|
When hypocrites accuse each other of hypocrisy things really get hilarious.Or perhaps democratic process is by its nature designed to reveal its inherent hypocrisy.Someone's statement in a television program has caused a big uproar in the whole country and exposed the hypocrisy of democracy once again.But this is discernible only to those who have decided not to entangle in the reform process.Here's a brief summary of what happened:
Maldives is going to presidential election on October 2008 and there are about 6 or more candidates contensting.One of the candidates was invited to a BBC Hardtalk style TV program called 'Siyaasath'.Lets make few things clear once again.This television program has been launched in conjunction with the upcoming election.The election is about electing a ruler.It is not an election to decide who is more knowledgeable in Islam(more on that subject later) or who has more expertise in baking cookies.Therefore it is assumed that the aim of this TV program should be to present opinions of the candidates which are specific to ruling,not baking cakes or needlework.So,what is ruling? Ruling semantically means legislation,enforcing legislation,ratifying laws,policy formulation and implementing administrative procedures.Which means the answers given by the candidate in such a TV show are in essence an indication of his legislative preferences,policy direction or administrative style .If the candidate was asked 'Do you believe its necessary for the woman to wear hijaab' and if he replied in the affirmative,it is an indication of implementing the said rule because, as said earlier, TV program is about politics(of a certain nature) and ruling.It is not a quiz contest to determine who has more knowledge in Islam.Nor was it a talk show where the guest speaks about his favourite food or drink.
The big hoo haa was created when the candidate who appeared in this particular TV show answered in the negative when he was asked whether woman should wear Hijab.He was simply answering the question in terms of implementation a legislation.Quite rightly,even if Islam says something is fardth,it does not become an implemented rule because soveriegnity is to the Majlis and the established mechanism(majority vote). Even for implementing an obligatory rule of Islam,the opinion of Majlis is a must.This mechanism of passing laws based on the majority vote is something the Islamic party in this country has always applauded as was the case when civil service bill(or was it an amendment?) was rejected in the Majlis.And surprisingly,this so called Islamic party has strongly condemned the aforementioned person's statement and published several articles about hijab on their website .But the question is,is this party calling for the implementation of the rule or just stating the rule for academic purpose ?
Anyway,this episode has opened a pandora's box.What if this Islamic party and its allaince come to power? Will they implement what they said is the truth ? Or are they going to develop a new fiqhi framework to justify its non implementation. Some may say that the society is not yet ready for its implementation.If the society is not ready for its implementation
why did these scholars get themselves busy in a political process that was clearly not geared towards creating such readiness for implementing Islam.At times members of this party got so restless about the slow process of 'reform' that they even complained to foriegn media and foriegn diplomats!
The general public should forget the tit for tat arguments of these people and lower their anxiety about the election and should start thinking why our creed is something and what is implemented upon us is something else.
Related
Audio - Islamic Aqeedah
Mabda
Aqeeda
Archive
Series of Thoughts (Dhivehi) |
