suspicion too in  the
Muslim community that this secularism issue is only a legal cover for
consolidating the grip of minority non-Muslims on the machinery of
state. If that is not the case, Muslims and others need assurances to
that effect.

We do not likewise need the establishment of an Islamic state but
greater respect and recognition has to be accorded to that system of    law
by the government and by leaders of minority religions and to the   right of
Muslims to be governed by all aspects of that Sharia should they so wish.

The government must take the lead in this effort. I must restore  balance
and equity in the public service and eliminate the public perception that is
biased in favour of the minority. It must treat all religious leaders and
their flock with respect and courtesy. It should cease to make religion a
negative issue in our national life.

May the Blessing and Peace of Allah be upon all of us and upon our   nation.
Assalamu Alaikum wa rahmatullah wa barakatu huu.





_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.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
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------