WASHINGTON (ABP) — A council of regional and tribal leaders has given approval to a new Afghan constitution containing provisions that fail to protect religious freedom, say international human-rights activists.
About 500 delegates to the loya jirga, or grand assembly, rose to their feet at the end of a lengthy and often contentious convention Jan. 4, signifying their approval of the document.
The document retains several sections on religious issues that raised concerns among religious-freedom observers when an earlier draft was released in November, prior to the convening of the loya jirga in Kabul.
It sets up a government that mirrors the United States' system in structure — with a strong executive branch, a bicameral legislature and an independent judiciary — but also declares Afghanistan an “Islamic Republic.” It also contains a section enforcing one particular school of Islamic law on disputes that cannot be resolved under existing laws.
The constitution names “the sacred religion of Islam” as the official religion of the republic, according to an unofficial translation of the final document.
While the constitution follows that clause by saying, “Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of law,” it goes on to say that “no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.”
The document doesn't contain any provision separating mosque from state or explicitly ensuring equal rights among religious groups, as does the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
That's not enough protection for religious minorities and non-conformist Muslims, according to some members of a U.S. panel monitoring religious freedom around the globe.
“We're disappointed that the bottom line is that the vast majority of the citizens of Afghanistan do not have rights to religious freedom — that was omitted,” said Nina Shea, a member of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, in a Jan. 6 telephone interview.
Shea is executive director for the Washington-based Freedom House Center for Religious Freedom. She went on to say that the provisions requiring no law to contradict Islam and guaranteeing free speech only in harmony with the principles of the Constitution could give the country's judiciary too much latitude in determining exactly what sorts of expression are acceptable.
Shea said that those articles mean that the principles of Islam, which the constitution leaves undefined, “is the supreme law of the land, and they are going to be interpreted — defined — by unnamed powers.”
This has already been a problem in Afghanistan in the era since American troops liberated the country from the oppressive, theocratic Taliban regime in 2002, Shea noted. Some dissidents have been accused of blasphemy by the country's Supreme Court for speaking up for moderate forms of Islam.
“In an Islamic state like Afghanistan now, political speech is religious speech, so when there is criticism of the government, those dissidents will not be given the space they need to dissent,” Shea told ABP.
But in a Jan. 6 opinion piece for the Washington Post, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan praised the constitutional process, calling it a “remarkable commitment to democracy” and noting that the majority of delegates to the loya jirga did not give in to pressure from Islamic extremists.
Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said the constitution “sets forth parallel commitments to Islam and to human rights. While embracing Islam as the state religion, the document provides broad religious freedom — allowing adherents of other faiths to practice their religions and observe religious rites.
He also praised the way delegates handled the sensitive issue of rights for women, who were severely repressed under the Taliban. “The loya jirga increased the number of women in parliament to an average of two female representatives from each province and explicitly stated, 'Citizens of Afghanistan — whether men or women — have equal rights and duties before the law,' ” he wrote.
The White House released a statement Jan. 4 in which President Bush praised the new constitution. “This document lays the foundation for democratic institutions and provides a framework for national elections in 2004,” Bush said. “This new constitution marks a historic step forward.”
But according to Shea, the lack of solid protections for liberty of conscience in the document means that Taliban-like rule may return to Afghanistan. “The failure to guarantee religious freedom for all citizens of Afghanistan means democracy will be stunted,” she said. “The most you can say about this constitution is that it defers the fight to another day.”
-30-