Category Archives: State Oppression

FOSIS disappointed at Irish government’s refusal to let in Yusuf Qaradawi

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Federation of Student Islamic Societies (FOSIS) in the UK and Ireland has voiced its disappointment at the Irish Government’s refusal to grant Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi entry into the country.

FOSIS spokesperson, Amandla Thomas Johnson said, “Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi is a distinguished scholar whose views are respected by Muslims from around the world. It is a shame to see that yet another prominent Muslim figure is being targeted due to his religious convictions.”

Thomas-Johnson added, “The opinions of Sheikh Qaradawi are often regarded as a voice of moderation, specifically his firm support of Muslim integration into Western societies. He has frequently and decisively condemned acts of violent extremism, and has authoritatively rejected claims that terrorism is acceptable in Islamic law. His influence spans into Muslim communities around the world; indeed shortly after the Egyptian revolution, it was he that addressed the liberated millions in their Friday sermon – such is the status he holds.”

Thomas-Johnson concluded, “Like the British Government before them, the Irish Government have begun to tread a precarious path by ignoring the fundamental right of individuals to express themselves freely. As long as an individual does not infringe against the law, it is crucial that we allow for a diverse range of ideas and views to be presented for a democratic, respectful and free society”.

FOSIS press release, 10 August 2011

ACLU fights US government’s attempt to block release of information about FBI mosque surveillance

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The ACLU of Southern California is protesting the U.S. government’s attempt to block information from being released in a lawsuit over the FBI’s monitoring of Orange County mosques.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice are trying to invoke the seldom-used state secrets privilege to avoid talking about how the FBI paid at least one informant to monitor mosques in 2006. They want the judge to toss the lawsuit.

The ACLU said in a statement Friday that lawyers have filed a motion urging the court not to dismiss the case until it has ruled on whether the state secrets doctrine can properly be invoked.

In February, the ACLU and others accused the FBI of carrying out surveillance at mosques because the agency was targeting Muslims.

Associated Press, 5 August 2011

See also ACLU press release, 5 August 2011

Update:  See Hamed Aleaziz, “Want to sue the FBI for spying on your mosque? Sorry, that’s secret”, Mother Jones, 8 August 2011

Time Magazine on the Italian veil ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The thing about Italy’s proposed law to ban women from wearing veils that cover their faces is that it’s not clear what difference it would make.

Just like in France or Belgium, which have introduced similar measures, Italy does not have a large population of women who wear the burqa or the niqab, which cover almost the entire body and face. “In my 20 years in Italy, I don’t think I’ve seen ten women who wear the veil,” says Izzeddin Elzir, head of the Union of Islamic Communities in Italy (UCOII), the country’s largest Muslim organization. According to Elzir, most Muslims in Italy subscribe to a school of Islam that doesn’t require women to keep their faces covered. “In summer, there are more, because there are lots of tourists [from Arabic countries],” he says. “But here in Italy, we see few cases.”

The legislation, which was approved by a parliamentary commission on Tuesday, occupies a strange place in the Italian political spectrum, uniting the socially liberal left with the xenophobic right. (A similar measure was floated by the previous left-wing government.) If approved by parliament, it would close a religious exemption to previous legislation that prohibits anybody in Italy from donning garb that would make their identification impossible. The proposed law has the support of the Northern League, a populist political party that has built its electoral success by fanning fears in a country being changed rapidly by immigration.

The effort to ban the burqa has the support of human-rights groups, like the EveryOne Group, which campaigns for the protection of minorities. “The reason [the burqa] is worn is to hide the woman, to limit her expression,” says the activist group’s president Roberto Malini. But he acknowledges that on this matter, the group finds itself in strange accordance with the Northern League, which has sponsored similar legislation on the local level, including one in the city of Bergamo, where kebab shops were recently banned from the historic city center. “Everything they do is to seed the fear of Islam,” says Malini.

For Elzir of UCOII, to reject the bill is to stand for religious freedom – a devout woman should be free to cover herself if she wants. He adds that those women who are being forced to don a burqa by their husbands risk being confined to their homes if the proposal is made law. “We say we are for the liberty of all,” says Elzir. “If there’s a woman who is obliged to [wear the veil], let’s work together to help get her out of this situation. Let’s not make a law against her.” He believes the bill is more about politics than policy, a distraction from the bigger issues. “Our parliament should focus on issues that impact all citizens, not just one or two people,” he says. “The citizens of Italy need an answer to this economic crisis. And instead our parliament is studying whether our Islamic women should be covered or not.”

Time, 5 August 2011

Italy: parliamentary committee approves veil ban bill

Posted on by Bob Pitt

An Italian parliamentary committee has passed a draft law which will ban women from wearing veils which cover their faces in public.

The bill, which has the backing of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s central-right coalition, would prohibit the wearing of a burka, niqab or any headwear which covers the face. The bill will go to a parliamentary vote after the summer recess.

Belgium and France have already banned the full-face veil in public.

If passed, those who defied the ban would face a fine of 150-300 euros ($213-426; £130-260) and some kind of community service, according to Ansa news agency. For those who forced someone else to wear the covering, the penalty would be 30,000 euros and up to 12 months in jail, Ansa reports.

Lawmaker Barbara Saltamartini, from Mr Berlusconi’s People of Freedom party, said she welcomed the move. “Final approval will put an end to the suffering of many women who are often forced to wear the burka or niqab, which annihilates their dignity and gets in the way of integration,” Ms Saltamartini said in a statement.

The opposition voted against the move.

BBC News, 2 August 2011

See also Daily Mail, 2 August 2011

Legal challenge to Belgian veil ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Belgian burqa ban is set to be challenged before the country’s constitutional court by two women who willingly wear the full-body Islamic covering, their lawyer said Friday – one day before the new law was to come into effect.

“My clients are far from being the only ones,” Ines Wouters told the German Press Agency dpa. “This is really a head-on attack on the Muslim world.”

Belgian lawmakers earlier this year approved the new law, which punishes anyone caught in public places with their face completely or partially covered – thus preventing identification – with a fine of up to 137 euros (197 dollars) and up to seven days’ imprisonment. Officials argue that the law is a matter of safety. Concerns about women being forced into wearing the burqa have also been raised.

But Wouters described the measure as disproportionate and discriminatory, arguing that it will further stigmatize the Muslim community. She said she would file her lawsuit with the constitutional court over the weekend. It calls for the burqa ban to not only be reversed, but also suspended until the court rules on the matter.

One of her clients, a Belgian woman who converted to Islam and has worn the burqa for 13 years, is no stranger to challenging such bans. She succeeded in overturning a fine in the Brussels commune of Etterbeek, which implemented a similar local ban, Wouters said. Her other client is a Moroccan woman who moved to Belgium a few years ago.

Both women are married, in their 30s and don’t consider wearing the burqa “an obligation, but a choice they make,” Wouters said.

DPA, 22 July 2011

See also Open Democracy and Deutsche Welle.

Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights blasts burqa bans as ‘sad capitulation to the prejudices of xenophobes’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Thomas Hammarberg comment

The Council of Europe, the oldest European institution which specialises in human rights, today (20 July) strongly criticised recent French and Belgian legislation targeting the burqa, a veil that covers entirely women’s faces.

Penalising women who wear the burqa does not liberate them, Thomas Hammarberg, the Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, said today in a written statement.

Hammarberg explained that a law in Belgium will enter into force on 23 July, introducing fines and up to seven days of imprisonment for women wearing such dress. Meanwhile in France, since April anyone who wears the niqab or burqa in public is subject to fines of 150 euros and/or “citizenship training”.

He adds that “loud voices” in countries such as Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Switzerland are demanding similar measures, while in northern Italy an old anti-terrorist law against concealing the face for security reasons has been used by some local authorities to punish women who wear full-cover veils.

The human rights commissioner rejects the view that such bans ‘liberate’ women, stressing that there is “very little” to show that this is the case.

Instead, Hammarberg insists that the way the dress of a small number of women has been portrayed as a major problem requiring urgent discussion and legislation is “a sad capitulation to the prejudices of xenophobes”.

“Much deeper problems of intercultural tensions and gaps have been side-tracked by the burqa and niqab discussions. Instead of encouraging this unfortunate discourse, political leaders and governments should take more resolute action against hate crimes and discrimination against minorities,” Hammarberg argues.

EurActiv, 20 July 2011

Watchdog recommends Tory U-turn on banning Hizb ut-Tahrir

Posted on by Bob Pitt

HizbThe counter-terrorism watchdog has recommended that the government back down on a manifesto promise to ban a British radical Islamist group.

In a report submitted to parliament, David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, says he does “not recommend changes to the system for proscription” that would allow the non-violent organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir to be banned.

As recently as May this year, David Cameron was explicit about his desire to see the group banned. In reply to a question from the Labour MP and former home secretary Alan Johnson, he said: “We are clear that we must target groups that promote extremism, not just violent extremism. We have proscribed one or two groups. I would like to see action taken against Hizb ut-Tahrir, and that review is under way.”

It is understood that Anderson’s review is likely to force the government into a U-turn over the issue. In his report Anderson said there were “formidable difficulties” to changing the proscription system, “which appear amply to justify the decision to stick with the status quo”.

In the aftermath of the 7 July attacks Tony Blair promised to ban HT but failed to get around legal obstacles. Currently only groups involved in violence or those directly “glorifying terrorism” can lawfully be banned.

In opposition, Cameron raised the issue during Gordon Brown’s first prime minister’s question time, asking: “We think it [Hizb ut-Tahrir] should be banned – why has this not happened?” In 2009 Cameron again upbraided Brown for not banning the group.

The Tory 2010 election manifesto was explicit in its promise to ban the group. It stated that a Conservative government would “ban any organisation which advocates hate or the violent overthrow of our society, such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir.”

Tory ministers have backed the pledge to ban the group. In 2009 the then shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling, said in a speech to his party conference: “I will immediately ban Hizb ut Tahrir.” In November of that year, the shadow education minister, Michael Gove, said a Tory government would proscribe the group, which has branches in dozens of other countries around the world.

Anderson told the Guardian he believed that the government would ultimately drop its plans to ban the group. “I’m not part of the government … but I’m aware that it has been very carefully looked at … and I’m not aware of any immediate plans to put them on the list,” he said.

Lord Carlile, the previous counter-terrorism reviewer, told the Guardian he was not aware of any plans to ban the group and believed that the government would be forced into a U-turn. “I don’t think anything is going to happen … I think the general view is that Hizb ut-Tahrir are best dealt with in public debate rather than by proscription,” he said.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We welcome David Anderson’s thorough and considered report – his first on the operation of the terrorism acts since becoming the independent reviewer. He has raised a number of issues and made detailed recommendations which we will consider carefully and respond to formally in the autumn.”

Guardian, 19 July 2011

We look forward to The Spittoon denouncing David Anderson and Lord Carlile for having come to much the same conclusion about Hizb ut-Tahrir as Islamophobia Watch has.

‘Forgotten’ terror suspect from Tooting nears five years in prison

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Free Talha AhsanThe family of Tooting’s ‘forgotten’ terror suspect, who remains in jail without trial, are preparing to mark the fifth anniversary of his imprisonment.

Syed Talha Ahsan – a 31-year-old writer with Asperger syndrome – was arrested at his home in Franciscan Road, Tooting, on July 19, 2007, after US authorities requested his extradition. He is accused in the US of terrorism-related offences arising out of an alleged involvement with a series of websites between 1997 and 2004. Mr Ahsan’s case is linked to that of Babar Ahmad – but he has received much less media attention than Mr Ahmad, who was arrested in 2003 and is also still in prison.

Mr Ahsan, who graduated from the School of Oriental and African Studies with a First in Arabic, has never been charged or tried in this country. He is currently in the final stage of proceedings at the European Courts of Human Rights – fighting against extradition.

Speaking to the Wandsworth Guardian this week, Mr Ahsan’s 73-year-old father, Syed Abu Ahsan, said the family was “very very depressed” about the situation, adding he did not hold out much hope his son’s case would be resolved soon. He said: “Nobody is above America. If they say something nobody dares to say differently.”

But Mr Ahsan’s family continue to lobby the Home Secretary to give him a fair trial in the UK, giving special consideration to his medical conditions. On July 19, they will be at the Islamic Human Rights Commission bookshop, in Wembley, where supporters will give readings from a book of poetry Mr Ahsan has written and had published while in Long Lartin Prison.

Mr Ahsan’s MP, Sadiq Khan, who has spoken out about Mr Ahmad’s case in the past, said: “It is extremely distressing for Mr Ahsan’s family that this case continues to drag on. I have met with the Extradition Minister to discuss this case and the case of Babar Ahmad. Although the Government is reviewing its policy on extradition to the United States, they have told me it is unlikely to cover existing cases, which is bad news for the family. I am hopeful that the European Court of Human Rights will make a judgement soon on the case.”

A spokeswoman for the Home Office had not responded to any queries as this week’s paper went to press.

For more information visit freetalha.org

Wandsworth Guardian, 13 July 2014

Belgian veil ban comes into force on 23 July

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Belgium will enforce a burqa ban from July 23 with a fine and possible jail time for women who wear it, joining France as the second EU nation to forbid full veils, Belgian media said Thursday.

The new law was published Wednesday in the kingdom’s official journal after deputies approved it unanimously in parliament in April.

Offenders will face a fine of 137.50 euros ($195) and up to seven days behind bars. An estimated 270 people wear the face-covering niqab or the full-body burqa in Belgium.

AFP, 14 July 2011

Muslims boycott Glasgow Airport over racial profiling

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Kenny MacAskillGlasgow’s Muslims are boycotting the city’s main airport and choosing to fly from Manchester because of perceived harassment from counter-terrorism officers, it was claimed last night.

The allegations were made at a public meeting called to discuss concerns held by parts of the Asian community that powers held by police, ports and immigration officials to question travellers at travel hubs were abused, with travellers singled out solely on the basis of their race or skin colour.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill told around 70 people at Pollokshields Burgh Hall in Glasgow that Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 was a necessary tool in fighting global terrorism. He admitted there had been occasions when the powers had been used inappropriately, but said it was not deliberately used to target people because of their ethnicity.

But lawyer Aamer Anwar said some Muslims had become so disillusioned at the way they were treated at Glasgow Airport they decided to take their business south of the Border. He said he would challenge police to deliver statistics on how much counter-terrorism intelligence had been delivered as a result of questioning travellers at the airport.

He said: “The questions are offensive, rude and intimidating in the way they are carried out. The police may like to claim they are collecting intelligence and they are like James Bond but I think they are coming across more like Austin Powers.” Mr Anwar said one Afghan man living in Glasgow returned from a trip home to be asked by officers if he knew Osama Bin Laden or had ever visited the Tora Bora mountains, where the al Qaeda leader hid out.

He added: “It seems as if there is racial profiling going on at Glasgow Airport and what the people from the community are doing is using Manchester Airport and other airports to fly out. Everything is not fine at Glasgow Airport. People do not accept the way they are being treated. They are not terrorists and they expect to be able to go about their business.”

The Herald, 13 July 2011

Via ENGAGE

See also The Scotsman, 13 July 2011