Homa
Arjomand
416-737-9500
This
Conference will emphasize on the effects of globalization of political Islam on
Women’s Rights, the question with polygamy, the Niqab and Honour Killing.
As well as the problems of legal pluralism and cultural relativism with respect
to women’s rights and discussion on separation of religion from the State.
In
order to cover all these issues, I will start my speech with a case of a victim
of polygamy, child trafficking as well as forced and arranged marriages in
Canada; the obstacles and challenges they face with no hope to overcome them
unless we progress our laws and regulations to one secular law for all and
alter the legal pluralism and cultural relativism for integration.
In the following
case, some changes are made to protect the client’s identity:
Farideh, at the age of
14, was sent to
Now
her father is pushing her to sponsor her husband. Farideh indicated she
would rather die than sponsor her abuser. In a Risk Assessment Check
List, she specified the following abuse: pushed, pulled, grabbed, slapped, punched
and kicked, objects were thrown at her. And in the section OTHER she
described in one full page how she was chained to the ground with her baby in
her arms to care for, without food and water for hours. All this was
while she was breast feeding her baby. She also described how her husband
knocked out two of her front teeth and broke her nose.
In
the part of the Sexual Abuse portion, Farideh indicated there was persistent
pressure to consent to rape, and she described how she was beaten while her husband
performed sex and then he would throw a glass of holy water over her to purify
her. All this abuse was to make her more submissive.
Farideh
returned to Canada because her mother was dying.
At
the hospital, she met a nurse in which she claims changed her life. She
was told by her family members that she cannot go against Allah’s wish because
Allah was testing her, and her husband is her destiny.
History
of Farideh’s background:
Farideh
was born in Ontario and had never been outside of her community. Farideh
never had any friends outside of her culture even when she was attending public
school. After school, she attended a Madreseh school which is an Islamic
School. She never participated in any of the school’s activities,
never attended any field trip; never went to a movie theatre, never wore pink,
red or purple coloured clothes even though those were her favourite colours.
Her biggest dream was to attend her graduation when she finished grade
eight. And that never happened.
The
obstacle Farideh faces:
Farideh
will not be able to pay market rate for rent and she will not be qualified for
subsidized housing as her children are not Canadian. She will not be qualified
for subsidized day care for the same reasons. She is supported
financially by Ontario Work which is social welfare but her financial support
will be discontinued if she does not resolve the child custody matter
soon. She will not be eligible for legal aid certificate in order to hire
a lawyer as the abuser is living outside of Canada. And soon if she does
not find a way out of this international legal system she will be prosecuted
for abducting her own children.
Social
obstacles:
Farideh
will be forced to distance herself from all members of her community, relatives
and her family for the safety of her children and herself which means she will
have to leave behind all she had known in her childhood and early youth. She
will be disowned by her family members as her action to seek help for
separation will not be taken lightly by the members of her community.
There are other hidden burdens that she needs to overcome, because of her
action: no-one in the community would be willing to arrange any marriage with
her siblings. Her brothers might be able to marry a girl from the
community but there is no chance for her sisters.
Among
members of the community, Farideh is considered a rebellious, a very bad
example for all the other girls. However despite, all these obstacles,
Farideh has made up her mind to go for separation and save the future of her
children, with no money and community support.
Regarding
the legal barrier:
If
Farideh is forced by the legal system to send the children back to Pakistan,
then she needs to make a huge decision. If she returns back with the
children, she will face a harsh punishment, not only from her husband but also
from the legal system in Pakistan. She knows there are women in Pakistan
whose noses were cut off by their husbands or their father, or have no ears
because they were not obedient or did not honour the family wishes. She
knows in Pakistan murderers can get out of prison with a small amount of money.
Farideh
will be facing a long painful legal battle. Her situation is not as
simple as child custody, child support and divorce. In her case the
husband is living in Pakistan, he is not Canadian and Canadian law does not
apply to him at all. The children were born in Pakistan. Her
marriage was performed in Pakistan. Therefore nothing much can be done at
the Ontario Family Court system.
Farideh
is not the only Canadian child of misfortune. There are countless other
Canadian children whose civil rights are violated and no-one has ever been put
in the spot light for this violation of children’s rights.
In
Farideh’s case, no one has been charged for what they have done to this child:
that she was taken to Pakistan at very young age and forced to marry and live
in a polygamist relationship: that she was left there with a man more than
three times her age to be sexually rapped, physically injured and go under
tremendous torture.
Our
expectation in Canada should be for the Canadian government to arrest and jail
Farideh’s father and all the ones involved in crimes committed against Farideh,
at least under Child Trafficking Act as shamefully there is no criminal act for
forced and arranged marriages or early child bride or even polygamy in Canada.
But
even with the Child Protection Act in place, the system has failed Farideh for
not protecting her rights, for not questioning her parents upon their return to
Canada about their missing child; after all they went out of the country with
the child and returned without her.
The
system managed to fail her without questions asked by any of its concerned
citizens. No-one from Children Aid Society ever knocked at her
parents’ house and asked about the missing Farideh, no school teacher ever
questioned the authorities about all those missing children, among them
Farideh.
The
question is how the government of Canada could neglect Farideh and all the
other children like her while there is the Child Protection Act in place?
How could the Child’s Civil Rights be totally violated in the presence of all
involved members of society and involved authorities but no-one speaks out
against it?
It
is certainly not an error in the legal documents.
The
violations of children’s civil rights was done simply by implementing a legal
policy in such a way that a horrendous crime would be considered an affront to
humanity, and the responsibility of the State to enforce this policy. Canada
has put in place legal pluralism and cultural relativism which is totally in
contradiction with the Universal Rights of the Child and Freedom of
Individuals. Under this policy minority rights and religious rights over
take the individual rights.
So
crimes against Farideh became invisible and not a crime at all. It is
consider part of Farideh’s culture and religion to be taken out of school
forcefully, cross the boarders, pass five oceans to her parents’ country
and forced to marry so young, in a polygamist relationship. It has been
said to the members of the greater society that under no circumstances, under
Child Protection Act, this harsh and inhuman life journey of Farideh could have
been prevented. And we are supposed to believe what we have been told by
the legal system.
This
unbearable cruelty to children and women should not be tolerated and must be
condemned strongly. Zero tolerance is needed to put in place for all
repressive laws and regulations. We need to come forward in full force
against any policies that pursues cultural and social segregation, and against
any practice that undermines the right and well-being of the child.
No
doubt when people hear about the case of Farideh, humanity will rise up
and help will come from every avenue. I am convinced that Farideh’s legal
problem will be resolved if not by “lawyers without boarders” then by other
kind and caring individuals who have heart and compassion for humanity.
But this is not the main aim of this conference.
The
aim is to help all the vulnerable children and women living in these isolated
communities, these communities that are surrounded by thick invisible
walls. These walls were built there from the moment the legal pluralism
and cultural relativism were implemented in Canada. The federal government
adopted multiculturalism as its official policy in 1971, to the disadvantage of
women and children, and patronized more the religious and ethnic groups.
The Multiculturalism Act was passed by Parliament and proclaimed in 1988.
This broad, unclear act needs to be amended immediately before the life and
safety of more women and children are put in jeopardy.
The
reality is that these invisible walls needs to be demolished and replaced by
one secular progressive law for all. Only then can the act of Child
Protection be effective and no child will be mistreated.
Right
now under the legal pluralism and cultural relativism and under the name of
freedom of religion, the Mormon sect can openly engage in polygamy where
children as young as 14 can become the wives of one man (as many as 180 wives,
I was told or even more in order to become part of the God) and political Islam
can find enough legal ground to establish Sharia law in Canada. It was
not too long ago that we challenged Sharia Court in Ontario and managed to
overcome faith based arbitration for family disputes. That means we
closed one gate only but there are many other gates open allowing 7th century
traditions to hunt and hurt women and children. And it is not practical
to fight these violations one at the time.
Under
this policy, women and children are left at the mercy of the sheik, imams,
priests, rabbi, old traditions, 7th century customs and religious
institutions. As a result there are two or more sets of values and rights
in Canada, one being Canadian law and the other being the law of the sect or
cult of a community. The only way it can be described is “ a state within
state”. Women and girls are forced to comply with those laws and
regulations and the ones who resist as Farideh did, will face harsh
punishment. If they are lucky, they might be flogged, raped, pulled out
of school, separated from all their siblings, disowned by community and family
members or forced to marry, but the misfortunate ones will face death by
honour killing, if not by stoning. All these are happening in our back
yard.
One
must not fail to remember, the reasons why these young brave girls were
slaughtered in the name of honor killing is because they all refused the
interference of religion and the backward culture in their private lives.
They were at the forefront of the battle for individual rights verses
collective /(minority rights) or lets say religious rights.
Aqsa
Parvez 16 in Mississauga, Khatera Haidery 20 in Calgary, Aminat
Magomadova, 14 in Calgary, Jaswinder Kaur Sidhu 25 known as Jassi, in
British Columbia, Rona Amir Mohammad and her three stepdaughters, Zainab Shafia
(19), Sahari Shafia, (17) and Geeti Shafia (13) from Kingstown Ontario.
All these victims have been tried and sentenced to death according to family
beliefs and culture, and murdered by members of their own family, for not
honouring the rules of inhuman traditions and culture. These killings are
shamefully honoured, respected and guarded legally, and financially supported
by the Canadian government under the policy of multiculturalism and cultural
relativism.
These
brave girls wished to control their own way of life and lost their lives for
what members of the greater society have been benefiting for the past
centuries. The most basic rights, the right to individual independence,
the right to the necessities of a normal life, the right to have protection of
body and mind against any violation, the right to education, the right to
socialize and have a social life. Their thirst for these basic rights put
them in a death role by the culture and religion of their parents. And we
as members of the greater society kept our distance and did nothing to protect
their civil rights.
The
reality is that honour killing, polygamy, child bride, forced marriage and
arranged marriage and stoning have great ties with the growth of the anti-women
culture and religious movement, in particular Islamic movements in the
West. As soon as the advocators of this movement find the tiniest room to
penetrate into legal system, more women will be subjected to violence and
brutally slaughtered for refusing to follow the traditions of their families’
culture. It is hurtful to say that Canada under the policy of
multiculturalism and cultural relativism has legally provided political Islam
and all other organized religious sects, lots of ground to grow.
It
is time to stand up firm and build a political campaign that promotes a
political solution. The banner of this campaign must be integration and
the concept of the equal and universal rights for all citizens, irrespective of
their country of origin, race, gender or religion; verses legal pluralism and
cultural relativism. Only then we can end all these horrendous crimes
against women and children living in these communities.
In
response to question of the Niqab and Burqa one needs to tie these two
types of veils to rise of political Islam. These types of veils are used
for advertising and promoting the agenda of political Islam movement, in the
West and so far have served its political desire and political needs.
In
fact these types of veils have become the banner of Islamists movement.
It
should not come to anyone’s surprise to witness not only niqab and burqa but
also the hijab being burnt by women at the forefront of every demonstration in
countries where political Islam gained power. Women have every right to
see this piece of cloth as a tool of oppression as they have witnessed it,
lived with its degrading laws and suffered a great deal.
They
know the only way out is to make religion stay a private matter for
individuals, separate from the State. Not water it down.
The
Niqab existed in only marginalized the Arabian Gulf region and came to light after
Islamic movement organized itself as state in Iran. The only difference is,
back then it was enforced upon women only in a small uneducated isolated rural
area, but now these types of veils are willingly adopted by advocators of the
Islamic movement, the ones who enjoyed sitting on benches of universities
and successfully achieved a degree that could not have been possible if there
was not an on going struggle for social progress, freedom, equality between men
and women and justice for all, at that time of their study, they were not
wearing niqab or any other hijab as political Islam was not yet in power,
therefore no recognition of this flag was needed then.
Wearing
Niqab or Burqa has nothing to do with their Islamic faith. Niqab or
Burqa is a flag of Islamists on rise for the expansion of Political Islam
on the international arena, socially, culturally, and religiously on a macro
level. And for it, they need to stay in the spot lights of the media
every day if not for every hour of the day, the Islamist’s existence needs to
be acknowledged, in every house hold either by act of terrorism globally or by
the outcry over the caricatures of Mohammad or over the halah meat at
elementary schools cafeteria, or upholding Islamic fashion under the Eiffel
tower, or over space to pray during lunch hours at schools, universities and
work places or else the followers of this movement will stop the traffic in the
heart of France and England and line up to pray. Of course in all these mocking
shows, the niqabist will be seen in first rows. And when they realize there
is no more audience, then it is time to show up at public places such as
schools, courts or even at election polls in various countries dressed in full
niqab and if they are confronted then the niqabists file a complaint with the
Human Rights Tribunal. We need to ban Niqab totally from our society, the
same way we banned the fascist flag.
As
for other forms of the veil (hijab), women should have rights to wear them or
not. However when it comes to public sectors such as schools, courts,
hospitals, libraries, police stations, the veil should be prohibited totally.
The
Islamic veil in any shapes and forms must be banned for children under the age
of 18 and prohibition of veiling children must become part of child protection
act.
Banning the niqab will certainly push
back political Islam and that will help the women’s movement to promote their
progressive agenda which is advancing total equality in every avenue
possible.