Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Revolutionary turbans

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2011/1053/fr2.htm
Revolutionary turbans
Al-Azhar has called for a civil state in Egypt and independence for the 
1,000-year-old religious institution, reports Gihan Shahine
It seems that the tsunami of political and democratic change currently 
taking place in Egypt has also reached the corridors of Al-Azhar 
University in Cairo, the Sunni Muslim world's oldest and most important 
centre of religious learning.
Earlier this week, the grand imam of Al-Azhar, Sheikh Ahmed El-Tayeb, 
met with intellectuals from various backgrounds and religious scholars 
as part of a dialogue that issued in the publication of a document 
setting out the institution's political position.
According to the document, Al-Azhar supports "the establishment of a 
modern, democratic and constitutional state" in Egypt that will observe 
the separation of powers and will guarantee equal rights to all citizens.
The document, which aims to define the relationship between the state 
and religion at this important moment in the country's history, says 
that the principles of Islamic Sharia law are "the basic source of 
legislation" in Egypt, while adding that Egyptian citizens who are not 
Muslim should refer to their own religious traditions in deciding 
matters relating to personal status law.
"The significance of this document comes from the fact that it is the 
first for 150 years that has introduced a comprehensive project stemming 
from Egyptian identity and Islamic culture," said Al-Azhar scholar 
Abdel-Moeti Bayoumi, a member of the Al-Azhar-affiliated Islamic 
Research Academy and one of those involved in drafting the document.
The document seems to take a firm stance on religious tolerance, 
recently considered a challenge facing the new Egypt. It calls for 
respect to be shown to the three monotheistic religions as well as for 
protection of their places of worship. All citizens should have the 
right to practice their religion, the document says, warning of the 
dangers of instigating sectarian rifts, which it describes as a 
"national crime".
Al-Azhar, the world's most important seat of Sunni learning, has 
recently been criticised for allegedly acting as a mouthpiece for the 
former regime, even issuing edicts widely seen as supporting its 
policies. During the 25 January Revolution that led to the ousting of 
former president Hosni Mubarak, Al-Azhar was criticised for allegedly 
toeing the government line, damaging the institution's credibility.
However, Al-Azhar's links with the state, too, may be about to change. 
The document stresses the leading role played by Al-Azhar in spreading 
the moderate message of Islam, emphasising that Al-Azhar, owing to its 
history and prestige, should remain the source of correct Islamic 
jurisprudence and should be free to decide the nature of the 
relationship between state and religion.
Though non-binding, the document is being seen as a vital component in 
the debate on Egypt's new constitution and a sign that Al-Azhar is 
regaining its important historical role.
It also reveals changes in the discourse of the still 
government-affiliated institution, which is now giving emphasis to 
eliminating poverty and illiteracy and improving scientific research and 
education. Al-Azhar's post-revolutionary orientation insists on the need 
for development, social equity, the fight against corruption and 
unemployment and the need for better healthcare.
"Giving priority to women and children's rights and insisting on the 
necessity of the separation of powers and the independence of the 
judiciary are all important points in this historic document, bringing 
it into line with the revolutionary spirit of the time," Bayoumi said in 
an interview with Al-Ahram Weekly.
The document also guarantees freedom of expression and creativity and a 
commitment to international treaties and laws in accordance with the 
principles of Islamic culture.
One of the most important points in the document concerns the 
possibility of Al-Azhar regaining its former independence. There is 
something of a consensus among observers that the institution may not be 
able to regain its formerly influential role unless its head, the grand 
sheikh of Al-Azhar, is elected, rather than being appointed by 
presidential decree, as has been the case since the 1950s.
The institution also needs to regain its financial independence, 
observers say, such that Al-Azhar sheikhs are free from government 
pressures.
In the document, El-Tayeb reiterates calls for future grand sheikhs of 
Al-Azhar to be elected by a council of scholars versed in Islamic Sharia 
law. This council would also be responsible for restricting the tenure 
of individuals elected to the position, formerly held for life by virtue 
of a presidential decree issued in 1952.
Nevertheless, some critics of El-Tayeb's calls remain sceptical. Sheikh 
Gamal Qotb, former head of Al-Azhar's fatwa council, which delivers 
religious rulings, said that the timeframe and procedure for the 
proposed election of the institution's grand sheikh were not defined and 
that the document, which has no legal force, cannot replace the law 
currently regulating the operation of Al-Azhar.
"It remains unclear who will form this council to elect the grand sheikh 
and whether it will include the imams of mosques, those working in the 
Ministry of Religious Endowments and those teaching in Al-Azhar 
institutes," Qotb told the Weekly.
Qotb said that Al-Azhar could not regain its independence without first 
separating the Ministry of Waqf, or religious endowments, from the 
government and re-affiliating it to the mother institution as was the 
case earlier in the last century. Egypt could not truly be a civil state 
as long as the government and the religious endowments authority were 
linked, Qotb said.
Secularist writer Salah Eissa, one of the staunchest supporters of the 
establishment of a civil state, is also dissatisfied with the Al-Azhar 
document on the grounds that it maintains that the principles of Islamic 
Sharia law should be the source of legislation. "If new laws need the 
consent of Al-Azhar, then that immediately means we are in a religious, 
and not a civil, state," Eissa said.
Bayoumi said that Eissa's objections were due to a misunderstanding of 
the document. The document, the brainchild of a large panel of 
intellectuals of all religious affiliations, including Copts, had 
deliberately used the expression "principles of Islamic Sharia" as the 
source of legislation because those principles promoted the basic values 
of all three religions, including freedom, equality, justice and democracy.
Besides, Bayoumi said, "all new laws will need the consent of the 
Supreme Constitutional Court and not Al-Azhar, whose role will only be 
advisory."
-- 
Namib
"La force ne fait ni raison ni droit ; mais il est peut-être impossible 
de s'en passer, pour faire respecter le droit et la raison" (Saint-Just)

Namib
Caro Namib, posso sbagliarmi, ma a me tutto questo improvviso parlare
di democrazia in M.O. sa tanto di manovra per sedare i nostri sospetti
e creare un impero teocratico sulle orme dell'Iran. Non credo ai lupi
che diventano improvvisamente agnelli.

 che diventano improvvisamente agnelli.
I popoli non sono nï¿œ lupi nï¿œ agnelli, e la societï¿œ egiziana (persino la 
sua componente propriamente "islamista", come i FM) era ed ï¿œ plurale; 
come e se si potrï¿œ esprimere questa pluralitï¿œ ï¿œ un altro problema, ma ci 
sono molti indizi (e questo documento ï¿œ uno di essi: l'accenno alla 
Shari'a - alla "legge", eh - ï¿œ tradizionale, e non significa 
"lapidazione delle adultere") che c'ï¿œ un intero mondo (prima occultato 
dalla "benevola tirannia" dei "nostri figli di puttana") che si sta 
muovendo (in Egitto, in Tunisia, in Siria, in Libia, in Marocco). La 
solita minestra interpretativa (islamici/antidemocratici vs. 
"riformisti") non significa piï¿œ un accidente: tutta la "primavera araba" 
dimostra che gli "islamisti" hanno cercato di *inseguire* qualcosa (una 
rivolta per "pane e libertï¿œ") che con loro non c'entrava niente e che 
loro non hanno affatto "ispirato".
-- 
Namib
"La force ne fait ni raison ni droit ; mais il est peut-ï¿œtre impossible 


Namib
Sono secoli che cercano di conquistare il mondo intero. Adesso che
possono mettere le mani sul M.O., il nord Africa e altri importanti
territori unificandoli in un'unica grande teocrazia fanatica
abbandonano ogni pretesa? Adesso che gli si offre loro la possibilit�
di conquistare perfino l'Europa si trasformano in pacifisti, in liberi
pensatori, etc. abbandonano ogni tentativo? Ci credo poco.
IN ogni caso, se vogliamo dare loro fiducia e l'opportunit� di
trasformare le loro societ� in altrettante democrazie, lo possiamo
anche fare, ma teniamo sempre un certo livello di vigilanza.

 trasformare le loro societï¿œ in altrettante democrazie,
Si trasformeranno (auspicabilmente) in quel che vorranno. Dopo tutto, ï¿œ 
casa loro, eh.
