...International Muslims Organisation...

Campaigns...

12th January 1991 IMO convention RE: Rushdi affair

The IMO has called a convention of Ulema, scholars, dignitaries and businessmen from the Muslim community to discuss and deliberate on a strategy for dealing with a book written by Salman Rushdi called the Satanic verses. Many of the Ulema gathered expressed their condemnation of the writing and the implications therein by the author against the Holy Prophet Muhammad p.b.u.h. his family and his companions.

Basis of Objection

It was deemed by the Ulema that the main objection against the book was the manner in which references were made to figures of sanctity, knowing full well that any disrespect shown to them would cause the deepest offence to Muslims worldwide. It was accepted that Islamic beliefs and personalities of the Muslim faith throughout its history will be the subject of criticism, critique, analysis by friend and foe alike. The Ulema where of the opinion that references in this book to the personality of the Prophet Muhammad p.b.u.h. his family and companions was neither a critique nor an analysis of their position and situation in history and what they initiated. It was merely an attempt to ridicule those characters and to associate their personalities with attributes that could neither be historically correct nor could be said that the portrayal was justified given that it was a book of fiction.

The idea that such freedom of speech has some basis in western civilisation was deemed to be incorrect. This assumption is neither legally nor morally correct. No civilisation allows for the totality of freedom of speech. The very basis of civilisation is based on civility and respect of the variations in human beings and not to say anything which may deem to be utterly offensive and without basis to one or more of those members of that civilisation. Thus for example no civilised society will allow any person to say to another’s father or mother to be associated with whoredom or being a pimp unless the same was correct or in any way could have been correct. In doing so, it would be against the tenets of a civilised society to say that any person has the freedom of speech to abuse and slander that person.


In British Law, the rules of libel and slander are clear to the effect and essence that restrictions are placed upon people in terms of what they say or write about others. There can be no doubt that the prophet Muhammed p.b.u.h. his family and companions are not only referred as historical figures in the Muslim faith but their respect is part of the Islamic belief system. Salman Rushdi knew full well of this aspect of Islamic Theology.

The utter condemnation of Salamn Rushdi’s book by the Ulema was deemed to be just and the reaction it provoked from Muslims throughout the world was also.

FATWA

There has been a religious edict by Imam Khomeini of Iran placed on Salman Rushdi for the wrong he has committed in writing this book. He was tried in absentia without being given the opportunity to present a defence in his favour. It was deemed by Imam Khomeini that no defence could be presented. The book itself, being the culpable act, speaks louder than any other defence that could be presented. On that basis Imam Khomeini felt that he was in a position to give a judgement in the manner that he did. The sentence given to him of being sentenced to death was also correct on the basis that if an Islamic court was giving sentence to Salman Rushdi in an Islamic state then the sentence for such a person would be death. However in the circumstances of Salman Rushdi living in Britain and in a non Muslim state the Ulema were clear that there was no application of such a death sentence in this country. Muslims in this country had to remain within the law of this country.

The Ulema echoed the feelings of the global community of Muslim scholars whereby there was universal condemnation of this book and its author Salman Rushdi. This condemnation also was translated into official Fatwa’s by no less than fifty judicial bodies around the world who pronounced upon the guilt of Salman Rushdi along with the same death sentence that would be applicable had he been in a Muslim state. Therefore the ruling of Imam Khomeini is not particular to him or to Iran but in fact it is the ruling of the global community of Muslim scholars.

In relation to the current position of the author Mr. Salman Rushdi, the Ulema were of the belief that he would serve a life imprisonment in any event. This is because there would be no opportunity for this man to ever live a normal life, as he has aroused the anger of millions of Muslims worldwide. The hurt of those people is such that the manner in which Muslims will vent their anger against the author if they come across him cannot be controlled. Therefore it seems foreseeable that the author will live a lifetime of hiding and self imprisonment and will rot in dark corners of this world, for the sin of attempting to desecrate the honour of the Holy Prophet Muhammad p.b.u.h.

Reaction

It was the believe of Ulema that properly organised demonstration should take place in the central London whereby the Ulema, dignitaries and members of the public from all sects should be invited to participate in expressing their condemnation of the action of Rushdi. The Ulema urged that such demonstration should remain peaceful, as otherwise it would be of no consequence. The Ulema urged that Muslims throughout the country should also organise similar demonstration and express in the most stern terms their condemnation of Rushdi’s actions. It was decided that the President General of the International Muslims Organisation Hazrat Allama Pir Muhammed Abdul Wahab Siddiqi would lead the central demonstration in central London which will leave from Hyde Park and end up in Trafalgar Square. It was also announced that Hazrat Allama Pir Muhammed Abdul Wahab Siddiqi will also lead a local demonstration from the Coventry city centre.


The Ulema also decided to send representations to Mr. Douglas Hogg the Minister for Home Affairs to express their anger at the manner in which Rushdi has conducted himself. The Ulema would also urge the Minister of State not to waste tax-payers money by giving him protection, but to force him to pay for his own protection from the millions that he has earned from his immoral acts. They also decided that they will urge the Minister of State to include laws in parliament, to allow for prosecutions on the basis of incitement to religious hatred. The Ulema would also represent the fact that the Muslims beliefs are undervalued by British Law by the fact that any discrimination against their faith is not culpable. The Ulema decided that they will continue to pursue any lawful means possible to achieve and realise the above said objectives.