Volume 20, Issue 1

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR), established in 2006, has been hailed as an innovative mechanism of the United Nations’ Human Rights Council. The peer review mechanism assesses the human rights records of all UN Member States and provides recommendations to further the global promotion and protection of human rights. This article provides an analysis of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s third UPR in 2018 with a specific focus on the State’s use of capital punishment. It explores the challenges faced by the UPR and issues recommendations to foster meaningful discourse, in the international community, to protect the right to life and engender change at the domestic level.

Hate speech ( ‘al-jahr bi’-sūʾ min al-qawl in the Qur’anic description) continues to be the subject of contentious debate. Arguably, the notion of “unregulated speech” in the liberal discourse encourages hate speech on the pretext of “defending” the right to freedom of speech. Islam recognises human dignity as the underlying basis of all human rights and freedoms, including the right to freedom of speech. Here arise two core questions. First, is freedom of speech and expression an absolute right or has Islam imposed certain conditions on the human agency while this right is exercised? Second, what do these conditions concerning freedom of speech imply about the regulation of hate speech? I approach these questions by beginning with the introduction of karamah principle followed by an overview of theoretical conceptualisations of free speech in the Western context. Finally, the Islamic position on the subject is brought forth through the conceptual analysis of relevant Islamic texts. The article draws three conclusions. First, human dignity is the intrinsic condition that surpasses all rights and freedoms. Second, the idea of “unregulated speech” is controversial and has been a reason for harming human dignity and making the public discourse inimical to social order. Third, there should be a legal, moral and rational reconciliation between exercising ‘speech limitations’ and ‘free speech’ to ensure sustainable peace and social cohesion.

Religious freedoms of minorities in Muslim-majority countries such as Pakistan are compromised due to structural issues as well as social and historical concerns. For instance, the abuse of the blasphemy law has led to minority communities facing threats and violence. And in a country where religious scholars are often absent from, if not against, discourses about human rights, the religious rights of minorities remain a secular and hence culturally unsound discourse. There is thus a need for two parallel movements. One, an awareness within Muslim communities about the need to engage with religious freedoms, and hence the modern human rights regime, as an essentially Islamic process requiring reform from within. And two, the human rights structure also giving religion its due since religious freedoms are part of, and engender, many other rights as well. In this article, a case is made for this dual process, by exploring the work of scholars of Islam such as Abdullahi An-Na’im and Khaled Abou El Fadl as well as the insecurities of religious scholars in Pakistan who have reacted to human rights as a western agenda.

This research explains the comparison of regulations on mosque loudspeakers between Indonesia and Muslim countries in the world. Guidelines for the use of mosque loudspeakers in Indonesia are regulated in the Instruction of the Director-General of Islamic Community Guidance at the Ministry of Religious Affairs Number 101 of 1978 concerning Guidance on the Use of Loudspeakers in Mosques and Musala and the Circular Letter of the Minister of Religion Number 5 of 2022 concerning Guidelines for the Use of Loudspeakers in Mosques and Musala . Primary data of this study includes the 1978 Instructions and the 2022 Circular Letters. Secondary data is obtained from relevant literature sources and regulations on the use of mosque loudspeakers in several Muslim countries in the world, namely Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Malaysia. This research finds the concept of moderation of regulations on mosque loudspeakers in Indonesia. The findings of this research can be used as a guide model for drafting the contents of mosque loudspeaker regulations in several Muslim countries around the world by relying on three moderate aspects regarding the rules of time (public morals), volume (public health), and sound quality of mosque loudspeakers (public convenience).

While there are legal regulations prohibiting smoking in indoor areas in Turkey, there is none for outdoor areas. Many non-smokers are exposed to environmental tobacco smoking against their will in Turkey. Numerous research efforts have documented the fact that environmental tobacco smoke poses risks to human health because it pollutes the environment by releasing dangerous chemicals into the air that non-smokers breathe. This means that tobacco smoking poses risks to a safe environment and people’s lives. People have a right to the environment, as guaranteed by the Turkish Constitution. Since Stockholm Declaration, many countries have recognized that people have a right to a safe environment or that a safe environment is essential to the enjoyment of human rights, including Turkey. However, how non-smokers perceive of the impacts of environmental tobacco smoke on the enjoyment of the right to the environment enshrined within the Turkish legal system has not been studied to date. Accordingly, this research aims to explore how issues relating to environmental tobacco smoke can be approached from an environmental human rights perspective. To achieve this purpose, a qualitative case study was conducted in Istanbul. The results of this analysis show that non-smokers do not enjoy the right to the clean environment guaranteed by the Turkish Constitution due to the ETS.