Why Muslims won’t stop circumcising their female children —Haroon, ex-Kwara Grand Khadi

A former Grand Khadi of Kwara State and coordinator of the state’s apex body of all Islamic organisations, Council of Muslim Organisations (CMO), Justice Idris Haroon (retd), in this interview by BIOLA AZEEZ, defends the practice of female circumcision among Muslims and speaks on other issues.

 

THE ordeal of Firdauz Amasa, an indigene of your state, at the hands of the Nigerian Law School is still fresh in the minds of many, especially Muslims. What is your view on the matter?

Fundamental human rights are universal and elevated rights, special and inalienable rights that every person is entitled to enjoy by virtue of being human. Except by the proper observance of the process of law, no individual, under whatever guise, should be deprived or denied of the enjoyment of these rights. Such rights, as enshrined in Chapter Four of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2011), include right to the  dignity of the human person, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom from discrimination on the grounds of sex, race, tribe, creed or political opinion and association, etc.

Qur’an 24:31 and Qur’an 33:59 make the hijab a mandatory dress code for all female Muslims. It is a piece of clothing meant to cover the bosom and other sensitive parts of her body. It is this divine instruction which Firdauz Amasa put to actual practice that deprived her harvest of intellectual pursuit and sojourn to the Nigerian Law School. Her insistence on wearing hijab to the call to bar ceremony was not out of arrogance or disobedience to the constituted authority; rather, it was based on the dictates and tenets of the religion she professes.

Going by the Qur’an verses and the provision of the constitution, it is crystal clear that the Law School infringed on the fundamental rights of Firdaus Amasa and the rights of thousands of female Muslims who were too timid to challenge the status quo. It is disheartening, disgusting and disenchanting that the very institution that ought to be the bastion of hope and succour for the weak and the oppressed is entangled in the web of infraction, illegality and impurity.

There are several High Court decisions and judgments, including Court of Appeal’s, which held that the use of the hijab is a constitutional and fundamental right; and no one, institution, corporate organisation can take it away.

In the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Canada and even some African countries, the use of hijab by female Muslims is allowed, respected and accommodated in the public life, in the army and even in the Law School. Law School graduates are allowed to wear hijab during the graduation ceremony and other similar events. Posted on the internet are several pictures of uniformed women from the UK, USA, Canada, etc, who are granted the right to wear hijab. Recently, the current president of Nigeria Bar Association posted on the Facebook the picture of his daughter wearing her hijab during her call to bar in the United States. Nigerians cannot be more English than the English; neither can we be more Catholic than the Pope.

The hijab saga at the International Conference Centre, Abuja, smacks of a feeling of hatred, a feeling of rejection, a feeling of denial, a feeling of marginalisation and a feeling of religious intolerance. Firdauz Amasa’s excruciating experience is a living testimony to the unwarranted bias against people of the Islamic faith.

 

Why have Muslims continued to practise female circumcision in spite of the scathing criticisms against such a practice by campaigners?

A critical assessment and evaluation of the anti-female circumcision claims reveal that they fail to discern the marked differences between female circumcision and female genital mutilation (FGM).

The term ‘circumcision’ literally means the act of excising the foreskin from the penis of the male. It is an act of removing, splitting or trimming the hood which covers the clitoris of the female. Female genital mutilation, on the other hand, refers to all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organ. Thus, partial removal of the tip of the clitoris is accepted in Islam, while total excision of the clitoris is repugnant to it.

Female circumcision and female genital mutilation are not synonymous and cannot be used interchangeably in any context. Any attempt, therefore, to use them interchangeably is heretical, blasphemous, mischievous, unholy and unscholarly. Such an attempt would be considered to be tainted with sinister motives and pecuniary measures.

Experts have emphasised that female circumcision restrains excessive libido, prevents unpleasant odour which results from foul secretions beneath the foreskin and reduces the incidence of urinary tract infections and infections of the reproductive system. In addition, female circumcision does not have harmful health effects on women.

There is no gainsaying the fact that the practice of female circumcision is obedience to Islamic fitrah and adherence to the traditions of Prophet Muhammad. Qur’an 53:3-4 stresses that the Prophet does not speak out of his own inclination or desire; what he says is a revelation from Allah. The verses underscore the all-time truth and veracity of the Prophet’s saying or practices because he was divinely guided and protected from error of judgement.

Anti-female circumcision campaigners should conscientiously grasp the differences between female circumcision and female genital mutilation. Any attempt, whether by commission or omission, to equate female circumcision with female genital mutilation will be viewed by Muslims as a wilful demonstration of intense hatred for Islam and Muslims and as a deliberate distortion of our religious practice, which must be resisted.

 

What is your take on last December’s official recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital by President Donald Trump of the United States?

Knowing that Jerusalem is one of the most sensitive issues in global politics, Trump’s declaration is provocative, inflammatory, dastardly, ill-informed and a naked affront orchestrated to offend the sensibilities of the oppressed people of Palestine, the generality of Muslims throughout the world and all lovers of peace, fair play and justice.

Trump’s announcement is a blight on the conscience of humanity, a macabre declaration that could engender social upheaval and political imbroglio in the troubled Middle East. Thus, the recognition smacked of diplomatic arrogance, political rascality, bigoted intolerance and morbid hatred.

It is shameful, ridiculous, deplorable, perfidious and treacherous that the so-called exponent of modern representative government unabashedly desecrated the sanctity of constitutional democracy. Where is the fact that the US is the bastion and symbol of the sacrosanct pillars of democracy? Does President Trump know that his inflammatory announcement can lead to flagrant human tights abuses in Palestine? Is he aware that his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital defies a 50-year international consensus on Jerusalem’s status? Did he care to think that this insalubrious announcement can jeopardise the Palestinian’s rights to life, liberty, personal security and right to free movement?

Jerusalem, from time immemorial, retains an important place in the life of the Muslims. It is the home of Masjid Al-Aqsa, the third holiest mosque, after the Sacred Mosque (Ka’aba) in Makkah and the Prophet’s Mosque in Madinah. Many verses of the Holy Qur’an and Ahaadith of the Prophet allude to the great religious significance of Masjid Al-Aqsa. For example, Qur’an 17:1 makes reference to the miraculous journey of Prophet Muhammad and his ascension through the heavens which occurred in the Mosque of Jerusalem. During this Night Journey (Israi wa Mi’raaj), the Prophet led a prayer in congregation that was attended by all the previous prophets. In addition, the sacredness of Jerusalem is emphasised in numerous places in the Qur’an. In fact, Qur’an 5:21 and 21:81 describe Jerusalem as the Holy Land. According to a hadith narrated by Abu Huraira, the Prophet said: “Land of congregation of the dead and their resurrection.” For about 16 or 17 months after the Prophet migrated to Madinah, the Muslims were facing (in the prayers) the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem before Allah ordered the Prophet and the Muslims to face the Sacred Mosque (Ka’aba) in Makkah. So, Jerusalem represents a central and venerated place in Islam.