Evolution of the Idea of Human Rights and Duties in Islam1

Dr. Ali A. Allawi
1st Seminar at the Carr Center, Kennedy School, Harvard University
October 28, 2009
Introduction
  • The contemporary notion of human rights— embodied in theory, practice and law— does not have a parallel provenance in pre-modern Islamic thought and practice.
  • There are no similar "moments" in Islamic history comparable to Magna Carta, the French Revolution's Declaration of the Rights of Man, or the framing of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
  • Neither does Islam have a tradition of theorising about individual rights and freedoms, in the vein of Locke, Hobbes, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Paine and JS Mill in pre-modern times.
  • Therefore, in as much as the modern principles of human rights can be related, in part, to an accumulation of systematic thinking on the rights of individuals, groups and communities, then Islamic thought does not exhibit the same or similar progression of the set of ideas and principles that underpin modern human rights.
  • However, there is little doubt that Islamic thought and jurisprudence, in the pre-modern era, did deal with many aspects of the rights and duties of various categories of human beings; but in a framework that was conceptually and methodologically different from the western tradition.
  • "Huqooq al-Insan" in Arabic are the contemporary rendering of "human rights". However, they cannot be located as such in pre-modern Islamic literature. But Huqooq itself is a word derived from the root word Haqq— a word which can mean equally truth or right or rights over others, or share. (Al-Haqq or the Truth, is one of Allah's attributes).
  • It is in this form that the equivalent principle of human rights and duties in Islam is found in a huge array of original Islamic sources.
  • Such sources can include documents on the principles and maxims of government; sayings of rulers and judges; actions of the muhtassib, (a type of ombudsman); treatises on justice, equality, ethics, political and moral philosophy, accountability, toleration, treatment of minorities, property rights, freedom of conscience and expression, and so on.
The Treatment of Human Rights in the classical Islamic Period — Primary Classical Sources for Deriving a Human Rights Doctrine in Islam
A. The Qur'an
  • For the mass of believing Muslims throughout history, the Qur'an has always been the key text upon which Islamic life and civilization has been built. Muslims have found in the Qur'an numerous verses from which an understanding of human being's position in the cosmos has been derived; as well as the enumeration and exposition of the rights and duties of human beings to their Creator, to each other and to themselves.
  • Such verses cover the dignity and moral perfectibility of human beings; mankind as God's vice-regents on earth; the inherent equality of human beings; elevated status of human beings in the cosmic order; as well as the obligation to consult others in governing; the toleration of non-Muslims and the rejection of compunction in matters of faith and religion.
  • Human beings (insan) and Haqq are mentioned over 70 and 250 times respectively.
  • However, the pre-modern reading and interpretation of the Qur'anic text was not done with the specific intent of developing a human rights doctrine. This only emerged in the 20thcentury mainly in response to the challenge of the modern human rights movement.
B. The Early Medinan 'Constitution'
  • This document reports the heads of agreement between the Prophet Muhammad and his followers after the hegira to Medina and the people of Medina and the surrounding tribes— both pagan Arabs, Christian Arabs and Jews. It is narrated by Ibn Ishaq, the earliest of the Prophet Muhammad's biographers.
  • The document regulates the relationship between the various components of the Medinan society and confirms the principles of toleration, freedom of religion and rights granted to the tribes and to non-Muslims, in the context of building a civic order.
C. Instructions and Decisions of the Rightly Guided Caliphs
  • Instructions from the Caliphs Abu Bakr and Omar on the treatment of non combatants and non-Muslims in conquered territories; and on the dispensation of justice.
  • Discourses, Orders and Sermons of the 4th caliph, Imam Ali2
  • The key document here is the detailed letter written by Imam Ali to Malik al-Ashtar, the governor of Egypt, where Imam Ali sets out the rights and duties of the ruler and the ruled, and guidelines on the proper and appropriate conduct of the state towards its subjects. (This document surfaces later in the design of the Iranian constitutions of 1906 and 1979).
  • The discourses of Imam Ali that were collected in a compilation called Nahj ul-Balagha (the Peaks of Eloquence), are an important source for the evolution of Shia Muslim ethical doctrines, some of which relate to the idea of human rights and duties.
D. Theological, Metaphysical and Jurisprudential Treatises of the Classical Age that Reflect on the Idea of Human Rights
  • These sources fall into a number of categories including: treatises on government and power, emphasising humanistic principles such as equality, access to justice, provision of personal security and public order, and enhancing social and economic welfare.
  • Such treatises include the writings of Al-'Amir (d. 991), al-Ghazali (d.1111), al-Tartoushi (d.1126), Abi Asiba'a (d.1269), Al-Taqtaqi (d.1309), Ibn Jama'a (d.1332), al-Zayani (d.1388).
  • Al-Tartoushi's book, Siraj al-Muluk (The Lamp of Kings) in particular comes close to discussing issues of equality before the law, and the rights of subjects not to be oppressed by state power in ways that approximate contemporary human rights discourse.
  • Human rights were also implicit in the writings of Islamic political philosophers such as al-Farabi in his Virtuous City; philosophers of historysuch as Ibn Khaldun and moralists and ethicists such as Ibn Hazm of Andalusia and ibn Muskawayh.
E. The Epistle of Rights by Imam Ali Zain al-Abidin
  • This is a document that has been authoritatively attributed to Imam Ali Zain al-Abidin (d.714), the fourth Imam of the Shia Muslims. It sets out eight categories of rights, mainly expressed in terms of the classical understanding of rights that others have over the individual.
  • These include: individual rights and obligations couched in religious terms; spiritual and religious rights; the rights and obligations of the ruler and ruled; the rights of parents and children; social rights (such as the rights of neighbours); economic and financial rights; the rights of those seeking reform (a uniquely Islamic category); ethical and moral rights.
F. The Rights of 'Adamic Creatures' of al-Mawardi
  • Al-Mawardi (d.1058) is a key political philosopher in Islam and the author of the famous treatise on government al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya ('The Principles of Government').
  • His treatise on the rights of man (Adamic Creatures) is less well known but nevertheless a significant document. It is written mainly as a manual for rulers to curb their excesses in the exercise of power and not to trample on the rights of human beings as ordained by religion.
  • In summary, the classical period did not treat human rights as a separate category of inquiry but included aspects of them in treatises on government, power and authority.
  • In general, rights arose as a correlative of duties and obligations, and this was so expressed in the jurisprudential terms of the Sharia. It is the human being as an obligor (Mukallaf) rather than one with inherent rights that is the foundation of Sharia rulings that have a bearing on human rights and duties.
The Impact of Modernity and Imperial Expansion on Traditional Understanding of Human Rights and Obligations (From the Early 19th Century to WW II)
  • The impact of the European powers on Islamic institutions and laws was felt especially forcibly in the Ottoman Empire. The demand for a constitution to contain the powers of the Sultan/Caliph introduced the idea of citizenship in place of the millet system.
  • The millet system was based essentially on the recognition of each religious community in the Empire as a separate unit, directly connected to the Sultan/Caliph. Each millet (e.g. the Greek orthodox, the Catholics, the Jews) set most of its own laws and regulations in light of religious ordinances and customs. The Sultan/Caliph in turn had his power limited to those areas for which the Sharia had no ruling.
  • The constitutional movement thus undermined both the principle of Sultan/Subject and the division of autonomous communities according to religious affiliations.
  • Political rights were therefore recast in modern terms of constitutional arrangements, representation, elections, separation of powers, and the institutions and laws that accompanied this profound change.
  • The impact of modernity in the 19th century also affected intellectuals, writers and high officials in the Muslim World in ways that further undermined the familiar concepts and categories of Islamic thought and practice.
  • The principles of the French Revolution, profoundly significant in the early construct of human rights doctrines in the West, seeped into Muslim lands and influenced a whole range of opinion leaders.
  • Rifa'a Tahtawi (d.1873) wrote regarding the meaning of liberty and freedom. In Islamic thought liberty was not an inherently desirable trait but merely one that stood in contrast to a state of slavery.
  • Syed Ahmad Khan (d.1898) introduced reason and the scientific method in his Qur'anic hermeneutics.
  • Muhammad Abduh (d.1905) discussed the importance of free expression and conscience as a fundamental human right.
  • Ali Abd el-Razzik dismissed the ideal of the Caliphate as a significant and necessary institution in Islam, allowing thereby legitimacy to the notion of the nation state.
  • Qasim Amin (d.1908) and Jamil Zahawi (d.1936) sought to elevate the status of women in Islam.
  • But all of these reformers met with strong resistance from traditional circles and their claims only gradually entered the public consciousness. In many cases, it was only through the efforts of autocratic regimes (such as Ataturk) that their principles (for example the emancipation of women) were accepted at the level of government.
  • The principles of limited and constitutional government were most profoundly expressed in the Iranian Constitutional Revolution of 1906. The author of the most famous treatise on the necessity of constitutional government in Islam was Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Hussein al-Naini (d.1936). It was his theoretical writings and pronouncements (especially Tanbih al-Umma wa Tanzih al-Milla) that inspired the revolutionaries of the period and reconciled the ideals of Islamic government with the demands of a constitutional order that limited the powers of the ruler.
  • Naini's treatise introduced important qualifications to the principles of government of Islam viz. the idea of deputising a person to represent one's political interests and limiting the duration of such deputation. Choosing one's representative in an assembly of such people, with delegated, limited but renewable powers becomes a critical aspect of a government in Islam. At the same time, the people are recognised as politically sovereign in the absence of a divinely guided Imam.
  • Naini's political and constituional ideas revolved around four basic points:
    1. A description of the evils of an unrepresentative and oppressive government.
    2. The promulgation of a constitution.
    3. The establishment of a parliament through elections.
    4. Elaboration on the ideas of freedom, equality, supervision and transparency.
  • Nevertheless Naini also introduced the idea of guardianship over the political process by the establishment of a council of elders that would supervise the constitution and government, and ensure that no laws are passed that contravene Islamic ordinances.
  • The ideals of the Iranian constitutional revolution of 1906 resurfaced in the 1979 revolution, but key aspects of Naini's vision were distorted or overlooked in the constituional arrangements of the Islamic republic.
  • Following the end of WW I, most Muslims resided in one form or another under colonial or imperial rule. The evolution of human rights doctrines were naturally subservient to the struggle for independence, and for expanding the scope of political freedoms where a form of parliamentary government was followed (e.g. in Egypt).
Human Rights and Islam in the Decades After the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights
  • The role of Muslim majority countries in the formulation of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 was minimal. That is not to say that Muslim majority did not particpate in the negotiations that resulted in the final document, but their concerns, when expressed, were not taken into account.
  • There were few Muslim majority countries in the UN at that point and apart from the interjections of Saudi Arabia— which abstained in the final vote— the other Muslim nations ratified the document without any reservations or comments.
  • Muslim countries all participated in later international conferences in 1966 which set out the civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights, and the collective International Bill of Rights have been ratified in their present form by nearly all Muslim majority countries.
  • The fact that a number of the provisions of these covenants contravened generally accepted Islamic norms (for example, Article 18 of the UDHR on the right to change one's religion) could be attributed to the nature of the governments (and their diplomatic representatives) of that period.
  • Most of the newly independent Arab countries were run by secular elements who were not over concerned with the nuances of the contradictions between certain Sharia rulings and the covenants of the human rights declarations.
  • It was only after the rise of political Islam on the world stage in the 1970's which culminated in the Islamic revolution in Iran, did a serious questioning of the conditions under which the international human rights covenants were drawn become a subject of dispute. The UDHR became depicted as an unequal imposition of a purported universal doctrine by ascendant western powers.
  • However, at the non-governmental level the UNDHR and the other human rights covenants spurred a critical examination of the Islamic retort to the human rights movement, and an attempt to update Islamic rulings and understandings of the concept.
  • The literature on human rights and Islam grew exponentially in the period after 1950 with several writers attempting to evolve a specifically Islamic notion of human rights built on key Qur'anic concepts, such as human beings acting as God's' vice regents on earth and the inherent dignity of human beings endowed with a spiritual essence.
  • In addition, the literature on Islam and human rights began to mine the principles of the Sharia as well as new renderings of Sharia rulings to build a body of human rights that purported to be in accordance with the teachings of Islam.
  • Parallel to this entirely new literature on human rights, Muslim countries meeting in various conclaves began to formally introduce the idea of human rights, albeit in a specific Islamic formulation.
  • The first such attempt to introduce specific provision for human rights in a model Islamic state was the Pan Islamic conference held in Karachi in 1950, which was attended by the leading Islamic ideologue of the times, Abul 'Ala al-Mawdudi. The Karachi conference produced a model constitution for an ideal Islamic state.
  • The provisions of this model constitution became the building block for several similar schemes promoted by  Islamist political parties, such as the Muslim Brotherhood's proposals for an Islamic constitution (1952) and that of Hizb-ul-Tahrir (also 1952).
  • These schemes culminated in the famous Azhar University's 1978 proposal for an Islamic constitution, whose significance lies in that it was proposed by the pre-eminent Sunni Muslim religious institution.
  • In one form or another, the idea of a specific Islamic formulation of human rights as a counterpoint to the International Bill of Rights can be traced to these proposals, all of which were triggered by the UDHR and the inadequate response of Muslim governments of the time to the (Islamically) controversial or problematic provisions of the covenants.
  • In the 1970's Saudi Arabia began to sponsor a series of meetings and conferences with a view to systematising an Islamic bill of human rights; as well as propagating the role of religion and religious doctrine in the formulation of international covenants of human rights. These efforts started in 1972 by the Saudi Ministry of Justice, directly and through the offices of the Saudi-financed World Islamic League.
  • In 1980, the Islamic Council of Europe, an independent organisation that had then a link to the World Islamic League, produced the first specifically Islamic doctrine of human rights, called the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (UIDHR). This was as a result of a conference held in London and attended by over 50 representatives from various Muslim governments. The UIDHR acquired a semi-legal status in the Islamic world and was seen as a counterpoint to the UHDR.
  • The Declaration involved the stipulation of  23 human rights, all of which were justified explicitly by Qur'anic verses and sayings (hadith) of the Prophet Muhammad. The rights listed did not follow the sequence of the UDHR and included rights that did not feature at all in the UDHR, couched as they were in the language of religion.
  • The UIDHR became in time the main foundational document and support for all subsequent elaborations on human rights by Islamic organisations. The UIDHR was unveiled to the world at an elaborate conference at UNESCO attended by a number of former leaders of Muslim countries such Ben Bella of Algeria and Ould Dadah of Mauretania.
  • The UIDHR was soon followed by a meeting of Muslim jurists, lawyers and judges in Kuwait in December 1980 that elaborated in detail on the UIDHR's covenants.
  • A specifically Arab version of human rights emerged out of a conference organised by the Arab League's legal department. The conference, held in Syracuse in Italy in 1986 grouped a large number of Arab legal, academic, religious and governmental figures. The conference produced a document, The Project for The Declaration of the Rights of Human Beings and Peoples in the Arab Nation. The document detailed the nature of civil rights.
    1. Recognition of legal rights.
    2. A right to life.
    3. A right to personal security.
    4. Freedom to travel, and so on.
    5. The nature of social, economic and cultural rights.
    6. Political rights (such as freedom of assembly, freedom to form associations.
    7. A right to nationality.
    8. And finally, group rights such as the right to self-determination, the right to resist the invader or foreign tutelage.
  • The conference also recommended the formation of a specific Arab Human Rights Committee as well as the establishment of an Arab Human Rights Court.
  • The conferences of the late 1970's and 1980's were partly in response to the enormous challenge thrown at the Muslim world by the promulgation of a specifically Islamic constitution in Iran. Many countries were moved to question the specifically Shia aspects of the Iranian constitution, especially to the innovative and controversial idea of the Rule of the Jurisprudent (wilayat al-faqih). Partly in response to the increasing diversion of various Islamically-inspired constitutions and declarations on human rights, the Iranian revolutionary government organised a Pan Islamic conference on human rights in Tehran in 1987.
  • The final communiqué of the Tehran conference on human rights detailed ten recommendations nearly all of which related to the legitimation of the new Iranian state and the privileged role of its ulema leaders; and the denunciation of imperial powers and the various enemies of the Iranian state. Only one recommendation specifically related to the issue of human rights in Islam.
  • The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam which was issued in 1990, is the most authoritative official pronouncement on the issue. It was approved by the foreign ministers of all the member countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) after a decade long process of debate, review and consultation, and three summit conferences of the OIC. It was subsequently ratified by a  summit of the OIC leaders.
  • The Cairo Declaration however did not try to reconcile or resolve the differences in emphasis and context with the International Bill of Rights, leaving many OIC countries in the uncomfortable position of endorsing two often conflicting interpretations of human rights. Neither did it result in the establishment of a permanent office or secretariat to monitor human rights in OIC countries.
  • The Cairo Declaration was soon followed by a  separate charter for the Arab world, the Arab Charter of Human Rights, which was issued by the Arab league in 1994. This charter seemed to defeat its purpose by granting governments the right to suspend the provisions of the charter "in the interest of national security, economic emergencies and threats to public order."
  • Partly in response to a heightened awareness internationally of human rights issues, the 1990's and 2000's saw a significant increase in the number of conferences in the Islamic world that examined the issue of human rights in Islam.
  • In 1996, a conference in Jeddah grouped jurisprudential leaders (fiqh experts) to develop the Sharia-basis of human rights legislation.
  • This was followed in 1997 by a conference held in Amman under the auspices of the Ahl-ul-Bayt Foundation, an official Jordanian institution. The conference was aimed at reconciling differences between Islamically-based human rights conventions and prevailing international standards, with a strong emphasis on developing an inter-faith basis for human rights legislation.
  • In 2000, Rome was the venue for a conference organised under the auspices of the World Muslim League, a Saudi-linked institution, which produced the Rome Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. This was followed by a conference in 2001 in Riyadh in which human rights were examined within the historic and legal legacy of Islam. These two conferences were the partly in response to increased agitation regarding the human rights record of Saudi Arabia.
  • In a related development which had a number of human rights implications, a conference was organised in 2005 in Amman to encourage inter-sectarian concord within Islam. This was partly in response to increasing Sunni-Shia violence mainly in Iraq, but also in Lebanon, Pakistan and Afghanistan. It was also intended  to isolate and negate the influence of extremist Islamic political movements in appropriating for themselves the right to issue binding religious decrees. Some of the pronouncements of the extremist organisations and leaders impacted directly on human rights abuses.
  • The Amman Message which emerged from the conference, and which was subsequently endorsed by a number of Islamic countries, called for inter-sectarian harmony, defined the formally acknowledged Islamic groups and sects, and denounced unauthorised religious decrees that did not abide by the strict rules of orthodoxy as expounded by the officially acknowledged sects and groups.
  • The accumulated effect of decades of engagement between Muslims and the modern human rights has been uneven. There is still no definition of an 'Islamically' acceptable standard, with a common agreed methodological and theoretical basis to which all parties would agree.
  • The documentary evidence clearly reflects this ambiguity and uncertainty. The Cairo Declaration for example stated categorically that the Sharia was the basis of all human rights legislation, ignoring the fact that the Sharia is understood differently by different sects. The UIDHR in contrast based human rights in Islam on the Qur'an and Prophetic sayings, a different emphasis in important ways from a strictly Sharia basis. The Arab Charter and the Syracuse Declaration relied on a different theoretical basis for human rights, and privileged raison d'etat over other considerations in extremis.
Critiques of the Concept of a Specifically Islamic Construct of Human Rights
  • The idea that there should be a specifically Islamic basis for Human Rights, that would meet the religious criteria of Islam has proved problematic. The critiques of the justification of a separate category of human rights notions in Islam cover the entire spectrum of opinion, from extremely conservative Muslims to the outer reaches of opinion regarding the compatibility of Islam with most aspects of modernity.
  • Traditional Muslim thought has always looked askance at categories of law and policy that are not rooted in the Islamic tradition. Thus, human rights as a separate aspect of the human condition requiring its own set of definitions of rules and processes is alien to the structure of traditional thought.
  • The refrain of this group to any crystallization of the principles of human rights, to which Muslims ought to abide, is an affront to the Sharia and to the notion of Islam as a perfected religion. In this mode of thought, there is no need for any separate body of law and doctrine on human rights for Muslims, as their lives, if ordered according to the Sharia, is bound to lead to a felicitous outcome for humanity.
  • This line of reasoning has retreated in modern times, especially in official and governmental circles; as well as in the formal religious institutions of Islam. However, it has been adopted, in one variant or another, by the forces of extreme political Islam, that do not acknowledge the need for any separate body of law and policy that covers the area of human rights.
  • A second line of reasoning among a number of conservative Muslims is that the entire human rights movement, from the UDHR through to the conventions of 1966, and the gamut of official institutions and NGO's that manage and supervise the human rights movement are linked to an on-going western onslaught to dominate the world and are no different in form and intent from other projects of political and cultural domination. The fact that Muslim countries mostly signed on to these conventions is of no significance to these critics, as the argument is often made that these governments were subservient to western interests in any case.
  • A corollary to this position is that there is no need for specific concern with human rights in the methodological form of the human rights conventions; but there should, nevertheless, be a heightened awareness of the issues of abuses and oppressive laws and customs within the Muslim world, and that these should be tackled and erased in the context of Sharia law.
  • A third line of reasoning can be broadly termed the rejection of the principles of the universality of human rights on the grounds of cultural relativism. This was best expressed by the 1984 statement by Iran's UN representative, Rajaei-Khorassani, who rejected the universality of the UDHR by claiming that it was an outcome of a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and thus could not be foisted on people whose traditions and values originate from other premises.
  • A fourth line of reasoning acknowledges that individuals and groups would benefit from a codification of their rights and duties; and that while the international conventions might not reflect the ideal mechanism to do so, their form and purpose should be adopted in the design of a specifically Islamic framework of human rights.
  • This implicitly accepts that international conventions cannot be ignored, and that they have seeped into the political discourse of Muslim countries. Muslim countries cannot stand by anymore as mute bystanders in the human rights debates of modern times and that their interests as states and governments are best served if they pro-actively engage the human rights movement by expressing an Islamic variant of the definition of human rights.
  • It is the combination of the last two perspectives that have driven the articulation of official human rights conventions in Islamic countries.
  • Finally, there is a significant body of opinion amongst Muslims whose political and philosophical perspectives are rooted in Islam (rather than, say, western liberalism), that there are indeed human rights that cross cultural and religious boundaries, and these are best expressed in the form of binding international conventions that stipulate individual and group rights primarily as a break on the powers of a rampant state.
  • This group works from the assumption that the declared human rights of international conventions must be legitimated by a re-reading of Islamic texts and doctrine to arrive at a similar understanding of human rights; in essence generating an Islamic sanction for issues where traditionally authoritative readings would indicate otherwise.
  • A variant of this line of thought is that of the Iranian philosopher Abdolkarim Soroush, who expressly denies that the idea of the duties-bound human being of classical Islamic thought has any relevance to the modern construct of mankind as endowed with inherent rights.
  • Similarly, the Sudanese-born legal theorist Abdullahi An-Naim, starting from the perspective of a devout believer, has called for a re-reading of the Sharia in light of the primacy of human rights and international law.
  • The critique of modern Islamic doctrines of human rights emanating from western sources or from secular Muslims tend to fall into the following categories:

    1. The need for international standards in defining human rights cannot be undermined or abrogated by Islamic "exceptionalism".
    2. The modern understanding of rights has no counterpart in a religious tradition that emphasises the nexus of duties and obligations that determine a human being's condition.
    3. International conventions are better mechanisms for protecting individuals against deprivations than Sharia-based criteria that are frequently vague and uncertain.
    4. The above applies in particular to provisions relating to the treatment of non-Muslims and women where classical Sharia readings seem to deny the principle of equal protection under the law. By affirming the primacy of Sharia law, the Islamic human rights schemes undermine other provisions that appear to accord with international conventions.
    5. The issue of freedom of religion, in particular the ability of Muslims to change their religion, appears to be treated evasively in the Islamic human rights conventions.
    6. The Islamic Human rights conventions assume that there is a singular Islamic position on the matter; while in reality Islam presents a far more nuanced and complex understanding of the issues of human rights. In essence, the modern Islamic human rights schemes are only a reflection of an ideological and theoretical position formulated by Islamic modernists and revivalists, who seek to monopolise the Islamic political space.
Finally…
  • The evolution of the principles of human rights in Islam will always be a complex process. On the one hand are claims that Islam should not demand an exceptional status in international conventions and agreements; and that Muslim countries and their citizens are best served if they abide by the international bill of rights. These should be adhered to even if some of their provisions may be problematic from the perspective of traditionally authoritative rulings.
  • On the other hand are the variants of claims that Muslims cannot blithely abandon the bases of their culture and civilisation to a system where the idea and ideals of rights might stray even further from commonly agreed norms of Islam. It is incumbent upon them to produce therefore their own version of the principles of human rights and hew to them in defence of their values and faith.
  • Of course it is possible that in time, the two systems may co-exist but for this to have any significance in terms of the rights of individuals and peoples, the real abuses that abound in Muslim countries must be reined in. Peoples must see a real improvement in their wellbeing, their rights and freedoms as a result of nations abiding by the stipulations of an Islamic code of human rights, irrespective of its provenance.
  • Lastly, the final word on what constitutes Islamic norms has not been given, nor will it ever be definitively determined.
  • In this respect, certain aspects of the Islamic legacy with profoundly humanistic overtones, from which an entirely new perspective on human rights can  evolve, can be re-discovered after centuries of neglect and marginalisation.
  • This especially relates to the area of ethics in Islam (akhlaq) and the field of tassawuf (sufism) and gnosis (irfan) from which important insights on the nature of human beings and their duties and rights can be derived.
  • This will be the theme of possible subsequent lectures on the matter— whether a human rights doctrine in Islam can be partly rooted in Islam's gnostic and sufic tradition.

2nd Seminar ► Islam, Ethics and Human Rights - An Alternative Perspective

1This article is based on a PowerPoint presentation. This is why the paragraphs are presented in bullets.
2This is of particular importance to Shia Muslims.