Qom – A scholarly session was held on Wednesday to evaluate Islamic countries; challenges and human rights in Islamic world authored by Hujjatulislam Dr. Muhammad Husain Muzaffari, head of the center of inter-religious dialogues affiliated to Organization of Islamic Culture and Relations. The work was evaluated by Dr. Muhammad Sutuda and Ruhullah Shariati at the conference hall of Islamic Propagation Office of Qom Seminary.

According to the office of scientific and international cooperation, the author, attending the session, said: “The work seeks to address this question as to what has been and is the relation between Islamic countries and the international system of human rights. Based on this work, ever since human rights declaration was ratified Muslim intellectuals sought to find out relations between universal human rights declaration and Islamic thought”.

“During 50s and 60s Muslim intellectuals were seeking to say that Islam was confirming all the contents and criteria of human rights supporting fully all of its regulations and standards”, Hujjatulislam Dr. Muhammad Husain Muzaffari said.

“The work has tried to explain Islamic countries’ stance in regard with the international system of human rights”, he added.

“In 70s and 80s, the international documents of human rights were published and Muslims at that time were not faced with a single document named ‘human rights’. It was during this period that declarations like child rights was also ratified”, he went on saying.

“The most important question faced by Muslim governments at that time was whether or not they could ratify these documents. They were of the view that they could accept international norms and standards to the extent they were not in conflict with Islamic rulings”, he mentioned.

“However the question at that time was not as to what was the relation between Muslim intellectuals and human rights declaration, though certain ambiguities and questions were raised for Muslim governments”, he maintained.

“Developing countries in general and Islamic countries in particular have thrown challenges to the international system of human rights maintaining that these laws and regulations are not in harmony with their own standards and regulations”, he pointed out.

“Islamic countries have gradually challenged this international system of human rights and these challenges had become more serious in Vienna. Muslim countries accepted human rights declaration and said that it had to be applied in different regions and in various religious and historical fields”, he stated.

“Western countries claimed (at Vienna conference) that Muslim countries were involved in ratifying laws related to human rights and thus today they cannot ignore these laws and regulations. On the contrary, Muslim countries said that since at that time (when human rights declaration was ratified) we were under colonialism therefore we played no role in passing those laws”, he stated.

“According to the work, once Muslim countries did not have a unified approach towards human rights. For example, before the Islamic revolution, Iran had a positive approach towards the declaration of human rights but after the revolution occurred Iran’s representative (Mr. Rajaei Khurasan) said at United Nations Organization that non of these declarations and resolutions was valuable in the eye of the Islamic republic of Iran”, he said.

“Except for Saudi Arabia (that cast abstention vote) and Yemen (that did not take part in voting), other eight Islamic countries confirmed human rights declaration. Iran and Turkey were also following Western countries. Though they announced their readiness to cast their vote, their stance did not prove to be affective”, he mentioned.

“In 80s and 90s a new era called ‘evolution era’ began to appear at the United Nations Organization. Countries begin to take new stances. Muslim countries announced that they were ready to accept international documents and regulations provided they were not in contradiction with Islamic laws”, he expressed.

“Muslim countries’ right to stipulate was in a way destructive as it prevented the international standards of human rights to become a norm”, he added.

In response to a criticism regarding his work, he said: “This is an applied work. I was not intending to deal with Islamic issues related to child rights and freedom of religion….. It is an applied work; it does not deal with theoretical issues. The study of this work can be useful for our statesmen as well as for the statesmen of other Islamic countries, for it touches the most applied and practical theories, advices and aids”.

Referring to the criticisms pertaining to the right of stipulation and its being destructive for human rights, he said: “The US and European countries have a unified approach towards Muslim countries’ right to stipulate. Islamic republic of Iran endorsed child rights while adding to have the right to stipulate. The right to stipulate raised objections on the part of Western countries”.

“The right to stipulate is our right. We can use our right and it will not create any problem, as there is no authority in the world to determine whether or not the right to stipulate is in conflict with the subject matter under question”, he mentioned.

“We must present a new discourse and write original books on human rights instead of issuing commentaries on their works. We gave child rights an Islamic color and accepted them. We must present a discourse covering the problems of Islamic countries in economic, political and social areas”, he noted.

“Organization of Islamic Conference has repeatedly declared that it would implement its own mechanism until 2008, though so far no thing has happened. It is hoped that the new measures would soon take effect”, he pointed out.

“We must present new mechanisms to address Islamic countries’ problems before other countries find pretexts to make any intervention”, he added.

As a critic of the work, education deputy of Baqir al-Ulum University said: “The work is nice as far as the style of writing, clarity of concepts, referring to sources and organizing materials are concerned. In addition to all these, the subject matter of the book is something that is the need of time in the world of Islam”.

“The work can contribute to Islamic sources on human rights. We had discussions on Islam and human rights but we did not deal with the issue from the perspective of the states. The present work has filled in this vacuum”, Dr. Muhammad Sutuda mentioned.

“It would have been better if this work first separated materials related to Islamic countries from those pertaining to other countries and then arranged them. In addition, the work suffers from being caught in the trap of repetition. For example, it defines Islamic world on many of its pages”, he mentioned.

“The main criterion in defining Islamic countries is the criterion of fifty percent though the book has made no mention of it”, he further added.

“The work applies the definition of international system to international regimes. The preface is too long making the reader feel bored. It would have been much better if the author shortened the scope his preface to this work and immediately entered into the main discussion”, he stated.

“Moreover the author has not determined the main concern of the inquiry making his reader sometimes feel lost. The work suffers from certain contradictions. For example somewhere it claims that Islamic countries did not play an equal role in ratifying human rights declaration while elsewhere it says something different”, Sutuda underlined.

“Terming the right to stipulate as destructive is something that needs to be proven. The US enjoys the right to stipulate and wherever its interests are not served it uses this right. This is while the work calls Muslim countries’ right to stipulate as destructive”, he said.

“The author has touched some issues related to development in a way that shows that the author has taken distance from the reality tilting towards idealism. The author was expected to deal with matters related to development in detail but he has sufficed to presenting some general ideas”, he said.

Referring to the work’s points of strength, Ruhullah Sahariati, a seminary researcher said: “Referring to rich English sources and drawing conclusions at the end of every chapter are among the work’s points of strength”.

Referring to the criticisms issued against the book, he said: “In addition to repeating discussions pertaining to human rights, it deals more with Islamic countries (rather than other countries). The author has severely (but at the same time unjustifiably) attacked on his predecessors dividing them into Muslims and non-Muslims”.

“The author has only enumerated the faults and flaws of their works ignoring their merits. The work has made little use of Persian works”, he maintained.

“The author’s negative approach towards human rights declaration is very clear. It has not sufficiently explained the effective or ineffective presence of Islamic countries in the process of the ratification of human rights declarations and conventions. It does not mention as to what were the reactions on the part of Muslim statesmen and public concerning human rights declaration”, he stated.

“The author has concluded that Muslim countries’ right to stipulate was destructive. There might be different perspectives here and the Western countries that have accepted Muslim countries’ right to stipulate did not regard this right as destructive”, he further said.

The session was held by the center of political sciences and theories with the cooperation of the office of scientific and international cooperation affiliated to Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy.