Al-Karama’s spokesman received by UK Parliament
19 Jul 2006
Alkarama, July 19, 2006
Invited by the MP for Westminster (central London) – Ms. Karen Buck – Mr. Mohamed Larbi Zitout, official spokesman for Al-Karama, delivered a speech in the British Parliament on the afternoon of 18/7/2006 presenting Al-Karama’s origins, principles, goals and field of activity. Following this, he presented a summary of the human rights situation in the Arab world, which he described as “extremely bad, and heading towards a catastrophe in the fullest sense of the word.” In this connection, he noted that the current situation in Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, and Algeria (to give a non-exhaustive set of examples) was a matter of serious concern, where hundreds are detained weekly and sometimes daily; where torture is the daily fare of tens of thousands of prisoners, detainees, and even those outside jail; where forced disappearance is normal; where many atrocities, including the random killing of innocents within the War on Terror, are practiced.
Even more dangerous than this, says Mr. Zitout, “a frightening international silence can often be considered as shameful complicity.” Here he noted that “The Algerian President Bouteflika’s visit to London a week ago, and his giving a speech in the very place where we stand now, fundamentally contradict the principles of Britain’s ancient democracy, which makes the defence of human rights – all humans’ rights – the basis of its existence”, especially given that, on the eve of his visit to Britain, Mr. Bouteflika carried out two things totally contradicting human rights. First, he ordered the amendment of the Constitution to allow him to remain in power indefinitely, since the people have no right to change their ruler. Second, he promoted a set of high-ranking army figures to higher posts – the very people who had committed atrocities that make Pinochet’s crimes look like minor peccadilloes. These include the head of the Algerian secret services, General “Tewfik” (Mohamed) Mediene, who was promoted to Army General – the highest rank available in the Algerian army – in recognition of what appears to have been his command of the dirty war in which, according to official figures, no less than 200,000 people, mostly Algerians, were killed in the worst conceivable ways. Mr. Zitout considered the statement of a British minister on Algeria about a year ago, to the effect that we can learn a lot from Algeria on counterterrorism, to amount to support for criminals.
He then opened the floor for discussion, and answered a number of questions from MPs and representatives of Amnesty and other human rights activists, focusing on what Al-Karama has accomplished up to now, its cooperation with other human rights organisations, what help it needs to carry out its work, and Arab public opinion on it. One of those present asked a question in a critical manner, suggesting that “Islam and human rights may be incompatible”. Mr. Zitout replied that “There are, it is true, some differences in viewpoint on certain understandings of human rights, and this difference is natural because the ideological, civilisational, and cultural backgrounds of people are different. It is not logical to expect the judgements of Muslims to be identical in all respects to those of others. Indeed, people within the same ideological community differ on many issues, so what do you expect of basically different ideological communities? But what Islam, and hence Muslims, do not disagree with other people on includes the right to life, from which many other rights follow, which is at the core of global human rights just as it is at the core of the Islamic religion. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates the right of every person to life (in Article 3), and Islam regards the killing of a single soul as equivalent to the killing of all humankind, except with justification.
Mr. Zitout added that the circumstances do not permit a lengthy treatment of this topic now, but that our conviction in Al-Karama is that the basic human rights as outlined in international treaties are nearly identical to the message of Islam which, by its definition and nature, is a religion for the protection of human rights. He added that what is claimed about the incompatibility of Islam with human rights (from certain human rights activists) is claimed from the opposite perspective (by certain Muslims) – that human rights, as presently understood, contradict Islam. Here, Mr. Zitout emphasised that the only ones who benefit from the creation of this conflict – indeed, the ones responsible for feeding and spreading it – are the regimes of oppression and torture that rule the people of the Arab world with force and coercion, and that even if there are some – natural – differences between us in the understanding of human rights, what we agree on constitutes the overwhelming majority, so let us cooperate on it; what we disagree on is the exception, so let us excuse each other on it.
The meeting lasted some two hours, during which Mr. Zitout spoke alongside the head of the Human Rights Committee in the House of Commons; the meeting was attended by a number of MPs, some representatives of Amnesty International, and other people active in, or interested in, human rights.
He then opened the floor for discussion, and answered a number of questions from MPs and representatives of Amnesty and other human rights activists, focusing on what Al-Karama has accomplished up to now, its cooperation with other human rights organisations, what help it needs to carry out its work, and Arab public opinion on it. One of those present asked a question in a critical manner, suggesting that “Islam and human rights may be incompatible”. Mr. Zitout replied that “There are, it is true, some differences in viewpoint on certain understandings of human rights, and this difference is natural because the ideological, civilisational, and cultural backgrounds of people are different. It is not logical to expect the judgements of Muslims to be identical in all respects to those of others. Indeed, people within the same ideological community differ on many issues, so what do you expect of basically different ideological communities? But what Islam, and hence Muslims, do not disagree with other people on includes the right to life, from which many other rights follow, which is at the core of global human rights just as it is at the core of the Islamic religion. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates the right of every person to life (in Article 3), and Islam regards the killing of a single soul as equivalent to the killing of all humankind, except with justification.
Mr. Zitout added that the circumstances do not permit a lengthy treatment of this topic now, but that our conviction in Al-Karama is that the basic human rights as outlined in international treaties are nearly identical to the message of Islam which, by its definition and nature, is a religion for the protection of human rights. He added that what is claimed about the incompatibility of Islam with human rights (from certain human rights activists) is claimed from the opposite perspective (by certain Muslims) – that human rights, as presently understood, contradict Islam. Here, Mr. Zitout emphasised that the only ones who benefit from the creation of this conflict – indeed, the ones responsible for feeding and spreading it – are the regimes of oppression and torture that rule the people of the Arab world with force and coercion, and that even if there are some – natural – differences between us in the understanding of human rights, what we agree on constitutes the overwhelming majority, so let us cooperate on it; what we disagree on is the exception, so let us excuse each other on it.
The meeting lasted some two hours, during which Mr. Zitout spoke alongside the head of the Human Rights Committee in the House of Commons; the meeting was attended by a number of MPs, some representatives of Amnesty International, and other people active in, or interested in, human rights.