The unjust fatwa

By admin-s Last updated Nov 4, 2014

If the Prophet and the various Caliphs of the Islamic golden age were alive today, it is in fact possible that they would all fall victim to this fatwa and be accused of being deviationist based on their liberal ideas and acceptance of the concept of religious plurality.

Azrul Mohd Khalib, MMO

Fatwas in essence, form and function, are opinions espoused by religious figures or bodies. Anywhere you go in the Muslim world, they are precisely that, opinions. But somehow, in Malaysia, in stark contrast to elsewhere around the world, fatwas tend to take on a legal form, are frequently gazetted and therefore treated akin to laws.

However, unlike legislation, fatwas are not subjected through a democratic process which allows for public consultation, review, debate and passage. It is usually decided by a bunch of individuals, mostly men, in a room somewhere.

These can be issued at the state and federal levels, and their enforcement is selective. If a 1995 fatwa, which declared smoking to be haram, were to be enforced, there would be more smokers seeking refuge in toilets and dark stairways across the country.

Like man-made laws, it is possible for fatwas to be unjust and wrong as men are not infallible. Those who conceptualise these opinions are human; therefore they are neither infallible nor free from prejudice or bias. So when fatwas are abused, the possibility of injustice is very real.

Such an injustice occurred recently with the fatwa issued by the Selangor Fatwa Committee and the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) against Sisters In Islam, as well as organisations and individuals who are deemed to be liberal and prescribe to recognition of religious plurality.

This demonising of others with supposedly deviant and vague connotations such as liberalism and religious plurality is a time-honoured tactic. Basically, anybody who dares challenge the religious authorities, however valid their arguments might be, could be slapped with the labels “liberalism”, “pluralism” and the latest one, “humanism.” And then they tell you that you need to prove that you are not what they accused you of.

People like Dr. Fathul Bari Mat Jahaya of the Umno Young Ulama Secretariat and Muhammad Khalil Abdul Hadi of Pas Youth, are united in thinking that religious persons such as those on the Fatwa Council are infallible and can do no wrong, hence their accusations of deviancy and biadab towards Sisters in Islam who dare to speak up and fight back.

To this day, I have not heard or read a single definition of what liberalism, pluralism and humanism as understood by the religious authorities such as Mais or Jakim, and most importantly, how upholding these values are wrong, are threats to Islam and are deviant.