Upcoming Court Dates to Watch in Egypt

The Baha'is of Egypt are eagerly awaiting two court dates that might greatly influence their struggle to obtain identity documents.

The first one will be on 15 December 2008 at Egypt's Supreme Administrative Court when a decision is expected regarding the appeal of a non-party (by an Islamist lawyer) to the 29 January 2008 ruling that allowed the Baha'is to obtain identification documents and birth certificates by inserting dashes "--" in place of religion in these documents. It is expected that the court will endorse the recommendation of its own State Judiciary Council to reject the appeal since the appellant, as stated by the council of judges, has no right to interfere with this lawsuit, and since the defendant (the Ministry of Interior) had not appealed the ruling and had accepted it on its face.

The second date is scheduled for 17 January 2009, on which Cairo's Seventh Circuit Administrative Court will rule on a challenge (a stalling tactic--not an appeal) to the same ruling of 29 January 2008 of the First Circuit Administrative Court, in which another Islamist lawyer challenged the competence of the judge. Consequently, the judge had referred the case out of his court to the Seventh Circuit Court for an unbiased determination.

Meanwhile, as of today, the Baha'is of Egypt remain "without identity."

Egypt: Ministry of Interior Tries to Explain Delays

Cairo's Al-Badeel Newspaper (7 June 2008 edition)

Egypt's National Council for Human Rights held a round-table discussion on 6 June 2008 to examine various pressing human rights violations in Egypt. Among which was the case of the Baha'is and the lack of progress in issuing identity documents. Several prominent activists and government representatives participated in this session.

One of the participants, General Ali Abdel-Mawla, first assistant to the Minister of Interior, stated that "the Ministry wants to implement the ruling of the administrative court [granting the Baha'is the right to obtain ID cards], but the challenge filed by the Islamists prevents [the Ministry] from doing so." He further affirmed that "in case these challenges were turned down [by the court], the Ministry will expeditiously implement the administrative court ruling."
N.B. These statements were made a day before the most recent court hearing that addressed the procedural challenge by the Islamists. The Ministry of Interior's lawyers asked for a postponement in order to prepare their memorandum supporting the Baha'is. The court postponed the case until 1 November 2008.

So, it is clear, according to these statements, that the Ministry of Interior has no hesitation in applying the court ruling in favor of the Baha'is. It should be also understood that the fact a challenge was filed by a third party--who was not even a party to the lawsuit--should not prevent the Ministry from implementing the ruling. A further delay (until 1 November 2008) can only lead to further extreme hardships for the Baha'is of Egypt.

Another important point is that this challenge was not an "appeal" of the ruling itself, but rather a challenge to the judge's competency--a strategy that has been frequently used by this particular Islamist extremist lawyer (Hamed Saddiq) to obstruct many other--irrelevant--cases.

My questions to General Ali Abdel-Mawla are: if the court upholds the Islamists' challenge on the first of November, what would the Ministry do then? Would it ask for another postponement? Would it sue the Islamist challenger? Would it not implement the ruling? Would it implement the ruling?

The real issue here is: what are the true motives of the Ministry of Interior? Supposing that the motives are sincere and intended to solve this crisis, then the Ministry should do so without any further delays.

Allowing such illegitimate procedural challenges--whose malicious intentions are very clear--to interfere with the due process of the law can only lead to anarchy. The Ministry knows what is needed to be done; using these frivolous challenges as an excuse to explain such unrealistic delays cannot be justified.

Egypt: "Identity Crisis" Entire Film Now Available!

The documentary film produced by the independent filmmaker, Mr. Ahmed Ezzat, has been just made public for free viewing in its entirety on an internet site. The 34-minutes film, "Identity Crisis: My Religion or My Country," documents in vivid details the struggle of the Egyptian Baha'is in search for their basic civil rights in their homeland. Mr. Ahmed Ezzat is not a Baha'i. He is an Egyptian human rights activist who has graciously provided this film for public viewing at his own expense and on his own precious time.

To view the entire film, please CLICK HERE....
(This version does not include subtitles)

Previously published promotional segment on YouTube

P.S. When linking to the website, under the film's image--written in Arabic--are three choices for downloading: high speed (top one), medium speed (middle one) or low speed (bottom one) copies of the film.

Official Egyptian Press Examines the Baha'i Case

The following is commentary on an extensive article authored by Ahmed Zaki Osman that appeared in Al-Qahera (a weekly published by Egypt’s Ministry of Culture) on Tuesday, 16 January 2007. Issue #353, p. 24. A pdf image of the article can be viewed at this link.

In the attached page that carries a fairly large picture of Abdu’l-Bahá (the son of Baha'u'llah, Founder of the Baha'i Faith), Al Qahira investigates the possible reasons behind the attack on Baha’is after the ruling of the first administrative court of 4 April 2006 that gave Baha’is the right to official documents required by the state for all transactions whether with various state departments or social institutions, banks, schools, universities etc…. The verdict was overturned by the Supreme Administrative Court, on 16 December 2006, to much jubilation from Islamist extremists both inside the court and in the papers, and to the amazement of Osman who points out in his article the confusion in self perceived roles on the part of members of parliament in particular.

The article is entitled: "Why was not the home of Islam big enough for all people, including the Baha'is...recognizing their rights to believe in whatever pleases their hearts?" In one of its subtitles the article points out that "Egypt's citizenship laws have never stated that adherence to divine religions should be a condition for citizenship."

Ahmed Zaki Osman, the author of the article, chooses as starting point what he calls the "geography" of the Baha’is' case. He quotes the famous geographer Gamal Hamdan who in his magnum opus "The Character of Egypt," has specified Egypt as the land most likely to manifest in all matters the rule of the 'golden means' and contrast, due to the rich variety of its demographic and historical heritage. Ahmed Zaki Osman carries this metaphor to its conclusion by highlighting the paradoxes in discourse that were rampant while the case for the Baha’is was being made public, albeit to underscore the underlying paradoxes rather than to demonstrate the positive aspect in Hamdan’s initial statement.

He scrutinizes the discourse of hegemony in a way that underscores what he suggests is a national ailment that he sees as fairly novel to the Egyptian scene, and arrives at the conclusion that Muslims are passing through an unprecedented phase of oppression, weakness and humiliation whereby it is difficult for the adherents of that faith to point to any achievement worth their while except in those societies where the preponderance of the population is not Muslim. He points to the fact that there are Muslim members of parliament in France, Britain, Germany and other countries and cites the fact that there is a Muslim woman judge in the United States; this however does not seem to impress Muslims at home with any message. They remain according to Ahmed Zaki Osman the victims of a monocular vision, unable to appreciate the invigorating elements in a healthy debate that rests on rational premises instead of vainglory and pride that derives its raison d’etre from an imagined threat in which all that is not Muslim is targeted for its own sake.

Ahmed Zaki Osman is not out to describe a persecution complex...far from it. What he is trying to do is to put in perspective the difference between handling a situation rationally or resorting to inflamed emotional rhetoric which is how he describes the responses that occurred from members of parliament who are otherwise noteworthy citizens. What he seems to be saying is that, in the absence of true democracy, frustration is taken out haphazardly without resort to either decency in dialogue or indeed an understanding of the roles designated by society to its judiciary, its executive and its representative bodies.

He describes a confusion of issues that allows members of parliament to draw their comments from their own personal leanings and feelings on a matter that falls within the realm of the courts and the institutions of justice and nothing else. To the extent that those members of parliament who raised the issue as intolerable, have addressed their request for questions in the house to the wrong minister! The minister they needed to address in order to voice a grievance such as their intention to deny a group of citizens the right to hold national ID cards with all what that implies, should have been the Minister for Interior and not the Minister of Religious Endowments!

This situation bespeaks, in the opinion of Osman, a degree of frustration and intolerance that stems both from annoyance with the political atmosphere as much as it is a manifestation of the confusion of issues that allow those politicians to play on the emotions of the public and to instigate their fears...though he does not accuse the parliamentarians who stand guard on Islamic pseudo issues--as was the case when the minister for culture made a denigrating remark (off the record) to a journalist about the veil, or when the Pope of the Vatican made his ill-advised references to history--of anything less than a misconception of their role in parliament.

The other reason Osman attributes the anger to is the lack of a mind educated to accept diversity and difference. He cites a famous dialogue between the Imam Muhammad Abdu and Sheikh Rashid Reda on the issue of the Baha’i faith. In the quotes he chooses, it is more than apparent that there was a steady and stable ground of enlightenment that ensured the rationality of the debate without either of the clerics condescending to haphazard accusations of the faith, its proponents or its leading figures. Indeed, Muhammad Abdu is quoted as saying of Abdu’l-Bahá that he is a very Great man. But then we must recall--says Othman--who the parties to that dialogue were, in a clear reference to their excellence, and thus the relative mediocrity of the current commentators and players.

Osman stresses what he calls "the geography of paradoxes" to indicate the clear schism between what a Nation thinks of itself, and what the reality of its discourse reveals. He describes the jubilations (Allah'u-Akbar!) that were loud in the court on the 16th of December, as an indication of a moral bankruptcy. As a matter of fact, he puts that scene under the subtitle: "The psychological defeat of the nation." He ends his article by posing a number of salient questions that all address the issue of the times when diversity is viewed as a threat and hopes that Egypt will overcome its current narcissistic, introvert outlook in order to regain its sense of dignity, rights for all its citizens whether poor or rich, Muslim or non Muslim, weak or strong.

To conclude, this writer challenges all the dogmas, delusions and illusions of the Islamist fundamentalist establishment which has triggered the government's appeal of the administrative court's ruling that had granted the Baha'is their rights. This challenge was introduced in the Egyptian parliamentary debate more than a month after the court's judgement and following several sessions during which the matter was never brought up. To make matters worse, these extremist individuals addressed the wrong minister regarding their issue. The article also points out the fact that the task of the parliament is not to police the judiciary and challenge court decisions, but rather act as a watch-dog to the executive branch of the government to ensure that the rights of individuals, whom they represent, are protected.

Furthermore, a secular member of the parliament, Dr. Zainab Radwan, a well known academician supported the recognition of the Baha'is, not because it is their right, but for a sinister reason--that is "to identify them so that the society can be protected from their influence"...not far removed from the Nuremberg Race Laws! Then, all of a sudden, the issue of "public order" was brought in, which in fact has absolutely nothing to do with this case, particularly when the disruption of public order, so rampant in the Egyptian society recently, has been caused by the exact same society elements which have been attacking the Baha'is....

Thus this whole matter which had emerged through the parliament, challenging a court decision that granted citizenship rights, has been illegal and out of jurisdiction all along. Even worse, the Supreme Administrative Court avoided the question at hand, and instead of ruling on the civil and personal status questions in front of it, resorted instead to take shots at the legitimacy of the Baha'i Faith!

A Clairvoyant Reflection on the Egyptian Baha'i Case

Mr. Is'haq El-Sheikh is a regular columnist in AlAyam daily newspaper published in Bahrain. It should be noted that this journalist is not a Baha'i. He is well known for his straight talk, his clairvoyant thought and intellectual objectivity and honesty. As he usually writes, the article was authored in Arabic, and the English translation does not do justice to its style and its literary superiority.

[TRANSLATION FROM ARABIC]

[Translator’s notes appear in square brackets [ ].]

Al-Ayam [Bahrain Daily Newspaper]
4 January 2007

[Column: “With the People” by Is’haq El-Sheikh]

Al-Baha’iyyah [Baha’ism] and the right to practise religious rites

The sublimity of this divine Bahá [glory] was reacting with and reflected by the spirit and conscience of people as a joyfulness based on the principle of the unity of humanity, aimed at creating eternal happiness in their lives and consecrating them towards establishing a just peace on the face of the globe. From light, bursts forth Al-Bahá [the glory] in an exalted illumination, ennobling the souls [of people], calling to truth in beauty, loveliness and splendour.

From the dawn of history the heavenly [Divine] and non-heavenly religions have called for love and peace for the sake of salvation and good deeds among the people...and if the three heavenly religions call for love, Al-Baha’iyyah [Baha'i Faith], as a new religion, considers that it summarises and develops the achievement [essence] of these religious ideologies and elevates them to the spirit of the age and its feature of rapidly shrinking distances between nations and peoples, placing them in a home in one small village.

Not once--since its inception--has the Bahá’í religion taken one stand against the three heavenly religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, or any other religion. Rather, it started to spread its splendour in Bahá’u’lláh and the justice of His light, calling, reiterating and blessing--uncovering [throwing light on] the Bahá of glory of God in the heavens and on earth, through peace, love and the spreading of good-will among people.... It is as if he is repeating the Christian “Glory to God on high, peace on earth and love for all,” or the Judaic call: “Love one another, be in fellowship...thus will God love you,” or the Muhammadan call: “The doctrine of God lieth in loving people” [all paraphrased by translator]. This is what Al-Baha’iyyah means by: “This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We have taken the inner essence thereof and clothed it in the garment of brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and in the realm of spirit obtain the gem of Divine virtue.”

Al-Bahaiyyah did not litter our paths with ugliness [indecency]; it did not declare hatred and enmity against our religion nor did it refute its spirit of true forbearance and tolerance; rather it has enshrined its luminous station, and cast the splendour of its enlightenment on the face of the earth in justice, love, peace and human solidarity and unity.

It was the International Declaration of Human Rights, perfected through earthly volition, promising all countries, including the Arab nations--with their customary apprehensive mistrust [sentence not completed]--that called for freedom of religion and the right of all nations to embrace a religion and a belief or not to have a belief. This, we see, is in harmony with the Muhammadan religion’s call for the right of religious freedom, and which the Holy Qur’an affirms: “You have your religion and I have mine” [paraphrased].

The purport of all of the above is to explain what has caused the indignation of all human rights proponents on the face of the earth when the sad and distressing news were reported about an oppressive and inhumane persecution of the [Egyptian] Bahá’í minority as it was deprived of the most basic of citizenship rights, following their natural right to belong to the Bahá’í religion--a right that is affirmed by all countries that are signatory to the Human Rights Convention. This has resulted in a big disappointment in the fairness of the Egyptian judiciary which has deprived them of citizenship rights. The justification for the court ruling was that the Egyptian constitution does not recognise any [religion] except the three heavenly religions: Islam, Christianity and Judaism; as though laws and constitutions, that have been superseded by life and worn out by the passage of time, are holy and irrevocable scriptures that cannot be changed for the better.

It is known that the Egyptian Bahá’í minority did not ask for the Bahá’í Faith to be recognized, even though it is one of the rights of citizenship.... Its wish was simply to be free to carry out the requirement of the civil law that they must obtain identification cards without lying about their religious beliefs. Possessing such a card is a common right to which every native born Egyptian is entitled. It is indeed very strange that the custodians of the law would themselves enforce the violation of a government policy that all citizens without exception are expected to observe.... This has been pointed out by the Bahá’í Universal House of Justice in referring to the ordeal of the Egyptian Bahá’í minority; and the Universal House of Justice rightly poses this question in this regard, saying: “But to what purpose were these three religions invoked? Was it to justify the exclusion of certain citizens from exercising their civil rights? Would this not amount to a misuse of the authority of these faiths to perpetrate an injustice that offends the high standard of justice to which they hold their adherents?” [a direct quote from the Arabic translation]. The Universal House of Justice further affirms that the ruling issued against the Egyptian Bahá’í minority in not granting the personal ID was “unreasonable not only because it is contrary to prescriptions set forth in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Egypt is a signatory, but more especially because the sacred scriptures of Islam extol tolerance as a precept of social stability.”

All the democratic, enlightened and forward-thinking forces that care about the application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights raise their voices, in solidarity and support of all religious minorities alike--those within the Judaic, Christian and Muslim religions and those without--calling for the lifting of oppression from these minorities and the integration of their citizenship in the political, social, cultural and religious life of society, the same as all citizens whose rights are upheld by the observed laws and constitutions.

The Bahá’í order is a religious, world-wide, humane, peaceful and tolerant order in its principles, rites and daily observances as well as its attitude to other religions. To wage war against it and harass it is an unethical act that contradicts the spirit of Islam and its lofty ideals of treating other religions with tolerance and humane Islamic virtues, encapsulated in the spirit of [this verse]: “Wherefore have you enslaved people when their mothers have birthed them free?” The age of slavery has gone for ever; let the hands and minds and consciences of all the religions on earth be raised up in dialogue, love and brotherly solidarity for the sake of human justice and against tyranny, persecution and enslaving other rights and religions.