AML NEWS:
INCORPORATION OF THE ECHR & ITS IMPACT ON THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY IN BRITAIN

The Association of Muslim Lawyers continued its series of informative lectures and seminars with a discussion on the implications of the European Convention of Human Rights on British law and how its incorporation may affect Muslims living in Britain.

One of the few issues on which the political parties differed last year was the issue of the lack of protection from religious discrimination. The previous government considered that the existing Race Relations laws were adequate. But, as the speaker himself demonstrated by his own person, not everybody is protected. Ahmad Thompson, a practising barrister and an author of various Islamic books, is ethnically English but reverted to Islam over twenty years ago.

Protection from religious discrimination is only possible if you happen to belong to an ethnic minority; but it is a torturous route, because it wasn't set up for that. Mr Thompson gave a few examples where protection from religious discrimination had not been secured including the case of the person who had found that someone had urinated on his prayer mat where he worked in a restaurant. The court found that no discrimination had taken place, because the restaurant owner employed people of all nationalities.

Mr Thompson spoke briefly about the draft resolution and report published by the European Union on the subject of religious fundamentalism, wherein it suggests that the continued discrimination against Islam and Muslims may lead to a radicalisation against European society. He said it contained some useful points and suggestions that should be taken on board and clarified, yet at the same time the report itself contained some gross misunderstandings.

It equates Islamic fundamentalism to violence without any differentiation between the two. This image of Violent Religious Islamic Fundamentalism is perhaps due in no small way to the attitude of the media although the EU report does suggest some useful ways of tackling media misinformation. Nonetheless the report seems to lead to the conclusion that all real Muslims are fundamentalists and all Muslim fundamentalists are violent. It is obvious to Muslims that these violent groups are not representative of Muslims at all but there is a danger that out of the confusion, a blanket policy may arise - that Muslims should be the exceptions to the case of normal human rights and freedoms.

These misunderstanding should be brought to the attention of the decision makers, policy makers and the public at large, urges Mr Thompson. These matters must be clarified before attitudes harden. In conclusion the report stated that it is desirable to pursue a policy "designed to secure acceptance and integration of Muslims in European society".

In response to this Mr Thompson said that the acceptance and integration of Muslims in European society will only succeed if Muslims in Europe are clearly and unequivocally granted equal opportunities, equal rights and protection from religious discrimination by the rule of law. As long as the rule of law does not recognise, guarantee and protect these basic rights, it is itself discriminating both directly and indirectly against Muslims.

As part of its election manifesto, the Labour Party promised the incorporation of the ECHR. But, as Mr Thompson pointed out, it seems that this will be on its own terms. For example, Article 2 of the First Protocol, concerning the right to education, states that the "State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."

The government accepts this principle "only so far as it is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and training, and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure." Therefore in schools where there are perhaps 95% Muslim students it should be much easier to give Islamic education.

It is also of interest to note that two articles did not appear in the government white paper, articles 1 & 13. Article 1 states that, "The High contracting parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention."

Article 13 states that, "Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity."

The United Kingdom is one of the 'High contracting Parties' and 'Section I' of the Convention comprises Articles 2-18. Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention clarify the present government's duty to 'secure' the rights and duties defined in the Convention. It follows that further secondary legislation will be needed in order to 'secure' the rights which the Convention seeks to protect by providing an 'effective remedy' in the English courts 'without discrimination on any ground'. If the government were to fail to do this, it would itself then be in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It follows that the government is under a duty, by virtue of Articles 1 and 13 of the Convention, to secure Muslim rights by passing legislation which inter alia protects them from religious discrimination - in spite of its present rejection of the main recommendations of the recent Runnymede Trust Report, Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All.

In Ahmed Thompson's opinion it would be better if we did not have to recourse to a confrontation with the government on this issue. Despite media portrayals he says, there is sympathy for the argument to ban religious discrimination within the UK courts. At the moment, pre-incorporation, we are able to invoke the ECHR where ambiguity exists in the law; but where the law is clear, the law must be followed. The European court can only be used after all the legal avenues in the home country have been exhausted. According to government figures on average this takes five years and costs £30,000. Once incorporation takes place, if existing legislation is contrary to the convention, it can be "fast tracked" to change it, and then the hands of British judges will be untied. Although it would be better if there already was an anti-discrimination law.

Mr Thompson also pointed out that perhaps the frustrations in terms of equality of treatment could be viewed in a historical context. How have the legal systems in European countries dealt with the entry of millions of immigrants into Europe as students or cheap labour and how have they had to adapt to these changing circumstances? Many other minority groups have spent a long time fighting for their rights.

Amongst the Christians, firstly the Unitarians then the Catholics and then the pagans have had a troublesome time with religious bigotry over the centuries. The invention of the Church of England and the establishment of Protestantism brought with it many clashes with the Roman Catholics. Indeed perhaps Guy Fawkes could be called, in today's parlance, a Roman Catholic terrorist.

Probably closer to the likeness of the Muslims in terms of being a minority in this country could be the example of the Jews. They first entered the country with William the Conqueror. Then in 1290 they were either expelled or converted, only to be allowed back in by Oliver Cromwell. Today they wield considerable power. Interestingly the first Jewish MP couldn't sit in the House of Commons until the oath had been changed.

So, it will take time and policies can be changed; but they won't change unless something is done to make them change. This government has a mandate of offering new hope where it hadn't previously been available. But so far they have not quite lived up to their promises. Jack Straw has so far ignored the main recommendations of the Runnymede Trust report

Having seen the historical context, it would be absurd to say that we should have to go through what the Jews and Christian sects had to go through. But will the introduction of new laws specifically outlawing religious discrimination and harassment eliminate these cases? Of course not, even twenty years after the introduction of the Race Relations and Sexual Discrimination Act, these things still exist.- but the worst excesses have stopped.

Laws are only as good as the people who make them and the best people seek understanding and tolerance. "Discrimination is a manifestation of ignorance; it can never be dispelled but it can be educated out", said Mr Thompson. Consider the transformation of the image of the typical British person, and how black people in this country have managed to make great progress in re-identifying themselves as black and British at the same time. Muslims too are now also a part of the fabric of British life, and it's up to us, said Mr Thompson, to change the images.

Relevant Articles of European Convention of Human Rights

Article 1

The High contracting parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention.

Article 2

No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.

Article 9

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

2. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Article 13

Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.

Article 14

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.