|
|
|
Homa Arjomand Speech at METRAC (Metropolitan Action Committee on Violence against Women and Children) on “Emerging Issues in Women’s Equality –A look at Sharia Law” I’d like to thank you for giving me the opportunity
to be among you today. Gatherings like this provide an opportunity to discuss the
obstacles women face in order to achieve equality. I’d like to present a true
picture of the situation that women and children face in the so called Muslim
communities. I will then highlight the need for the total separation of religion
from the State as a precondition of women’s liberation in these communities.
The first victims of religion influenced culture,
particularly of Sharia, are women and children. Sharia has deprived many women and
girls of their basic rights in Unfortunately, the government of The Arbitration Act 1991 has already paved the way for a new parallel court systems in While, technically, all Muslim women have access to Canadian laws and courts, and while the Canadian legal system would reject the oppressive decisions made under Shari'a as being contrary to Canadian Law, the reality is that most women would be coerced (socially, economically and psychologically) into participating in the Shari'a tribunal. Women would be told that the Shari'a Tribunal is a legal tribunal under the Arbitration Act. Even women who know that Canadian law would not uphold the decisions, would not challenge the decisions for fear of physical, emotional, economic and social consequences. Allowing religious
interference in the justice system endangers the life and safety of battered immigrant women who are at the merci of
male-chauvinist cultures. One of the main arguments put forward by the Initiators of Sharia court is that the Canadian government should not be allowed to interfere in the way that people choose to practice their religion or to bring up their children. We support state intervention to protect children by use of a child protection law. Some will express concern that freedom of religion will be restricted. Our response is that being born into a family of a specific culture with certain beliefs should not mean that a child is to be left, unrestricted, to the mercy of her/his parents. Anyone can have any beliefs, express them, publicize them and organize around them. The question is : What are the regulations that society puts in place to protect itself? Police, counselors, Assistant Crown Attorneys, teachers and nurses are trained to be very sensitive towards others culture and religions. As it is stated very clearly in the “principles of Intervention for CAS (Children Aid Society) and VAW (Violence Against Women Collaborative Work), “all intervention should be culturally informed and based on cultural sensitive practices. Culture includes country of Origin, sexual orientation, ability and economic status.” My question is how much can a CAS
worker, a VAW and a police officer bend for cultural relativism? The
reality is that they have paid huge amounts of respect to the violations of
women’s and children’s rights, instead of paying attention to the needs of
women, youth and children. especially in the so
called Islamic communities. The government added some amount of dollars to train its
legal staff, funded some TV programs, provided facilities and financial support to the
provokers of multiculturalism. The outcome is the obvious justification of two sets of
values, of rights and of privileges for the residents of |
|
[Disc
|