Indigenous religion not protected, ANU academic tells Ruddock review

by Andrew Brown
Sydney Morning Herald
6 April 2018 

A leading Canberra academic has told the Turnbull government's review into religious freedom that Aboriginals are not adequately protected to practice their religion.

Ernst Willheim, a visiting fellow at the Centre for International and Public Law at the Australian National University, said the current legal system failed to accommodate the difference between Aboriginal and "mainstream religions".

An ANU fellow has said the current legal system fails to accommodate differences between Indigenous religion and "mainstream religions".

The submission was one of more than 16,000 received by the review, headed up by former Attorney General Philip Ruddock, recently made public.

The inquiry was announced last year following concerns surrounding religious freedom after same-sex marriage was legalised.

The religious freedom review is being headed by former Howard government minister Philip Ruddock.

In his submission to the review, the expert on Aboriginal heritage protection said Indigenous Australians were not fully protected by the law to practice their religious beliefs.

"Aboriginal religious or spiritual beliefs commonly require that particular knowledge be restricted to certain individuals or groups and not to be further disclosed," Mr Willheim said.

"Yet the statutory procedures for obtaining protection ... require full disclosure of the details of secret knowledge or beliefs to non-Aboriginal decision makers and to the opponents of protection.

"Disclosure of secret knowledge or beliefs through a public inquiry process destroys the values Aboriginal people seek to protect."

The academic said current laws enacted to protected the religious beliefs of Aboriginals have failed to achieve their purpose.

Mr Willheim said there was a "collision" of the core values of Aboriginal religious practices and the Australian legal system.

"The Australian legal system establishes a non-Aboriginal process for the authentication of Aboriginal religious belief," he said. "That in itself is inherently offensive to Aboriginal people."

A key part of Mr Willheim's submission noted secrecy was an essential part of Aboriginal religious beliefs, with elders guarding knowledge and passing it on selectively to the next generation.

According to the ANU visiting fellow, Indigenous people would have to break these traditions if they were required in a legal setting.

"These beliefs, ceremonies and rituals form part of the religious life of the community. Access to religious knowledge is a basis for power in the community," he said.
"Aboriginal religions are fundamentally different from mainstream religions but the legal system fails to accommodate the difference.

"International law principles and international authorities clearly support the view that the rights of Indigenous people to pursue their religious, spiritual and cultural practices are important legal rights."

While 16,000 submissions were received by the review, almost 2000 were made public before the Easter weekend.

The rest of the submissions are due to be published on May 18, when the review is expected to hand down its report.

Shabbat : A seventh day rest for all living things

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews

1 hr · 

Hey, animals need a #Shabbat, too!

“The seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals.” (Deuteronomy 5:14)

Brigid O'Carroll Walsh

Love

Like

Love

Haha

Wow

Sad

Angry

Israeli health minister Yaakov Litzman resigns in protest over railway work on the Sabbath

Updated 23 minutes ago

PHOTO: Yaakov Litzman said the weekend maintenance work on the railway was not warranted. (Reuters: Ammar Awad)

MAP: Israel

Israel's health minister has resigned, saying he opposed continued maintenance work on the country's railways on the Sabbath, when all labour is strictly prohibited by Jewish law.

Key points:

• Mr Litzman said he took issue with government-sanctioned Sabbath "desecration"
• Israel's railways authority said it must carry out work on Saturday so it did not disrupt transportation during the work week
• Much of Israel comes to a halt at sundown on Friday for the Sabbath, but few Israelis strictly observe the day of rest

Yaakov Litzman, who heads a powerful ultra-Orthodox political party in Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition, said the work conducted publicly on the railway prompted him to resign.

He said, "As a minister in Israel, I can't maintain the ministerial responsibility" of government-sanctioned Sabbath "desecration" that contradicts the "holy values of the Jewish people".

While Mr Litzman said the weekend maintenance work on the railway was not warranted, Israel's railways authority said it must carry out work on Saturday so it did not disrupt transportation for thousands of Israelis during the work week.

Railway and some other public works have occurred for years on the Sabbath, which begins at sundown on Friday.

Mr Netanyahu said later at a government meeting he regretted Mr Litzman's decision, describing him as, "an excellent health minister who did much for the health of Israel's citizens".

He said his coalition would not dissolve over the issue.

Mr Netanyahu stressed the Sabbath was important to all Israelis — as is the need for "safe and continuous" transportation — and added he was convinced a solution could be found.

The chasm between secular and orthodox

Ultra-Orthodox parties provide Mr Netanyahu with support to stabilise his coalition, while the Government carves out large budgets for the minority community.

They have traditionally acted as kingmakers in Israel's fractious coalition building and have in the past threatened to topple coalition governments by robbing them of their majority.

The issue of desecration of the Sabbath has triggered crisis in the past and highlights the cultural chasm between Israel's ultra-Orthodox population and its secular majority.

Much of Israel, including public transportation, comes to a halt at sundown on Friday, but few Israelis strictly observe the day of rest.

Many restaurants, movie theatres, sporting events and national parks operate, and in secular bastions such as Tel Aviv even some corner stores and shopping centres are open.

Mr Litzman's resignation did not immediately threaten Mr Netanyahu's coalition, but it risked setting off a chain reaction that might.

Later on Sunday however, any crisis appeared to have been averted when Mr Netanyahu and the ultra-Orthodox coalition partners agreed to maintain the Sabbath status quo.

Mr Litzman's resignation could have exerted pressure on the other two ultra-Orthodox coalition partners to squeeze out concessions from Mr Netanyahu to prove to their constituents that they respect the Sabbath as much as the resigning health minister.

Mr Netanyahu may be hesitant to offer anything perceived as being too generous for fear of alienating secular voters at a time when opposition party Yesh Atid, led by charismatic former journalist Yair Lapid, has been gaining traction in polls.

AP

The fight for women's historic Quranic rights : Triple talaq : India court bans Islamic instant divorce

From the BBC

India's top court has ruled the practice of instant divorce in Islam unconstitutional, marking a major victory for women's rights activists.

In a 3-2 majority verdict, the court called the practice "un-Islamic".

India is one of a handful of countries where a Muslim man can divorce his wife in minutes by saying the word talaq (divorce) three times.

The landmark court decision came in response to petitions challenging the so-called "triple talaq" custom.

The cases were filed by five Muslim women who had been divorced in this way and two rights groups.

Women's rights campaigners have hailed the court's decision as a historic win.

What is instant divorce?

There have been cases in which Muslim men in India have divorced their wives by issuing the so-called triple talaq by letter, telephone and, increasingly, by text message, WhatsApp and Skype. A number of these cases made their way to the courts as women contested the custom.

• How Muslim women won the battle
• The women who challenged triple talaq
• The fight against instant divorce

Triple talaq divorce has no mention in Sharia Islamic law or the Koran, even though the practice has existed for decades.

Islamic scholars say the Koran clearly spells out how to issue a divorce - it has to be spread over three months, allowing a couple time for reflection and reconciliation.

Most Islamic countries, including Pakistan and Bangladesh, have banned triple talaq, but the custom has continued in India, which does not have a uniform set of laws on marriage and divorce that apply to every citizen.

What did the court say?

Three of the five Supreme Court judges called the controversial practice "un-Islamic, arbitrary and unconstitutional". One of the judges, Justice Kurien Joseph, said the practice was not an essential part of Islam and enjoyed no protection.

The judges also said it was "manifestly arbitrary" to allow a man to "break down (a) marriage whimsically and capriciously".

Chief Justice JS Khehar, in a differing opinion, said that personal law could not be touched by a constitutional court of law. The opposing judgements also recommended that parliament legislate on the issue. However this is not binding and is up to parliament to take up.

The Indian government, led by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has supported ending the practice. Narendra Modi has brought up the issue several times including in his Independence Day address on 15 August 2017.

'Strong message' - By Geeta Pandey, BBC News

The judgement is a huge victory for Muslim women. For decades, they have had to live with the threat of instant divorce dangling over their heads like a sword.

Campaigners say over the years thousands of women, especially those from poor families, have been discarded by their husbands in this manner. Many have been rendered destitute, with nowhere to go, or have been forced to return to their parental homes or fend for themselves.

The top court has also sent a very strong message to Muslim clergy. India's Muslim personal law board had called the practice "reprehensible" but said that it was not an issue for the courts and government to interfere in. With this latest ruling, this will no longer be the case.

---

How are people reacting?

The judgement is being widely hailed as a major win for Muslim women and women's rights. The prime minister praised the "historic" ruling.

Shayara Bano, one of the main petitioners, said she appealed to people to accept the ruling and not politicise the issue. "I have felt the pain when family breaks. I hope no one has to go through this situation in future," she told reporters.

Hasina Khan, founder of the Bebaak Collective which fought against triple talaq, called the verdict "historic". "We are extremely happy. Muslim women have struggled for years," she told the BBC

Zakia Soman, an activist from Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, another of the groups which contested the practice, said Indian women of many religions had supported them. "It's a historic day for us, but it doesn't end here," she said.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), which had maintained that the court had no jurisdiction over the matter, has yet to make an official statement on the ruling, but has convened a meeting to decide what its response should be, a report in Indian newspaper The Hindu said.

However, it quoted an executive member as saying that the judgement would have "wide ramifications" as it affected the religious rights of minority groups.

But the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIWPB), which had opposed the stand of the AIMPLB, said the judgment "could not have been better".

"It will change the entire landscape of Muslim families. It's now in the mainstream and will protect not only women, but children. Families will be more stable because children will also be protected," Chandra Rajan, an advocate for the group, told the BBC.

On social media the hashtags #TripleTalaq and #SupremeCourt began trending on Twitter India even as the verdict was being announced. The hashtag #Tripletalaq is also trending globally on Twitter.

---

Is talaq talaq talaq allowed around the world?

Dating from the 8th Century AD and not mentioned in the Koran, triple talaq divorces often conflict with countries' legal systems.

India has become the 23rd country to outlaw them, joining places as far apart as Egypt, Sri Lanka, the United Arab Emirates and Malaysia.

In countries including China and the UK a couple must go through the official channels to be legally divorced but there have been cases of individuals considering themselves divorced after the triple talaq has been said.

In Saudi Arabia the law leaves room for various interpretations of religious custom, and triple talaq is practised.

This type of verbal divorce is practiced around the world but as it is illegal in so many countries, it is hard to say exactly how common it is.

Why must "talaq" be said three times? Under some interpretations of Islamic law, a man can divorce his wife and get back together with her - but only twice. After the third divorce, the marriage is completely over and cannot be started again without an intervening marriage to someone else.

Scholars are divided on whether it counts as a full and final divorce to say the word three times, or whether it needs to be said on three separate occasions.

and please read this, too.