The democracy we get in Iraq may not be exactly the kind that we are hoping for, but that does not mean that the people of Iraq don't seek the freedom to govern themselves. This is what the war and this election has always been all about.
Posted on 02/07/2005 6:39:13 AM PST by presidio9
IRAQ'S Shiite leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, and another senior cleric last night set out radical demands that Islam be the sole source of legislation in the country's new constitution.
The shock Shiite move came after Iraq's leading Sunni clerics group yesterday demanded a timetable for the withdrawal of US-led forces as a condition for joining talks on a new constitution. After a leading Shiite cleric issued a statement setting out the position on sharia law, Ayatollah Sistani, the spiritual leader of Iraqi Shiites, made it clear he backed demands for the Koran to be the basis of legislation.
The national assembly set up after last month's US-backed election is to oversee the drawing up of the new constitution. The role of Islam has been at the centre of a dispute between the rival parties and the US-led occupation authority that administered Iraq until last June.
Ayatollah Sistani leads the five most important clerics, known as Marja al-Taqlid, or sources of emulation, who had shown a more moderate face going into the election.
The surprise statement was issued by Sheikh Ibrahim Ibrahimi, a representative of Ayatollah Mohammad Ishaq al-Fayad, a member of the marja. "All the ulema (clergy) and marja, and the majority of the Iraqi people, want the national assembly to make Islam the source of legislation in the constitution and to reject any law that is contrary to Islam," the statement said.
"We warn against a separation of the state and religion, because this is completely rejected by the ulema and marja and we will accept no compromise on this question."
A source close to Ayatollah Sistani said the spiritual leader backed the demand.
The role of Islam was a sticking point when the interim constitution was drawn up under the US-led occupation.
After acrimonious debate and the threat of a veto by US administrator Paul Bremer, the final version completed last March said Islam should be "a source" of legislation.
No law that "contradicts the universally agreed tenets of Islam" would be accepted, the final draft of the "fundamental law" stated.
Following talks with UN special envoy Ashraf Qazi, the Sunni Committee of Muslim Scholars said it would take part in drafting a new constitution only if a date were agreed for US-led troops to leave the country.
"We told him (Mr Qazi) we had conditions and that we would discuss them with the parties that boycotted the polls and would put forward a common stance," said committee spokesman Omar Ragheb.
"These demands focus on reaching a consensus with all political parties on the withdrawal of foreign forces."
The committee, which persuaded the main Sunni religious group, the Islamic Party, to boycott the election, indicated it would press Sunni insurgents to abandon their campaign of resistance if its demands were met.
Meanwhile, Italy tried to secure the release of a woman journalist kidnapped in Baghdad after an ultimatum was posted on an Islamist website giving Rome 72 hours to order a pullout of its 3000 troops.
Yes, but that was only in the Shiia areas. Had the Sunni not boycotted he'd have less (but still a lot).
It doen't take a majority to skew an election anyway. Just a determined and active subset.
Well, at least they had a glimpse of the present.
He may not be to our taste, but 2/3 of Iraq voted for "his" party. He's far from being on the fringes of Iraqi opinion.
The democracy we get in Iraq may not be exactly the kind that we are hoping for, but that does not mean that the people of Iraq don't seek the freedom to govern themselves. This is what the war and this election has always been all about.
Well then, if they willingly vote themselves into another tyranny, then that is their choice, and I say leave them to their own hell.
Tell me again why we left Sadr and Sistrani alive?
This one nutty cleric holds a lot of influence over about 70% of the people who voted. Are you suggesting that we can ignore him and impose whatever constitution we please?
Post 12 says it all. The source is the AP, thus, lets wait to see what is REALLY going on in Iraq.
This is AFP running with a rumor that has been disproven. What they really said was really quite mild.
There were some great photos from election day. As for whether it set an example in the middle east...Well, women were just recently barred from voting in Saudi municipal elections. Two steps forward...
Why would it? Sistani has been an open book from the beginning.
Quite the opposite. If they vote to install hell, let 'em live there.
One man. One vote. One time.
This can't be true, because the talking heads in the media have told me about a thousand times that Iraq is a "secular" country.
hopefully they will be told in no uncertain terms that they are really in no position to demand a darn thing, and that if they decide to continue supporting terrorism that they will be targeted for prosecution with extreme prejudice.
One can hope.
McGavin, in the post below yours, proves your point.
The AP is not only partisan, but incompetent.
We left Sistani alive because he is the head of a quietist school of Islam that believes that clerics who participate in politics become corrupt. This man has been stating this his entire life, he has seen what happened in Iran. Now, suddenly AP/AFP comes out with this distortion and you guys are ready to hang one of the really good guys.
The US Constitution was based on Judeo-Christian principles, should someone have hanged George Washington?
A source close to Ayatollah Sistani said the spiritual leader backed the demand
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.