Band 4, Heft 1 - The Transnational Muslim World, Human Rights, and the Rights of Women and Sexual Minorities

To understand the Muslim world it is essential to see it in a transnational context that is informed by its heterogeneity, power contestations, and continuous change. To understand human rights' foundations and origins it is essential to grapple with its legal, political, normative, and institutional groundings, and bear in mind its ongoing reconfigurations and global impacts. Each of these tasks is illustrated by how movements for the rights of women and sexual minorities have come to impact on the transnational Muslim world and international human rights. This article explores each element within these complementary themes as a way of framing how and why the international human rights regime increasingly intersects with the Muslim world in a way that underpins challenges to authoritarian politics and the monolithic constructs of politics and society on which authoritarianism thrives.

Hijab – covering of a Muslim woman's body – is the most visible Islamic mandate. For a century it has been a major site of ideological struggle between traditionalism and modernity, and a yardstick for measuring the emancipation or repression of Muslim women. In recent decades hijab has become an arena where Islamist and secular feminist rhetoric have clashed. For Islamists, hijab represents their distinct identity and their claim to religious authenticity: it as a divine mandate that protects women and defines their place in society. For secular feminists, hijab represents women's oppression: it is a patriarchal mandate that denies women the right to control their bodies and to choose what to wear. The clash has been particularly strident in Iran, where the state has twice intervened with legislation to an extent that no other Muslim country has experienced. Iran, too, has been a prime site for the emergence of `Islamic feminist' discourses that speak of hijab not as a `duty,' but as a `right,' and as a social rather than a religious mandate, and finds juristic arguments to support this position. This article traces the genealogy of this new juristic position from notions of hijab in classical Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). It documents how jurisprudential positions and notions of hijab in Iran evolved in response to socio-political factors. It concludes by highlighting wider implications of the new juristic position on hijab for establishing common ground between secular feminist and Islamic discourses.

This article explores the political implications of Muslim public self-presentation and forms of self-fashioning associated with the ongoing processes of re-Islamisation in both Muslim-majority and Muslim-minority societies. It sketches how projects of the Muslim public self contribute to a refiguring of the public sphere. The argument put forward is that public practices of self-reform grounded in religion and presented in pietistic terms are political by virtue of being tied to projects of societal reform and because they have a bearing on the public sphere and public space. Proceeding from the premise that the public sphere is not neutral and that the subjectivities inhabiting it are shaped by power relations, the article examines the ways in which projects of Muslim public selves are imbricated in the material conditions of the settings in which they develop and as such are underpinned by dynamics of power and contestation.

The Islam and human rights nexus is too often viewed as being static. In reality, the relationship is complex and mutable. In an era of unsettling changes to the status quo, perceptions of the Islam and human rights nexus have also proven to be sensitive to shifting political dynamics. In these circumstances, the position that Islam and human rights are inherently in conflict, which assumes two settled entities in a stable relationship, is becoming hard to sustain – as is the position that human rights are ineluctably tied to Western civilization. Many Muslims are arguing that Islam and human rights are harmonious, and human rights contain principles that address some of Muslims' most pressing concerns. However, there are also factors – such as certain U.S. policies - that could work in the opposite direction, energizing Islamist hostility to human rights and confirming Muslims' suspicions that human rights are part of a nefarious Western plot. We must recognize that the Islam and human rights relationship is regularly readjusting in response to a changing environment, so that the issues addressed over the next decades will not likely be the same ones that Muslim societies and Islamic thinkers have been wrestling with to date.

This article argues that while Islam may not be the sole factor for ensuring the realization of human rights in Muslim States, it is certainly a significant factor that can be constructively employed as a vehicle for improving the poor human rights situation in predominantly Muslim States that recognise Islam as State religion or apply Islamic law or Islamic principles as part of State law. It addresses the question of how best to realize that in light of the two essential approaches (the `socio-cultural approach' and the `politico-legal approach') for promoting and protecting human rights generally, and the two divergent perspectives (the `adversarial perspective' and the `harmonistic perspective') to the discourse on Islam and human rights. The article then advances the view that the harmonistic perspective would be most helpful for employing Islam as a vehicle for the realization of human rights in the Muslim world within the context of the socio-cultural and politico-legal approaches for promoting and protecting human rights generally. Relevant academic and policy oriented examples, especially in relation to promoting women's rights in the Muslim world, are cited to substantiate this position.

There exists a limited pluralist model of regulating or `managing' religious diversity in contemporary Europe. This pluralist model, however, is in contrast to the limitations that appear at the state level, which reflect an increasingly illiberal, secular Europe. Such contrast stems historically from tensions that exist between the national and transnational aspects of the model itself, but it also reflects the emerging debates on religious pluralism and the democratic state. With the settlement of post-colonial migrants (with Muslims constituting a large majority) a public debate on the role of religion in Europe has resurfaced as these communities exist outside the historical formation of Western church-state relations and are challenging the very underpinning of what comprises a `liberal' democratic state. In particular, it is the role of Islam in secular Europe that frames several questions in this debate: to what extent is it necessary to regulate religious freedoms in the `public sphere' in order to protect the democratic state? What restrictions on minority religions should be considered `necessary in a democratic society’ and what limitations should be placed on state interference in minority religions as protection against the undue influence of a dominant social group? Against this backdrop, this article explores the historical social formation of religious pluralism in the European context and examines the legal and political frameworks at the national and regional levels to `regulate' diversity.

Muslim women and Muslim members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community face a specific form of dual subordination in relation to their gender and sexuality. A Muslim woman might seek solace from India's patriarchal religious judicial structures only to find that the secular system's patriarchal structures likewise aid in their subordination and create a space for new forms of such subordination. Similarly, a marginalized LGBT Muslim might attempt to reject an oppressive religious formulation only to come to find that the secular Indian state might criminalize a particular form of sexuality. This analysis explores how Indian laws "give meaning" to sexuality through the legal structures manifested by state and religious regulatory bodies and argues that both religious and state legal institutions need to be reformed to create a legal environment that furthers rather than inhibits a full realization of sexual rights.

In the last decade a body of literature has been written on the phenomenon of `Islamic Feminism,' which closely links it to a human rights discourse in Muslim countries. The term `Islamic Feminism' may seem a paradox, but by using Iran as a case study this article demonstrates that the idea of feminisms in Muslim societies, rather than being paradoxical, is actually a legitimate and potentially powerful force. In this paper Iranian feminists are categorized into four groups: Islamic state feminists, Islamic non-state feminists, Muslim feminists and secular feminists. Each group is differentiated according to their interpretations of fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence), their use of ijtihad (independent reasoning) and their relations to human rights and to the government. The novel concept of feminist dependency paradigm is also explored. The dependency paradigm investigates the multi-layered dependencies of the feminists to the state, to foreign funders, intellectuals, and to the family.

Agitation for women's rights in Iran is entwined with broader movements for freedom and reform that critique the Islamic Republic's shari'a law as discriminatory. Despite the foundation of these reform efforts in the social realities of contemporary Iran, anyone who critiques laws governing the rights of women is prone to the charge of insulting the sanctity and foundation of Islam and subject to harsh penalties. Reform efforts will be hamstrung until there is a foundation for open discourse and debate in Iran. Thus, human rights such as the right to freedom of expression and related rights must be seen as the fundamental basis for successful political and legal reform in Iran – whether that reform is based in liberal Islam or secularism.