The coronavirus outbreak has pitted Islamic clerics against politicians in a confrontation over religion versus politics; of course, religion and politics are intricately intertwined in normative Islam. The Pakistani government has already succumbed to pressure from Muslim clerics to open all mosques for Ramadan. Now Muslim groups in South Africa “are set to head to the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria in a bid to declare certain parts of the lockdown regulations unconstitutional as it prohibits prayers, specifically the Muslim daily prayers, in places of worship.”
“Muhammed Bin Hassim Mohomed, Anas Mohammed Chotia and the As-Saadiqeen Islamic Centre who will argue the lockdown regulations should be amended to allow places of worship to remain open during the lockdown under certain conditions.”
Court papers also assert that “it is a violation of Islamic law as contained in the Holy Quran to forcefully close mosques to prevent any worship from taking place, even in the context of the pandemic.”
But the influential United Ulama Council of South Africa is opposed to the court challenge, saying the application “ignores that the entire country is called upon to make sacrifices.” Mohammad Tauha Karaan, a board member of the UUCSA, said that “certain freedoms may be limited if they threaten the sanctity of human life or offend human dignity.” He said that the coronavirus restrictions involved “no limitation on freedom of religion or belief.” But he also seemed to open the door to some kind of challenge to the restrictions by noting that “prayers happen five times per day – no matter what day it is – and there are also a significant number of churches, synagogues, temples and similar places of worship. This would make the implementation of these measures in every one of these places of worship ‘burdensome, impractical and insufficient.'”
Churches, synagogues and temples are not involved in this constitutional challenge, so why bring them in? Should there be a widespread infection of COVID-19 in the Islamic community due to the opening of mosques for Ramadan, there could be a backlash against the community. So it behooves the UUCSA to appear to be concerned about the wider community. It is useful to recall in this connection that Muslim Brotherhood (MB) leaders in the West go to great lengths to deceive. This fact warrants not paranoia, but questions about Islamic organizations with an unsavory history and reputation. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood and those linked to it disassociate themselves from violent jihad for covert purposes, while their organization is dedicated to the proposition that violent jihad is accepted as their highest calling. When given sufficient power and emboldened, the MB engages in violent jihad. Take, for example, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
The MB is an adaptive movement that is has in some cases presented itself as favoring certain “reforms” in order better to adapt to the realities of free societies in the West, but always with the expansion of political Islam in mind. Those reforms have nothing to do with human rights and modernization. Brotherhood members continue routinely to deceive the Houses of War, as the very same MB groups that disassociate themselves from violent jihad in Western countries have been found to be linked up to groups such as Hamas.
Similarly, the South African Law Commission has been partnering with questionable Islamic organizations for decades. Among them is the United Ulama Council of South Africa, which the government consults on issues pertaining to Muslim interests and legal institutions, just as Western governments have been partnering with Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups. The Council seeks to be “a friend of the court.” It isn’t in the interests for the UUCSA to sacrifice long-term advantage for short-term gain during the current lockdown.
Here is some background on the formation, roots and purpose of the United Ulama Council of South Africa, which includes infighting and the emergence of the Council as a force to reckon with:
In the 1990s, High Court Judge Mohammed Navsa was appointed to chair the Law Commission committee on Islamic personal law. Various Muslim groups were competing for representation in the Muslim community and vying to be the arbiter on matters pertaining to Muslim personal law. Eventually, “an inclusive Muslim Personal Law Board (MPLB) consisting of the major stakeholders” was launched in Durban in 1994. Included in the MPLB were Muslims from the hardline Deobandi sect of Islam and from the Sunni Barelvi movement. These groups have engaged in jihad violence against one another for turf; but in a groundbreaking event, they uniting in 1994 in South Africa. The MPLB was forced to adapt to South African law, but this adaptation was not without turmoil. The Deobandi Jamiats — which have been influenced by Wahhabi ideology — denounced the influence of progressive Muslims as un-Islamic, insults were hurled, and ultimately the MPLB was shut down to form the new Ulama Council of South Africa. The new organization aimed at “pursuing recognition of Muslim personal law.” In 1998, the UUCSA met with President Mandela, urging him to implement Muslim personal law (MPL). They reiterated a demand for “MPL to be exempt from constitutional provisions.” We see the real goal of the UUCSA in this: they are dedicated to implementation of the Sharia while camouflaging and appearing to be “reformist” in order to fool South African authorities. But that was then. Now the UUCSA has managed to make significant influential headway, but have its goals changed?
In 2011, the true face of the United Ulama Council of South Africa was shown when the Society for the Protection of our Constitution filed a complaint with the Registrar against Radio Islam, implicating the General Secretary of the UUCSA. “The complaint was that the Respondent was propagating by means of broadcast the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures, and that this was undermining the Constitution.” The complaint mentioned two individuals together: Ebrahim Bham, Secretary General of Jamiatul Ulama South Africa, and Yusuf Patel, General Secretary of the United Ulama Council of South Africa. Alarming information from a Radio Islam broadcast exposed much about these two leaders and their organizations. The Court document stated:
It may be wise to obrtain [sic] tape recordings of the interviews previously held with one [sic] Moulana Bham and Moulana Yusuf Patel. It these interviews confirm our client’s suspicions that these two men are embarking on a subtle campaign of inciting terrorism, then our client instructs that they should be criminally charged under the Terrorism Act.
Bham has also stated this about “right wing” politicians following the New Zealand mosque rampage:
“Right-wing politicians in western countries have been spreading hatred against Islam since the 9/11 attacks in the United States by generalizing Muslims as ‘terrorists.’”
Unfortunately, when Westerners see headlines about the United Ulema Council of South Africa cooperating with the larger society, they automatically assume it is good news and in the interests of the whole, all in the name of “diversity.” Reality is otherwise.
“Muslim groups to challenge lockdown regulations in court,” by Azarrah Karrim, News24, April 23, 2020:
A group of Muslim leaders and entities are set to head to the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria in a bid to declare certain parts of the lockdown regulations unconstitutional as it prohibits prayers, specifically the Muslim daily prayers, in places of worship.
On Thursday, Muhammed Bin Hassim Mohomed, Anas Mohammed Chotia and the As-Saadiqeen Islamic Centre will argue the lockdown regulations should be amended to allow places of worship to remain open during the lockdown under certain conditions.
They would also ask for magistrates to oversee the process to allow for congregational prayer, preparation and distribution of meals and testing for Covid-19, according to court papers.
This, they said, would be done while also regulating the number of congregants, enforcing physical distancing and using sanitisers and other hygiene measures, among other things.
“The real questions we will ask the court is to consider whether a complete and total shutdown of mosques and other places of worship is the appropriate measure required to contain Covid-19 in the context of prayer and worship.
Read: Muslim groups go to courts to challenge lockdown
“Prayer and worship … bring a level of calm to the community, it brings a level of hope to the community and it significantly enhances our society’s ability to deal with the crisis from a mental and spiritual perspective,” the court papers read.
It added currently, regulations prohibited them from practicing their religion, freedom of movement and association and impact on their dignity.
“It is a violation of Islamic law as contained in the Holy Quran to forcefully close mosques to prevent any worship from taking place, even in the context of the pandemic.”
Opposing view
However, the United Ulama Council of South Africa (UUCSA) – the amicus curiae in the case – has a different view, saying the application “ignores that the entire country is called upon to make sacrifices”.
Mohammad Tauha Karaan, a scholar of Islamic studies and board member of the UUCSA, said the application disregarded general health risks to society during the pandemic.
Karaan added to adhere to lockdown regulations would also be to adhere to the objectives of Islamic law because the Quran spoke about human life and the preservation of life.
“Islam views the value of human life and dignity as all-encompassing because the cluster of environmental, political, cultural, social and economic rights is inextricably linked to human dignity,” he said.
“On this basis, certain freedoms may be limited if they threaten the sanctity of human life or offend human dignity.
“In addition, Islamic tradition mandates that the views of the scientists, epidemiologists and medical experts who have knowledge of [in this case] the Covid-19 pandemic ought to be given primacy,” Karaan added.
In South Africa, there were about 850 mosques and many smaller places of congregational prayers, he said.
Prayers happen five times per day – no matter what day it is – and there are also a significant number of churches, synagogues, temples and similar places of worship.
This would make the implementation of these measures in every one of these places of worship “burdensome, impractical and insufficient”, Karaan said….
“There is no limitation on freedom of religion or belief. The applicants and adherents to other faiths can continue, as I and numerous other adherents in South Africa and around the world are doing, to adhere to the tenets of their respective faiths and carry out their daily prayers without significant hindrance at home,” Karaan said.
Terry Gain says
Good. Allah will protect you. He is most merciful. But should you perish from this made – in – America virus don’t worry, a carnal paradise awaits you. You shall have perpetual erections, rivers of wine, an endless supply of wide-eyed virgins with swelling breasts and – should you be so inclined – young boys.
A religion you say? Can there be any doubt about it?
Save Europe says
….and yet Somalis in Sweden have been bleating about the fact they represent a significant percentage of deaths in the country!
Oooooh, I DO wonder why !!!!
jca reid says
F*ckin’ Idiots!! Countries will go to pigs & whistles when they let Muslims in & they start to dictate what’s what.
gravenimage says
South Africa: Muslim groups go to court to challenge coronavirus lockdown regulations for mosques
……………….
Well, of course. There is nothing un-Islamic about infecting your neighbors with a deadly disease.
Patrick B. Ludwig says
Who csres. Just stay away from muzzies. it’s called “muslim distancing” and should be practice at all times, corona or not.
Muzzies are always toxic and do not smell nice.
spiro says
Now that’s an idea we should
Follow
gravenimage says
+1
TJ says
Im South African, a police officer got charged this morning for insulting islam. A group of muslims got themselves arrested because they defied our lockdown and went praying. We are in a hard lock down now for 32 days.
gravenimage says
Thanks, TJ. Yet another case of Muslims out endangering both each other and the rest of us. I hope they shut this Mosque down.
Save Europe says
“Islam views the value of human life and dignity as all-encompassing because the cluster of environmental, political, cultural, social and economic rights is inextricably linked to human dignity,” he said.
???????
gravenimage says
Yes–absurdly laughable.
SB says
Terry Gain,
Dare I say,
you surely are an author.
S.B.
Zelna Jansen says
Where can I get a copy of the court judgement