Sharia Law to be introduced in Libya

Border-Rat

The transitional government leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil set out a vision for the post-Gadhafi future with an Islamist tint, saying that Islamic Sharia law would be the "basic source" of legislation in the country and that existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified.

Libya's transitional leader declares liberation - Yahoo! News

Al-Qaeda to NATO: Thanks lads, it'll make hitting Europe so much easier. Utter failure.

cyclopath2001

Border-Rat wrote: »

Libya's transitional leader declares liberation - Yahoo! News

Al-Qaeda to NATO: Thanks lads, it'll make hitting Europe so much easier. Utter failure.

No mention of Al Queda in the article??

The leader calls for patience, honesty, tolerance and a banking system that does not exploit people. This sounds like something we could do with here. As for the basing of law on the Sharia, that is not necessarily a bad thing, it just depends on the way they interpret things.

Why mention Al Qaeda? It's more likely that Ikea will gain influence once the country has stabilised.

irishh_bob

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

No mention of Al Queda in the article??

The leader calls for patience, honesty, tolerance and a banking system that does not exploit people. This sounds like something we could do with here. As for the basing of law on the Sharia, that is not necessarily a bad thing, it just depends on the way they interpret things.

Why mention Al Qaeda? It's more likely that Ikea will gain influence once he country has stabilised.

yeah , who knows , we might even see sweedish style social democrocy :rolleyes:

Einhard

If the people of Libya want a system of Sharia law introduced, and they express this will in a democratic manner, then that's their prerogative. I'd be deeply against it, but in a democratic society, the people make that decisions.

It seems though that some people around here are democrats only to the extent that it suits their own purposes or ideology...

Border-Rat

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

No mention of Al Queda in the article??

The leader calls for patience, honesty, tolerance and a banking system that does not exploit people. This sounds like something we could do with here. As for the basing of law on the Sharia, that is not necessarily a bad thing, it just depends on the way they interpret things.

Why mention Al Qaeda? It's more likely that Ikea will gain influence once the country has stabilised.

The NTC is an Al Qaeda affiliated organisation.

Einhard

Border-Rat wrote: »

The NTC is an Al Qaeda affiliated organisation.

Do you have proof that the NTC is affiliated to al Qaeda? Or could it be that some parties within the NTC have links with AQ which would be an entirely different thing entirely, but possibly not as conducive to your purposes?

HavingCrack

Einhard wrote: »

If the people of Sharia want a system of Sharia law introduced, and they express this will in a democratic manner, then that's their prerogative. I'd be deeply against it, but in a democratic society, the people make that decisions.

It seems though that some people around here are democrats only to the extent that it suits their own purposes or ideology...

Ah, but my issue is that even if you opposed Sharia Law or weren't a Muslim it would still be imposed upon you regardless of your wishes. As obvious as it appears this is the main issue with democracy. Do 51% of a population have the right to force their beliefs on the 49% of the rest...I would say no.

lagente

Another Iraq, only this time accross the water from Italy, Great.
Pretty soon the real nasty fighting will begin, they're gonna have to get peacekeepers in soon enough.

Einhard

HavingCrack wrote: »

Ah, but my issue is that even if you opposed Sharia Law or weren't a Muslim it would still be imposed upon you regardless of your wishes. As obvious as it appears this is the main issue with democracy. Do 51% of a population have the right to force their beliefs on the 49% of the rest...I would say no.

Well, first off, there is a general misrepresentation of Sharia law in the West in general, and in the OP in particular. There are different forms and different degrees of the law. Sharia is the basis for law in many countries, and very rarely involves the type of brutality that we've seen in Iran and Afghanistan recently.

On your main point, I think the rights of the minority always have to be respected, but I think the OP has an agenda here. From his posting history, it's clear that he was against the ousting of Gadaffi and the UN/Nato intervention. It seems to me that his point is, basically, that things will be worse without Gadaffi. I don't agree with this for a start, and neither do I agree with the implicit assertion that tyrants are sometimes preferable to democracies. In Ireland, for example, a fiscally prudent tyrant might have avoided getting us into our current economic mess- I'd rather make my own mess, and then deal with the consequences, instead of living under the heel of a tyrant, however competent or even well-intentioned. I think Gadaffi's removal gives the Libyan people to forge their own path, and that's to be welcomed.

Einhard

lagente wrote: »

Another Iraq, only this time accross the water from Italy, Great.
Pretty soon the real nasty fighting will begin, they're gonna have to get peacekeepers in soon enough.

The current situation in Libya, and that which pertained in Iraq could scarcely be more different.

HavingCrack

lagente wrote: »

Another Iraq, only this time accross the water from Italy, Great.
Pretty soon the real nasty fighting will begin, they're gonna have to get peacekeepers in soon enough.

Highly unlikely to be honest. The situation's in Libya and Iraq are extremely different. Clearly you can never comprehensively rule out more blood shed but I suspect that a situation anyway comparable to Iraq is unlikely.

Einhard wrote: »

Well, first off, there is a general misrepresentation of Sharia law in the West in general, and in the OP in particular. There are different forms and different degrees of the law. Sharia is the basis for law in many countries, and very rarely involves the type of brutality that we've seen in Iran and Afghanistan recently.

Regardless of how liberal an interpretation one takes Sharia Law still isn't something I would want to live under.

Einhard wrote: »

On your main point, I think the rights of the minority always have to be respected, but I think the OP has an agenda here. From his posting history, it's clear that he was against the ousting of Gadaffi and the UN/Nato intervention. It seems to me that his point is, basically, that things will be worse without Gadaffi. I don't agree with this for a start, and neither do I agree with the implicit assertion that tyrants are sometimes preferable to democracies. In Ireland, for example, a fiscally prudent tyrant might have avoided getting us into our current economic mess- I'd rather make my own mess, and then deal with the consequences, instead of living under the hell of a tyrant, however competent or even well-intentioned. I think Gadaffi's removal gives the Libyan people to forge their own path, and that's to be welcomed.

Agreed

lagente

Einhard wrote: »

The current situation in Libya, and that which pertained in Iraq could scarcely be more different.

Einhard wrote: »

Sharia is the basis for law in many countries, and very rarely involves the type of brutality that we've seen in Iran and Afghanistan recently.

such fkn bull

Einhard

HavingCrack wrote: »

Regardless of how liberal an interpretation one takes Sharia Law still isn't something I would want to live under.

Me neither. However, as I stated, there are different versions of Sharia law, and major differences in how it is applied. Sharia does not necessary mean the amputation of arms for burglaries, or stoning for adultery.

Incidentally, and this relates to the OP's point, Libya's legal system under Gadaffi was a meld of Islamic law, and doctrines from his Green Book. So the point of the thread is moot, considering Sharia is not being "introduced".

lagente wrote: »

such fkn bull

Touché. A rebuttal as comprehensive and devastating as it is elegant.

Jonny7

Ironically Shariah Law would be a big improvement on the previous system.

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

If the people of Sharia want a system of Sharia law introduced

And for the non-muslims, or secularists in the country? They don't get a say?

Will homosexuality be a punishable crime? Will the death penalty be a common practice? Will apostasy be punishable by the law? These are all valid questions that must be asked.

Brown Bomber

Einhard wrote: »

Do you have proof that the NTC is affiliated to al Qaeda? Or could it be that some parties within the NTC have links with AQ which would be an entirely different thing entirely, but possibly not as conducive to your purposes?

If you want to argue semantics it's not "links" but are allied with. The LIFG, who played a key role in within the anti-Gadaffi forces are formally allied with Al Qaeda. This was announced by fmr Mujahadeen Jihadi, Al-Qaeda and LIFG leader Al-Libi (the Libyan).

Here he is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5GsU19iCec

The LIFG's current leader Belhadj is also a fmr Mujahadeen Jihadi. The overthrow of Gadaffi and his secularist state is a culmination of lifetimes work for Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in Libya.

Do you expect them to simply pack up and move onto the next holy war?

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

And for the non-muslims, or secularists in the country? They don't get a say?

Will homosexuality be a punishable crime? Will the death penalty be a common practice? Will apostasy be punishable by the law? These are all valid questions that must be asked.

Yes I agree. I wouldn't like to live under Sharia law, and I think it would be a retrograde step.

However, my reply was made in the context of the first post, and the poster's view on what's happening in Libya, and has to be read in that context. I think that democracy is always preferable to tyranny- that was the point I was trying to make. In the latter, one person makes the decisions. In the former, at the least, 50.1% of the people do so. I don't believe, as I think the OP is attempting to assert, that the latter is sometimes preferable as a means of governance.

I'd also point out again that Sharia has always been the basis for Libyan law (which the OP conveniently omits), and that the degree and kind of such a law varies widely.

Einhard

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If you want to argue semantics it's not "links" but are allied with. The LIFG, who played a key role in within the anti-Gadaffi forces are formally allied with Al Qaeda. This was announced by fmr Mujahadeen Jihadi, Al-Qaeda and LIFG leader Al-Libi (the Libyan).

So, as I anticipated, the claim was factually incorrect. The NTC are not allied with AQ; a faction within the NTC is. There's a major difference. If people don't realise that the NTC is an extremely fractured group with deep rivalries and divisions, then perhaps they shouldn't be posting on matters Libyan. If they do understand, and choose to ignore it because it doesn't suit their purpose, then perhaps they should do likewise.

The LIFG's current leader Belhadj is also a fmr Mujahadeen Jihadi. The overthrow of Gadaffi and his secularist state is a culmination of lifetimes work for Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in Libya.

it's also the culmination of a lifetime's work for secularist democrats in Libya who were hounded and persecuted for having the temerity to want a say in how they were governed.

Do you expect them to simply pack up and move onto the next holy war?

I expect all factions in the NTC to put themselves before the electorate and abide by their decisions. Or are you suggesting that it would be better for the Gadaffi dynasty to be perpetuated indefinitely?

Brown Bomber

Einhard wrote: »

So, as I anticipated, the claim was factually incorrect. The NTC are not allied with AQ; a faction within the NTC is.

No, the claim made, not by me I'd add is that the NTC are "affiliated.

af·fil·i·at·ed

   [uh-fil-ee-ey-tid] Show IPA
adjective being in close formal or informal association; related:

I think it's reasonable to say that the NTC are affiliated with Al Qaeda through it's members who belong to the LIFG being formally allied with Al Qaeda.

Regardless, it makes a mockery of the "IKEA" comparison.

Einhard wrote: »

There's a major difference. If people don't realise that the NTC is an extremely fractured group with deep rivalries and divisions, then perhaps they shouldn't be posting on matters Libyan.

You've just outlined some of the reasons why Libya has the potential to be another Iraq.

Einhard wrote: »

it's also the culmination of a lifetime's work for secularist democrats in Libya who were hounded and persecuted for having the temerity to want a say in how they were governed.

I agree. That doesn't make the problem of alligning yourself with Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who are going to want their piece of the pie go away.

Einhard wrote: »

I expect all factions in the NTC to put themselves before the electorate and abide by their decisions.

When you say "expect" do you mean in the sense that an employer say to a habitually late employee "I expect to see you at 9 am sharp tomorrow" or that you confidently predict that Jihadis fighting wars their whole lives are going to accept being squeezed out?

Einhard wrote: »

Or are you suggesting that it would be better for the Gadaffi dynasty to be perpetuated indefinitely?

I'm very much in favour of democracy for what it's worth.

wes

As has been pointed out, Sharia law, has already existed in Libya to some extent, so the current claims by the interim leadership, isn't any kind of change.

Also, things may change drastically, when there are elections. Also, I think we would need to see the proposed laws first, and this wouldn't be the first time, a politican banged on about Religion to please the Religous right, and then essentially ignore them.

anymore

It is a rare enough thing for me to agree with Wes, but for God's sake, give a them few months to organise their affairs before jumping down their throats - might have a look at the preamble to Ireland;s constitution in the meantime.
And remember, the thing about democracy is that we dont get to decide what other democtacies want in thier countries - I know that is a very difficult idea for many of Irelands ' liberals' to grasp, but there it is.

Jonny7

+1 to the above

The Libyans have had the same leadership for 4 decades, very controlled society, the rebels are an absolute ragtag bunch, and many of the NTC officials were members of the previous regime, they've just been through very bloody upheaval, violence between countrymen, the reprisals and revenge killings, the tribal system is still at the fore

I'm obviously hoping for the best but the whole thing could still go pear-shaped. If the country does pull out of this, relatively free and fair then it will be great for the Libyans and it will send a very strong message out to the other ruling families/dictators/regimes.

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

+1 to the above

I'm obviously hoping for the best but the whole thing could still go pear-shaped. If the country does pull out of this, relatively free and fair then it will be great for the Libyans and it will send a very strong message out to the other ruling families/dictators/regimes.

The strong messages are apparently coming thick and fast....

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/gaddafi-backers-found-in-mass-grave-2914955.html

In a way it's ironic that Human Rights Watch now appears to be uncovering quite some level of abuse and wrongdoing in the new Libya,a situation which may well only be addressed by imposing a far more robust type of rule....perhaps more akin to the style of the ancien régime...?

Killer Pigeon

I wouldn't directly relate Al-Qaeda with Sharia Law, even though they are an strong defender of it. However, this is indeed a worrying development. In my opinion, NATO should discontinue it's support for a state that contravenes the principles of secularism and human rights.

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

............

In a way it's ironic that Human Rights Watch now appears to be uncovering quite some level of abuse and wrongdoing in the new Libya,a situation which may well only be addressed by imposing a far more robust type of rule....perhaps more akin to the style of the ancien régime...?

The kind of regime that has seen the birth and growth of Islamism over the region? Do you think there's a 'drought' of Islamists that needs to be addressed?

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

The kind of regime that has seen the birth and growth of Islamism over the region? Do you think there's a 'drought' of Islamists that needs to be addressed?

Personally,I dont think that at all,but thanks to the likes of the Colonel, Islamicists were having some difficulty in walking out amongst the great-unwashed.....now it appears that the real dissemination of the Islamicists views can accelerate,thanks to the selfless work of the U.N./NATO

Bring it on I suppose...?

DeVore

I'm not catholic, yet Irish law was effectively canon law for most of my life and I had no democratic say in that, ever.

Libya 1, Ireland 0.

DeV.

bmaxi

Of course, we here in the Christian world and particularly Ireland, should be appalled at the notion that the State would want to impose the dogma of one religion on everybody else. :rolleyes:

opinionated3

DeVore wrote: »

I'm not catholic, yet Irish law was effectively canon law for most of my life and I had no democratic say in that, ever.

Libya 1, Ireland 0.

DeV.

At least you werent beheaded on the internet cos of your lack of catholic belief.

Means Of Escape

The monster that gaddaffi himself claimed to be keeping at bay is emerging me thinks.
What happened to all the agreements the West made w Libya?
Reparations for the Lockerbie bombing made,Italians and British meeting him to create a new future?
This started in 2009!?
Hillary Clinton shaking hands w his now slain son?
Iraq has cost the US 750 billion dollars the deaths of 3400 approx troops and is being left in a mess
Its now accepted that Afghanistan will never be saved.
Is democracy the way for countries that have had supreme rulers for hundreds of years?
Who will replace Gaddaffi and will he or she be immune to the need to have complete control over Libya lest it remain in a civil war loop like Afghanistan,

partyatmygaff

DeVore wrote: »

I'm not catholic, yet Irish law was effectively canon law for most of my life and I had no democratic say in that, ever.

Libya 1, Ireland 0.

DeV.

Yes because twentieth century Irish law is much more oppressive than Sharia Law...


As for not having a democratic say in that... Yes you did. If no one had a democratic say, then how exactly did law change? You certainly had a democratic say in shaping the law of the country. You just didn't exercise it correctly at the time.

Others did and through time law has changed to reflect the will of the nation.

DeVore

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Yes because twentieth century Irish law is much more oppressive than Sharia Law...


As for not having a democratic say in that... Yes you did. If no one had a democratic say, then how exactly did law change? You certainly had a democratic say in shaping the law of the country. You just didn't exercise it correctly at the time.

Others did and through time law has changed to reflect the will of the nation.

So you support the Libyan peoples right to vote on their legal framework then.

Good, glad we're all on the same page.

DeV.

partyatmygaff

DeVore wrote: »

So you support the Libyan peoples right to vote on their legal framework then.

Good, glad we're all on the same page.

DeV.

Yes I do.

The rebels saying that "Islamic Sharia law would be the "basic source" of legislation in the country and that existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified." is a danger sign.

What sort of democracy involves an unelected leader making such huge decisions? I know Libya is by and large Muslim but that does not mean they all agree to be legally bound by Sharia Law. This sort of start does not bode well for a healthy democracy.

DeVore

No it doesnt, but the point I and others were making is at least they are going to have a democratic vote on the subject.

My parents regularly refer to Ireland as a Catholic Country and the signs of the catholic church are everywhere in this society. As a non-believer, I never got the opportunity that the Libyans will get of at least having a vote in that decision.

DeV.

partyatmygaff

DeVore wrote: »

No it doesnt, but the point I and others were making is at least they are going to have a democratic vote on the subject.

My parents regularly refer to Ireland as a Catholic Country and the signs of the catholic church are everywhere in this society. As a non-believer, I never got the opportunity that the Libyans will get of at least having a vote in that decision.

DeV.

DeV, what part of "Rebel leader announcing (Without any official mandate) that all laws of the state are to be based on Sharia Law and that all existing laws which contradict Sharia Law are to be nullified" relates to democracy? No one elected him. He has no mandate to make such changes to Libya's laws. When were people asked to vote on the matter? They weren't. How you see this as the birth of a new democracy is beyond me.

wasper

lagente wrote: »

Another Iraq, only this time accross the water from Italy, Great.
Pretty soon the real nasty fighting will begin, they're gonna have to get peacekeepers in soon enough.

Iraq has been destabilised because the US invaded the country, dismantled the army including Border troops. Opened the door for AlQaeda to come in & it justified US invasion.

DeVore

I heard nothing like that , in fact I heard the opposite. You have a source? Mine is just the BBC from this evening...

Ennahda has sought to reassure secularists and investors, nervous about the prospect of Islamists holding power in one of the Arab world's most liberal countries, by saying it would not ban alcohol, stop tourists wearing bikinis on the beaches or impose Islamic banking.

DeV.

nacho libre

Jonny7 wrote: »

Ironically Shariah Law would be a big improvement on the previous system.

Considering you supported nato action on the basis it would help bring democracy to Libya this is a puzzling statement. Isn't one of the central tenets of democracy that the rights of minorities are protected. With islamists fundamentalist being aligned to the ntc, it is reasonable to assume they are going to want to implement a strict form of Sharia law. They don't have a history of accepting the democratic wishes of people.
You probably don't want to hear it, but what we may well see emerge is another strongman in order to control the extremists

ArtSmart

HavingCrack wrote: »

Regardless of how liberal an interpretation one takes Sharia Law still isn't something I would want to live under.

All western constitutions are based on Christian 'law' .

HavingCrack

ArtSmart wrote: »

All western constitutions are based on Christian 'law' .

What's that got to do with anything? Have the 'Christian' laws of Europe seen anywhere near the barbarism that Sharia law calls for in contemporary times? Strawman argument if I've ever heard one.

RichieC

DeVore wrote: »

or impose Islamic banking.[/I]

DeV.

nothing would have the yanks in quicker than that...

Tomk1

HavingCrack wrote: »

What's that got to do with anything? Have the 'Christian' laws of Europe seen anywhere near the barbarism that Sharia law calls for in contemporary times? Strawman argument if I've ever heard one.

I think this is the whole point, in the past, real true christian-law has been used to do some of the same barbaric acts, today its' a softy-christian law, lets not forget, it's not long ago that the Irish state overturned the our xian-religious law on divorse, at least under Sharia Law divorse is allowed.

Just like any country that gets freedom, there will be a power struggle, and most likely a civil war. Lets hope they're taking the political route, which means trying to appease every group.

mongoman

The prejudicial ignorant hear terms such as Sharia law and come to the usual narrow minded conclusions. Sharia law can and is interpreted in many different ways across the Islamic world. Libya is entitled to choose whatever future it wants. If the people decide then who gives us a right to judge them?

Son Of A Vidic

Border-Rat wrote: »

Al-Qaeda to NATO: Thanks lads, it'll make hitting Europe so much easier. Utter failure.

You are seriously deluded if you think that's even a remote possibility. That's a bit like saying that competent politicians will eventually populate the Dáil = never going to happen.

Brown Bomber

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

You are seriously deluded if you think that's even a remote possibility. That's a bit like saying that competent politicians will eventually populate the Dáil = never going to happen.

It's more than a remote possibility. It's really quite simple: The military commander of the NTC is also the head of a terrorist group, the LIGF which is formally allied with Al Qaeda. It has already been stated by the NTC that the current jihadi rebels will take over the leadership of the new Libyan army. All the photo opportunities of old Libyan ladies in voting stations with their cards won't change this.

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations
LIFG are number 26

I believe you should at least read this article to familiarise yourself
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/4/jihadists-plot-to-take-over-libya/

Peanut

DeVore wrote: »

I heard nothing like that , in fact I heard the opposite. You have a source? Mine is just the BBC from this evening...

Ennahda has sought to reassure secularists and investors, nervous about the prospect of Islamists holding power in one of the Arab world's most liberal countries, by saying it would not ban alcohol, stop tourists wearing bikinis on the beaches or impose Islamic banking.

DeV.

That was the Tunisian opposition party afaik, the article was published around the same time.

Brown Bomber

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

You are seriously deluded if you think that's even a remote possibility. That's a bit like saying that competent politicians will eventually populate the Dáil = never going to happen.

Never going to happen?

What do you make of the Al Qaeda flag flying over the Benghazi Courthouse, the de-facto HQ of the NTC?

Here is the flag of Al Qaeda in Iraq for reference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIrshtYKNs4

This is the same building that the rebels lynched and hung a black man from.

Looks like Gadaffi may have been telling the truth afterall.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1Y-WIdHuM4