In this speech in the UN Human Rights Council, David G. Littman points out discrimination against women directly and documentably sanctioned by Islamic law. President Phuangketkeow responds by requesting more 'sensitivity' in matters where religion is involved, womens' rights has distinctly lower priority than showing 'understanding' for religion.
In his follow-up speech on June 10th, Littman reminds the assembly that such demands constitute an undermining of the universality of human rights, that The idea of "Cultural relativism" is nothing but an excuse to violate human rights, and demonstrates his precise and well-documented understanding of Islamic doctrine by quoting current Islamic scholars endorsing the practice of trading sex slaves in the free market.
Partial transcript below, elaborations not spoken are in brackets, []:
Thank you, sir. In April 2009 the Islamic Fiqh Academy, established by the OIC [Organization of the Islamic Conference] in 1981, issued a ruling entitled 'Domestic Violence'. This is a significant document that reflects a consensus of leading Islamic scholars in the world regarding the treatment of women.
[It was clearly issued in the context of criticisms of Islam and Muslim societies]
[IFA's resolutions in Arabic are on the Fiqh Academy website.
English translation attached.]*
[The Islamic Fiqh Academy (IFA), under the OIC's wing, is comprised of 43 scholars, elite Islamic jurists of their respective countries -- and many are chief justices or grand muftis.] [IFA's aims are clearly stated in this ruling and we shall only refer to the essential points:
to unite the Ummah (the global Muslim community, conceived of as a single nation, by conforming conduct to the norms of Islam at all levels (from individual to international);
to apply Islam to contemporary problems; and to create a body of Islamic jurisprudence to meet the needs of modern life.]
[Undoubtedly, the Islamic Fiqh Academy speaks for the Islamic mainstream. In the words of Dr Abdul-Salam Al-Abbadi, Secretary-General of IFA, it is intended to function as the "supreme juristic reference for the Muslim world." IFA's rulings have OIC's full backing.]
This fatwa represents the dogmatic assertion of the absolute authority of the sharia over all understandings of human rights as they apply to women and the family, including International Human Rights Conventions and Covenants. In it, Islamic States of the OIC are instructed to ignore every article of any Convention or Covenant which is inconsistent with the sharia.
I will quote some examples from this ruling:
Not considered to be 'violence' or 'discriminatory' are:
The criminalization of homosexuality.
A husband forbidding his wife from travelling alone, except with his permission and in accordance with the sharia.
Legal guardianship over a virgin female in [entering into a contract for her] marriage.
Sir, this applies to the 'marriage' of girl child under 10 to an 80 year old man, as in a recent case covered in the media.
Polygamy [up to 4 wives].
Regarding "a disobedient wife who has exalted herself against her husband [by disobeying him]... commence with admonishing her, then [sexual] abandonment [of the wife], and ending with non-violent beating."
At the State level, all governments are enjoined to review agreements that have been signed and "to reject any articles of international agreements and conventions which are contrary to the provisions of sharia law... such as advocating full equality between male and female in [family] inheritance.
Mr President, this fatwa has been in circulation for over 2 years, is backed by the most eminent and credible of Muslim jurists, yet it has not yet been addressed by UN Human Rights bodies, particularly this Council. Why the continuing silence on the contradictions between the International Bill of Human Rights and the OIC's Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (1), which we have raised here over the past twenty years -- all to no avail?
Thank you, Mr. President.
The President [verbatim from UN webcast]: Thank you. Can I remind the speaker that you know we're here to discuss human rights issues and when we raise issues of religion I think we have to do so with sensitivity and understanding... sensitivity... I hope that the speaker will be mindful of this when he takes the floor next time.
