Posted on 10/18/2005 8:55:11 PM PDT by churchillbuff
WASHINGTON, D.C., October 16, 2005 -- The constitution voted on yesterday in Iraq may well constitute an obstacle to securing human rights and individual liberties should it be approved, Freedom House said today. Immediate and comprehensive efforts should be undertaken to ensure that post-referendum amendments and enabling legislation for the constitution address the most problematic provisions.
On October 15, Iraqis voted in a national referendum on whether to adopt a constitution that emerged in mid-September after months of negotiation and was expected to be approved. A political agreement reached last week commits Iraq's leaders to consider new amendments to the constitution in the very near future.
While the Constitution contains numerous positive attributes that may contribute to the emergence of a democratic state, including strong language asserting religious freedom and democratic principles, Freedom House analysts have assessed that the provisions relating to the creation of the Supreme Federal Court could empower sharia experts on that court. They could suborn universal standards of individual liberties and principles of equality to a particular and restrictive religious interpretation of rights based on the religious affiliation of individuals.
"The implications for dissidents, including religious dissenters, as well as for legitimate political opposition, women, religious minorities and non-believers, are quite troubling and ominous," said Freedom House Executive Director Jennifer Windsor." There is a real risk that all these groups will face serious dangers in the new Iraq, " she said.
Iraq now joins three other states with constitutions that provide for sharia experts who are not required to have civil law education on their Supreme Courts: Iran, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. "These are not the models that new democracies should be emulating," said Ms. Windsor.
A constitutional provision related to the composition of the Supreme Court poses a threat of rule by Islamic jurists in Iraq, which could directly contribute to sectarian divisions within the country. Protections of the rights of women, and freedom of expression and belief are also in danger, as suggested by the case of Afghanistan, where the first act of the chief judge of the Supreme Court was to bring blasphemy charges against the only woman cabinet member on the basis that she criticized sharia.
Freedom House also expressed concern about the lack of protection for freedom of expression in the constitution, which declares that free speech is guaranteed within the bounds of public morality and public order. Such a provision is woefully inadequate, given that most infringements on free expression in autocracies across the globe are rationalized on the grounds of order and morality.
"We know that many people -- in the US government, in the international community and especially among Iraqis -- tried and failed to correct these defects as they emerged," said Ms. Windsor. "That work must continue. Given the likelihood of the passage of this constitution, friends of Iraqi democracy should focus renewed energy and commitment on trying to shape the enabling legislation yet to come, following on the December elections," she said. "The newly negotiated provision that allows constitutional amendments to be considered next year, where previously there was to be an eight-year moratorium, also offers hope for improvement. Along with many others, we at Freedom House will be there with Iraqis to work for a better result in the future."
In Freedom House's latest global survey of political rights and civil liberties, Freedom in the World 2005, Iraq is rated Not Free.
Explain how. What is inaccurate in this Freeom House report? Point out specifics.
See post #8
http://www.freedomhouse.org/aboutfh/funders.htm
Freedom House is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization that relies upon tax-deductible grants and donations under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code.
Major support has been provided by:
(snip)
The Soros Foundations
Yep ... that sounds like the Soro's Camp to me
"This kind of aching hypocrisy deserves some sort of award."
Yep. Instant exposure and then go on to another thread. Our work here has been done.
Next?
You should change your screen name to Chamberlainbuff
When I see the Soros Foundation, the Ford Foundation as major contributers and read the names in the "Mission Statement" along with all the other stuff follow the $$$ and the philosophy.
Lest you forget all the "upstanding citizens" associated with the ACLU and we all know what they are.
Or McDermott/Ritter/Ramseybuff
For example:
IRAQ BISHOPS READY TO SEEK HELP FROM POPE
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1505043/posts
I
"Churchillbuff is Stuck on Stupid"
I guess you like fundamentalist Islam. Iraq has declared itself an Islamic state. I don't consider that good news. If you disagree, then it's you who are "stuck on stupid" Or maybe you're a mullah trolling on FR!
Well, regardless of your detractors on this thread- please tell me how to help you defend Iraqi Christians. What can we do? Thanks!
lol... I posted right past your reply. So, I don't need to "goooogle" it, or look to another thread, do I? What Iraqi Christian orgs. are you associated with, I would prefer to help in your cause- now. Please explain...
Most of the backers of this group support removing religion from our way of life here in America, but for some reason I should believe these communist bastards are worried about the religious rights of Iraqi's? Get a grip slick, this groups cares only about bashing Bush, something you and them have in common
A fledgling Democracy has to crawl before it can walk, it must walk before it can run.
Are you so bereft of wit that every time you are challenged you devolve into one idiotic accusation or another? I won't dignify this one with an answer.
I do recall you taking a position that the women of Iraq had it better under Saddam. Do you recall that thread? Do you recall what you were defending and are defending now? The rape rooms? The executions? The torture and imprisonment of political opponents, their families, their children? How you can shade this proposed constitution in the light of that three decades of human tragedy is something I cannot believe a person of conscience capable.
I wonder why Saddam's defense lawyers are posting on FR, shouldn't they be getting ready for their big day in Iraq?
Non-believers? That could cover a lot of territory! Depends completely on each persons definition of non-believer.
But, I digress. Here the left is basically complaining that the the Iraqi's did not implement a Constitution to their liking. Irrelevant of whether we like the constitution or not, it is there country. But Jennifer Windsor obviously wants the Iraqi constitution the way she (i.e. America) wants it.
In other words, the USA should use its 'influence' to get a constitution better to a libs liking.
Well, another wonderful example of liberal hypocrisy.
For how many decades have we heard the radical, cowardly left scream for us to get out of various countries around the world. And for what reason? According to them we were using our 'influence' to guide these countries into a more, what, democratic society?
Now, that terrible thing that the USA does, use it's influence, is being demanded after decades of blaming our influence for every negative thing on the globe.
This goes beyond mere hypocrisy and stupidity. It appears to me that, in most cases, liberals are mentally deranged.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.