 |
| Receptor Meeting with Prof. Abdullahi An-Naim |
At the meeting that
took place on the 8th An-Na'im shared some of his insights with the
Receptor Team, mainly on his view on human rights, attaining its effective implementation and cultural
legitimacy, its monopolization by powerful states and the effective relationship
it can share with Islam.
An-Na'im is mainly concerned with questions of legitimacy of internationally recognized human
rights standards in different cultural and contextual settings, which he
believes, is not solely the responsibility of states per se but also depends on the broader efforts of individuals and
groups that come into contact with human rights issues. He takes the view that
states are not the sole protector of human rights especially because they are
prone and susceptible to promoting their own competing interests and goals. Furthermore, the
state as an entity cannot effectively be held accountable by the
international system for its failure to
adequately protect human rights, essentially because the human rights treaties that
they sign up to, are without any without any real 'teeth' and therefore cannot effectively guarantee a state’s commitment and resolve to upholding such
rights. Many states as a result, end up taking these obligations lightly and in
some cases start showing an indifferent attitude as a result.
Relatedly another
reason as An-Na'im puts, is that in
almost every instance the state is hijacked by the market mainly because trade
or business treaties carry more weight than human rights treaties do. Thus, he
concludes, the state is essentially “a-moral” and that those who act on behalf
of it mostly do so with their own interests in mind. He therefore believes that human rights can be
best achieved through moving away from a “state centered system to a more
people centered system," one in which people or groups of people might be in the best position to promote and
defend human rights. Some of these
actors would include civil society organizations, social scientists, lawyers
and judges, as well as community leaders who are regularly in contact with
human rights and are therefore in the best position to do so.
Specifically in this
regard, An-Na'im has emphasized the value and need for dialogue. For example, he suggests that there should be more internal discourse and cross cultural
dialogue to encourage goodwill, mutual respect and equality with other cultural
traditions. Internal discourse would
naturally feature at a national level and would include scholarly works as well
as political action. An-Na'im has stressed the importance of cross cultural
dialogue and internal dialogue in order to reach consensus on a “body of
beliefs” within the human rights framework. This, according to him is only
achievable through dialogue and respect, and a common form of reciprocity between
various cultures, which he suggests, is treating others in the same way as one
would like to be treated. An-Na’im, therefore takes the position that human
rights can only gain legitimacy and subsequently can only be observed if it is
sanctioned through a person’s own cultural identity. This is what he believes
is necessary and crucial for the cultural legitimacy of human rights.
On the relationship between the North and South and
their prevailing power relations, An-Naim has observed that this is another area disenfranchising the effective spread and legitimacy of human rights.
Here he spoke of the role of the international donor system and northern type
NGO’s that continuously criticize the South and create a type of human rights dependency
system indicative of neo-colonialism . Initially the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights was a treaty owned by all states but later subsequently became hijacked
by more powerful states to the detriment of weaker states, in his view. As a
result, this created a top down system of human rights where a type of
imperialism and domination is the resultant order of the day and where human
rights are imposed rather than shared, agreed upon and genuinely believed in.
This same ‘colonizer and colonized’ mentality which was internalized in the
past by Africa through colonialism, continues to be internalized through the
conduit of human rights nowadays, indicative of the current North South divide.
An-Na'im, as a result calls for agency and self-determination
of disempowered groups that do not equally participate in human rights dialogue
and debate. In his view “agency of the subject of human rights” is critical and
necessary. Each society must struggle for their rights because transformation and
liberation can only take place if there is struggle within and without one’s
society for change to occur. In his view change is inevitable and will in each
society, come with time, but it is necessary that people themselves lead it. It
is therefore essential internally that people engage with their own communities
as well as with other individuals and communities across cultures, so as to
find common ground and consensus.
Lastly on the issue of human rights and Islam, An-Na'im observes that secularization and religion are currently part and parcel of Islamic tradition.
This, in his opinion should not be the case as it creates friction. Rather, it
is necessary to separate the state and Islam but only to the degree that the state
allows an individual freedom enough to practice his/her faith without fetter.
While it is essential is that this type of model of separation, should allow for neutral decision-making by the
state, it should not resemble the French model of laicity, where religion is
accorded lower rights than for instance freedom of speech. So, while An-Na'im
believes that separation of state and religion is necessary, it is necessary
that it be done is a culturally and religiously sensitive way. This is because rights
are not absolute and therefore need to be properly balanced for the good of the
society concerned. On the adjacent issue of terrorism
and radicalization and the rise of ISIS, An-Na'im suggests that the roots of
Islamic violence needs to be re-traced in order to understand the emergence of
radical terrorism. In his opinion only Muslims can defeat ISIS, by exposing the
fallacy of their religious claims. So Islamic dialogue is not only necessary, it
is essential in combatting terrorism. On a personal level and from the side of his
activist fervor and passion for the effective spread of human rights An-Na'im eventually hopes to see Islam become a catalyst for social
justice, equality and human rights.
Posted by Ingrid Roestenburg-Morgan
