By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
Absolute monarch Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei announced in January a harsh form of sharia law will be enacted. Effective in three phases beginning now and spanning two years, the edict eventually allows for the stoning to death of homosexuals, adulterers, and apostates; for amputation of limbs for those convicted of theft; and flogging for abortions and the consumption of alcohol. The capital offense provisions of the law reportedly apply only to Muslims.
Sultan Bolkiah claims this is a step in solidifying a long cultural tradition in the sultanate which was established in the fourteenth century. Increasingly conservative Muslim politicians and officials in Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia are beginning to move from sharia being limited to family matters to now criminal law and capital offenses. Acheh in Indonesia is included especially. While Brunei enjoys one of the highest per capital income in the world, has many social benefits such as effectively free health care and education, its population of over 416,000 individuals now is seeing human rights restricted in a trend that is generating international condemnation in the West. Al-Jazeera reported that many members of the Muslim ethnic Malay majority have voiced cautious support for the changes. However, non-Muslim citizens, who are fifteen percent of the population, led a rare burst of criticism on social media earlier this year, but largely went silent after the sultan called for a halt.
“Theory states that God’s law is harsh and unfair, but God himself has said that his law is indeed fair,” the sultan said.
But will Western governments be willing to isolate countries engaging in abuses of individuals and oppression of the human rights of populations or is trade and money going to become the focus and inconveniences such as abuse continue to be ignored?
In another familiar trade above human rights story, on the day this sharia law measure took effect the Obama Administration’s chief trade negotiator Michael Froman was lobbying Capitol Hill to ratify The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), strongly sought by President Obama and others since 2009, which would bind the United States to providing the sultanate with economic privileges.
Senator Elizabeth Warren stated her concern about the secrecy of the trade agreement (leaked to various news organizations) and how this agreement will allow corporations and governments the ability to override existing laws.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other NGOs have expressed concern and worry that governments such as Malaysia and Brunei which now both have laws criminalizing homosexuality are now given special trade privileges, whereas trade sanctions and other measures by corporations, governments, and individuals to attempt to instigate change in these governments to protect their citizens should be instead used. Providing trade advantages only serves to reward violations of human rights.
There are concerns in the non-Muslim cultures within Brunei. According to The Diplomat the sharia bans the propagation of religions other than Islam or atheism. The offense will carry a $20,000 fine and/or a prison term of up to five years. This has compromised the 30,000 Filipinos living in Brunei and prompted a warning from a Catholic priest in the tiny, oil-rich sultanate that there will be no baptisms. “There will be no baptisms. There is not a lot we can do about it. We will have to wait and see what happens,” he told Britain’s Independent newspaper.
Schools have also been warned that children are not to be exposed to any religion, be it through ceremonies or acts of worship, but Islam and that non-Muslims would be subjected to some aspects of the new laws. It was not clear exactly what parts of Sharia law would be imposed on non-Muslims.
On the International front Phil Robertson, Deputy Director for the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch, said: “Brunei’s decision to implement criminal Sharia law is a huge step backwards for human rights in the country. It constitutes an authoritarian move towards brutal medieval punishments that have no place in the modern, 21st century world. The entire world should express its outrage and heap criticism on this ill-considered move and urge the Brunei government to immediately reconsider.” Rupert Abbott of Amnesty International, noted the laws carried the death penalty for acts that should not be considered crimes and would “take the country back to the dark ages.” He further added, “Brunei Darussalam’s new Penal Code legalizes cruel and inhuman punishments. It makes a mockery of the country’s international human rights commitments and must be revoked immediately.”
In a carefully worded statement the UN has said it considers some of the penalties to be “torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” under international law. As such their use could warrant an investigation from the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The backlash against the sultanate and its business interests is generating in the United States in certain circles. The sultan owns the Dorchester Collection which includes the iconic and luxurious Beverly Hills Hotel and is now experiencing this. Entertainer Jay Leno protested outside the hotel with the Feminist Majority Foundation The foundation moved its Global Women’s Rights Awards from the hotel as did Gill Action’s Political OutGiving conference. Talk show host Ellen DeGeneres called for a boycott and Virgin CEO Richard Branson tweeted “No @Virgin employee, nor our family, will stay at Dorchester Hotels until the Sultan abides by basic human rights.”
Some organizations went to some considerable length to voice their resolve against the Beverly Hills. According to Fox411 the teen suicide prevention charity Teen Line forfeited its $60,000 down payment to take the event elsewhere, and the Hollywood Reporter notified the Beverly Hills Hotel that it will not hold its annual Women in Entertainment breakfast there. The Beverly Hills City Council is meeting to discuss a resolution condemning Brunei’s new laws, and encourage “the government of Brunei to divest itself of the Beverly Hills Hotel.”
The sultan claims that the law allows wide discretion on behalf of judges on whether or not to impose these internationally condemned punishments of gays, adulterers and others judged to be in violation of these sharia laws. But it remains to be seen how this is actually carried out. The fact that these laws are in force is a moral outrage in more open and free societies.
Since Brunei is ruled by an absolute monarch it remains to be seen how influential international and internal pressures to embrace core human rights will be. One could argue that it only requires the changing of one mind to end this return to a dark chapter in Islam that is seemingly increasing in some areas of the world. But when face and other pressures are at hand this might prove difficult. Brunei does have a parliament yet it is completely subservient to the sultanate. Yet with a nation as developed and committed to modernism in trade and international monetary issues as Brunei, it does on the surface seem rather disconnected with its departure from the tenets of basic human rights and justice.
By Darren Smith
Sources:
Huffington Post
BBC News
Fox News
The Diplomat
al-Jazeera
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Paul Schulte
Dave – attacking religion is both bigoted and tyrannical.
Ah, predictably sad weakness on full display.
Religion is a system of (ignorant) ideas that, like all ideas, is deserving of criticism, mockery, and merciless scrutiny.
Whining and hiding behind offense is childish, which again is predictable by the intellectually immature (i.e., rather than make a substantive counterargument, one name-calls).
You sound very much like racists who think criticism of their racism is racist.
–
I defend the right of all believers to practice any nonsense they wish, so long as those believers defend my right to call it nonsense. Nothing tyrannical about that.
If you want theocracy, enjoy Iran and Saudi Arabia, and Brunei.
Dave – I, on the otherhand, generally allow religious people to lead their own lives and I do not try to convert them. I might attack the precepts of a church if I think it is not what it is purports to be. I will defend your right to criticize them as much I as I will defend their right to punch your lights outs. Couldn’t be fairer than that. 😉 Hope you will return the favor.
Attacking ‘isms’ such as Communism or Fascism isn’t considered tyrannical or bigoted. So why is attacking Sharia Law considered bigoted? Sharia Law can be disguised as someone’s religion by stating it is based on the teachings of a Prophet. However, in practice Islam/Sharia law has a dichotomous role as both a religion and a form of government controlling all aspects of one’s life.
I practice Christianity; however, my Church does not impose civil or criminal penalties on either its members or our community. I am subject to the laws of my State and Federal Government and my religion cannot punish me in any manner regardless of my actions or behavior. One can also criticize my religion without any fear of government or religious reprisals.
If Nick was right about Sam’s combine numbers it will be interesting to see how he does when they play him. I am sure he will be playing early pre-season.
Wayne,
Nick has created the list. As far as I know I am the only one on it. He often cites that I am not allowed any questions – I think the calendar now reads July.
The Sharia List is new today. He advised me to not make any such statements.
feynman,
I’m puzzled, what is the “No Questions Allowed List?” I’m just now reading this thread so I may have missed something, if so then I apologize.
Paul,
I am already on the No Questions Allowed List and The No Statements Concerning Sharia Law vis-a-vis Our Judicial System List.
Why not start up a Those Who Must Not Attempt To Dissuade Me List?
Chuck,
I fully understand and agree with everything you have written about the Brody situation. I think I have offended you and am very sorry for that.
I think I understand how the world works and tried to lessen any sting in acknowledging that we all live and work in a less than perfect world with my initial short comment. I am not any different and I, too, would have accepted that contract. (My dad and brother worked almost all their lives the tobacco industry. My dad is gone, but smoking is something that won’t be included in family discussions when my brother is around.) But like your father-in-law, I would have been made uncomfortable about the terms of that contract. Isn’t it fair to suggest that’s how he felt and that’s why he mentioned it?
But my sincere apologies. I am a great admirer of your posts and your comments – especially these last several days. You deserve no criticism – only my appreciation..
Paul,
If you are reassured by pointing that out and feel that it settles the issue, far be it for me to attempt to dissuade you. I have found you to be un-dissuadable.
Just making a point that you can either agree or disagree with. However, if you find me un-dissuadable, whatever that is, you might consider stopping from trying.
feynman
The company was in the business of building and selling school buses, not politics. They were not about to turn away a seven or eight figure contract because of middle east politics and bigotry. Additionally, it would have been illegal for them to enforce the clause in the contract. If the company had turned up their noses at contracts that size, letting Superior or Blue Bird snag them, the entire top management would have been run out of town on a rail.
As for my father-in-law, he was the chief engineer, not the business manager. Their Jewish employees paychecks paid their bills just the same as everyone else’s. Personally, he was a straight arrow, deacon in his Baptist church, and believed in the Golden Rule. He had to go to the middle east a number of times when there were technical problems. He did not care for it and didn’t stay any longer than he had to.
Time to fix the judicial system or put someone under the table
All unanswered.
It is distressing that an officer of the court prefers ‘smart’ to ethical. What are ethics when you condemn the practice, but close your eyes and take the money? You may have jobs, but you sure haven’t ethics.
Chuck. I hope you know I in no way wish to insult your father-in-law. I’m sure he was a fine man. Hope you understand.
9 questions!
Godwin Rule about to be broken…..
And that would apply to contracts with German companies just prior to WWII?
Smart and ethical are not diametrically opposed.
Nick
Why is it that you suggest I make no comparisons or ask no questions about Sharia law? Is that forbidden? Do you disapprove? Should I just GUESS what is meant by the threat of Sharia law in this country? Is it a real threat? Or is it a threat as defined by that crazy woman lawyer/dentist in CA? Do you know what the Muslim American community wants? Or do you just hear the words Allah Akbar and fall on the ground quivering? Or did I err when I suggested our judicial system is flawed? In reading Prof. Turley’s blog, I’ve concluded that our judicial system is quite flawed. I thought I wasn’t alone in that.
Ward Brody Works handled it the SMART way. You ignore the anti-Semitic rule, take the business, and employ more people. I want ethical smart people running businesses, not ethical stupid people.
Chuck,
Distressing story about the contract for Ward Brody Works and it’s a kind of ‘two-fer’. Horrible that such clauses were included, and not exactly inspiring that Brody didn’t tell them to shove it.
Sorta gets you down that we have to operate in this kind of a world.
Feynman, If I were you I would just stop making statements about Sharia law compared to our judicial system. But, feel free to keep shooting, you have 2 feet and 10 toes.
Again, look who told me ….
Yes, If Islam is such a peaceful religion why do we all hit the ground or run like hell when we hear, “Allah Akbar.”
I mean our fear of Sharia law as being practiced in THIS country and sanctioned by our courts.
Not keen on Sharia law as instituted in Muslim countries. Much prefer our judicial system, flawed as it is.
Repeat after me, Islam is a peaceful religion, Islam is a peaceful religion ….!! How do I know …?? Mohammed Atta told me.