Dignity, Difference And Divergence 9
consider the UDHR to be Western and thus ‘parochial’ and exclusionary of
other cultures and societies.
So, for example, in 1979 the Iranian Constitution promotes human rights
“according to Islamic standards”, or at the Islamic Conference to discuss the
UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981) a collective reservation
was entered by Iraq rejecting any provision “contrary to Islamic law, or to
laws based on Islamic principles”. In fact, the primacy of Islamic law is
usually cited as the framework for Muslim adherence and acceptance of the
UN human rights covenants. In a number of instances there are marked
differences between UN provisions and those reflecting Islam, so for instance
the death penalty is legitimated in Articles 10, 11 and 12 of the Arab Charter
of Human Rights, except for pregnant women and those under eighteen.
Sultan Hussein Tabandeh of Iran published A Muslim Commentary on the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1968 for the Tehran International
Conference on Human Rights. He understood the UDHR to be mostly
compatible with Islamic law and that it reiterates many Islamic provisions,
but in a number of areas it is not possible to reconcile Islamic traditions with
the UDHR. 15 He discussed family law, divorce, and rights in marriage,
which are designed in Islam “to protect the family”, and the limits on
freedom of thought and expression as set by Islamic law. Freedom to change
religion, he also understood to violate Islamic law. The freedom of
expression issue and the 1988 fatwa against Rushdie served to highlight the
chasm between liberal Western conventions and laws and those of Ayatollah
Khomeini’s Islamic state.
How different are the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (1981)
and Arab Charter on Human Rights (1994) from the UDHR? The first thing
to note is that in form, at least, both documents are modelled on the UDHR.
The UIDHR begins with a prayer and acknowledgment of Allah and
continues with the claim that there is no need for the UDHR at all as there is
already a universal code in the Qu’ran. Within the framework of an
“obligation to establish an Islam order”, the UIDHR rejects all forms of
discrimination, enjoins protection and honouring of the family, views
“worldly power” as a “sacred trust”, “all economic resources” as “divine
blessings bestowed on mankind, to be enjoyed by all”, and insists that all
“public affairs” be determined after “mutual consultation” between those
affected in accordance with the “law and public good”. Muslims are
obligated to refuse to do anything contrary to the Islamic Law regardless of
who issues the order and nontransferable
individual responsibility is
mandated for all. Freedom of thought and expression is recognised but only
so within the Islamic Law. Everyone has the right to earn their living
“according to the Islamic Law” and “all means of production shall be utilised
in the interest of the Ummah (community) as a whole, and may not be
neglected or misused”. And, the poor have a right to share in the “wealth of
the rich”. Clearly there are significant overlaps with the UDHR, but there is
considerably more emphasis on the communal and collective good and all
rights are accepted or limited by the compatibilities or differences with
Islamic law.
reference: Paul Morris
A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Dignity, Difference And Divergence 9
consider the UDHR to be Western and thus ‘parochial’ and exclusionary of
other cultures and societies.
So, for example, in 1979 the Iranian Constitution promotes human rights
“according to Islamic standards”, or at the Islamic Conference to discuss the
UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981) a collective reservation
was entered by Iraq rejecting any provision “contrary to Islamic law, or to
laws based on Islamic principles”. In fact, the primacy of Islamic law is
usually cited as the framework for Muslim adherence and acceptance of the
UN human rights covenants. In a number of instances there are marked
differences between UN provisions and those reflecting Islam, so for instance
the death penalty is legitimated in Articles 10, 11 and 12 of the Arab Charter
of Human Rights, except for pregnant women and those under eighteen.
Sultan Hussein Tabandeh of Iran published A Muslim Commentary on the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1968 for the Tehran International
Conference on Human Rights. He understood the UDHR to be mostly
compatible with Islamic law and that it reiterates many Islamic provisions,
but in a number of areas it is not possible to reconcile Islamic traditions with
the UDHR. 15 He discussed family law, divorce, and rights in marriage,
which are designed in Islam “to protect the family”, and the limits on
freedom of thought and expression as set by Islamic law. Freedom to change
religion, he also understood to violate Islamic law. The freedom of
expression issue and the 1988 fatwa against Rushdie served to highlight the
chasm between liberal Western conventions and laws and those of Ayatollah
Khomeini’s Islamic state.
How different are the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (1981)
and Arab Charter on Human Rights (1994) from the UDHR? The first thing
to note is that in form, at least, both documents are modelled on the UDHR.
The UIDHR begins with a prayer and acknowledgment of Allah and
continues with the claim that there is no need for the UDHR at all as there is
already a universal code in the Qu’ran. Within the framework of an
“obligation to establish an Islam order”, the UIDHR rejects all forms of
discrimination, enjoins protection and honouring of the family, views
“worldly power” as a “sacred trust”, “all economic resources” as “divine
blessings bestowed on mankind, to be enjoyed by all”, and insists that all
“public affairs” be determined after “mutual consultation” between those
affected in accordance with the “law and public good”. Muslims are
obligated to refuse to do anything contrary to the Islamic Law regardless of
who issues the order and nontransferable
individual responsibility is
mandated for all. Freedom of thought and expression is recognised but only
so within the Islamic Law. Everyone has the right to earn their living
“according to the Islamic Law” and “all means of production shall be utilised
in the interest of the Ummah (community) as a whole, and may not be
neglected or misused”. And, the poor have a right to share in the “wealth of
the rich”. Clearly there are significant overlaps with the UDHR, but there is
considerably more emphasis on the communal and collective good and all
rights are accepted or limited by the compatibilities or differences with
Islamic law.
reference: Paul Morris