EOGM MKSI Leicester's- 23/11/2008
By Kulsum Rajani
The Twenty third of November 2008. A day I will not be forgetting anytime
soon as it was the first time I attended an EOGM meeting at MKSI Leicester.
It was also the first time that women were allowed to attend. This was a big
step forward for a jamaat that is continuously moving towards discrimination
(as promoted by the new constitution). They were actually going to let women
voice their opinions and partake in the future of our Masjid. Or so I and
women attending thought. We, the women were handed a microphone and
ordered to sit in a separate room. We women objected to such a chauvinist
attitude and made several calls to the president. I ask what is Islamically
wrong with women sitting in the same room as men? We were all wearing
hijab and wanted to be in the same room but on a different side to the men.
The president finally answered our call with an irritated tone. He couldn’t
believe what he was hearing, women wanting to sit in the same room as men?
How dare they! I guess the president forgot that he himself had sat among
men AND women in April for The World Federation meeting. Having had little
experience in such an affair I guess I didn’t know what to expect. But I was
encouraged by a fellow female witness to this sexist behaviour to let the public
know of this treatment and ask are we next? We now know that unless you’re a
Khoja the Leicester “Shia” jamaat won’t take you seriously but what if you are a
woman?
The meeting began with the secretary’s mentioning of some house rules and
the code of conduct. However as the meeting progressed the Management
Committee (MC) didn’t feel the need to enforce the code of conduct. Mr Nathoo
broke this code several times by shouting while others were speaking and even
voicing personal vendettas. Finally when Mr Muhammad-Abbas questioned
the MC on Mr Nathoo’s code of conduct the MC seemed to have forgotten about
their declarations of fairness and justness. This led the meeting completely
out of control while those in control sat back and watched. Not once was the
fairness and justness approach of the code of conduct mentioned again. Well
at least not when those disobeying the conduct were in favour of the new
constitution.
Another interesting skill I was able to experience on the day was the
manipulation of the law of Islam. The MC turned to the Grand Ayatollah Sistani
for advice on the Khoja/ non-Khoja issue. This was an excellent idea. However
what followed was far from excellence. An extended question was sent to the
Ayatollah even though his website clearly asks to keep the questions concise.
Ayatollah Sistani did not answer the question claiming it was not a matter of
fiqh. Yet the MC with its “infamous knowledge” portrayed Ayatollah Sistani’s
refusal to answer the question as an approval for their discriminatory new
constitution. Yes, it is a racist, discriminatory, anti-Islamic constitution which
promotes division and the superiority of one race. You all know this whether
you are for it or scared of what you neighbours will say and thus hiding you
opinion against it.
When a member pointed out that the question presented to Ayatollah Sistani
and the resulting answer was out of context as to what the MC were trying to
prove the answer was simply we don’t want to hear what you have got to say.
Whatever happened to equal rights and equal say?
I guess what my experience at the EOGM taught me and what I will bare in
mind for the future is: the MC openly promotes equality, fairness and the right
to voice your opinions UNLESS your opinion is against the MC or questions the
MC. What a great portrayal of fairness and equality this is. On the other hand
if your opinion matches the MC you can do whatever you want. Feel free to go
against the code of conduct as well.
The manipulation of Ayatollah Sistani’s response and the many correspondent
letters to the MC which the MC “forgot” to publicise remind me of my history
lessons. I was told how Hitler used his position and how he censored and
manoeuvred the issues the public was allowed to know about. I presume some
could also find similarities in this with what Muawiyaah did.
The most astonishing aspect of the meeting appeared when disputes arose
over clause 4. The clause which allows Khojas to act like the Quraish and not
allow non-khojas to become full members of the masjid, gain any influencing
or leadership position or vote. When verses from the Holy Quran and Hadith
of the Ahlul Bait (AS) were mentioned to show how wrong the proposition of
the clause were according to Islam, several members stated “we don’t want to
hear from the Quran and Hadith”. Now call me naïve but shouldn’t the future
of our jamaats be decided in accordance to the Quran and Hadith? Was it not
the MC’s duty to steer the discussions towards the statements in the Quran and
Hadith rather than away? (Which is the way the meeting progressed). So an
inconclusive answer from Ayatullah Sistani is okay but the statements in the
Quran and Hadith are far from being adequate for our MC and fellow Khojas.
The MC managed o convince the public that the communal assets gathered
as a result of generous donations from Khoja and non-Khoja alike were the
property of Khoja and hence non-Khojas (however religious they are), could
not be trusted with their administration. May I take this opportunity to remind
everyone that the masjid and its assets are the 12th Imams, not Khojas or
any other person on this planet but the 12th Imams alone. Hence the most
religious of the community despite their race should be able to administer the
assets. Those people that look upon the Quran and Hadith for guidance. The
factual point that non-Khojas also contributed to the assets of the mosque was
disregarded by the MC. What justice is this, where we discriminate and don’t
allow those who helped gather these assets any say in the administration of
these assets?
From a young age I was taught that a masjid is for all Muslims regardless of
their race or background. I’m sure this is what you teach your children as well.
Then why are we allowing constitutions that discriminate against our Shia
brothers?
The meeting bought up an argument in which a bohra was previously not
allowed membership in the Leicester jamaat. The argument here is simple he
did not share the same religious beliefs as those for whom this mosque was
built, whereas the new constitution is simply discriminating on race with no
consideration of religious values.
To save the property of our Imam becoming caught up in a racist constitution
the Chairman of the Building Committee maintained that he would go to any
extent within the boundaries of Islam to save the rights of our Shia brothers.
Whether that means resulting to English Law as Shariah law doesn’t seem
to be having an effect on the Leicester Jamaat (“we don’t want to hear from
the Quran and Hadith”). When Mr J. Bhojani responded to the chairman’s
statements with bitter hopes of the chairman’s bankruptcy I started to wonder
again, where was this code of conduct? Where was the equality and justness
the president spoke of? Better yet where were the Islamic morals that teach us
not to wish bad’duah on our neighbour? I don’t understand why the MC didn’t
enforce their code of conduct on all contributors at the meeting.
Despite the clear discrimination and division this constitution will generate
among Shias the constitution was passed. The meeting finished with a speech
from an elder member of the community; Mr Fidahussain which touched my
heart. He outlined that this constitution was unfair and a middle root should
be found. We should allow our fellow Shias a vote in their jamaat whether they
are allowed in the MC or not as they will be paying membership. This basic
human right of a member having a voice and opinion should be respected. At
the end, we will all be responsible for our actions on the day of judgement.
The Twenty third of November 2008. A day I will not be forgetting anytime
soon as it was the first time I attended an EOGM meeting at MKSI Leicester.
It was also the first time that women were allowed to attend. This was a big
step forward for a jamaat that is continuously moving towards discrimination
(as promoted by the new constitution). They were actually going to let women
voice their opinions and partake in the future of our Masjid. Or so I and
women attending thought. We, the women were handed a microphone and
ordered to sit in a separate room. We women objected to such a chauvinist
attitude and made several calls to the president. I ask what is Islamically
wrong with women sitting in the same room as men? We were all wearing
hijab and wanted to be in the same room but on a different side to the men.
The president finally answered our call with an irritated tone. He couldn’t
believe what he was hearing, women wanting to sit in the same room as men?
How dare they! I guess the president forgot that he himself had sat among
men AND women in April for The World Federation meeting. Having had little
experience in such an affair I guess I didn’t know what to expect. But I was
encouraged by a fellow female witness to this sexist behaviour to let the public
know of this treatment and ask are we next? We now know that unless you’re a
Khoja the Leicester “Shia” jamaat won’t take you seriously but what if you are a
woman?
The meeting began with the secretary’s mentioning of some house rules and
the code of conduct. However as the meeting progressed the Management
Committee (MC) didn’t feel the need to enforce the code of conduct. Mr Nathoo
broke this code several times by shouting while others were speaking and even
voicing personal vendettas. Finally when Mr Muhammad-Abbas questioned
the MC on Mr Nathoo’s code of conduct the MC seemed to have forgotten about
their declarations of fairness and justness. This led the meeting completely
out of control while those in control sat back and watched. Not once was the
fairness and justness approach of the code of conduct mentioned again. Well
at least not when those disobeying the conduct were in favour of the new
constitution.
Another interesting skill I was able to experience on the day was the
manipulation of the law of Islam. The MC turned to the Grand Ayatollah Sistani
for advice on the Khoja/ non-Khoja issue. This was an excellent idea. However
what followed was far from excellence. An extended question was sent to the
Ayatollah even though his website clearly asks to keep the questions concise.
Ayatollah Sistani did not answer the question claiming it was not a matter of
fiqh. Yet the MC with its “infamous knowledge” portrayed Ayatollah Sistani’s
refusal to answer the question as an approval for their discriminatory new
constitution. Yes, it is a racist, discriminatory, anti-Islamic constitution which
promotes division and the superiority of one race. You all know this whether
you are for it or scared of what you neighbours will say and thus hiding you
opinion against it.
When a member pointed out that the question presented to Ayatollah Sistani
and the resulting answer was out of context as to what the MC were trying to
prove the answer was simply we don’t want to hear what you have got to say.
Whatever happened to equal rights and equal say?
I guess what my experience at the EOGM taught me and what I will bare in
mind for the future is: the MC openly promotes equality, fairness and the right
to voice your opinions UNLESS your opinion is against the MC or questions the
MC. What a great portrayal of fairness and equality this is. On the other hand
if your opinion matches the MC you can do whatever you want. Feel free to go
against the code of conduct as well.
The manipulation of Ayatollah Sistani’s response and the many correspondent
letters to the MC which the MC “forgot” to publicise remind me of my history
lessons. I was told how Hitler used his position and how he censored and
manoeuvred the issues the public was allowed to know about. I presume some
could also find similarities in this with what Muawiyaah did.
The most astonishing aspect of the meeting appeared when disputes arose
over clause 4. The clause which allows Khojas to act like the Quraish and not
allow non-khojas to become full members of the masjid, gain any influencing
or leadership position or vote. When verses from the Holy Quran and Hadith
of the Ahlul Bait (AS) were mentioned to show how wrong the proposition of
the clause were according to Islam, several members stated “we don’t want to
hear from the Quran and Hadith”. Now call me naïve but shouldn’t the future
of our jamaats be decided in accordance to the Quran and Hadith? Was it not
the MC’s duty to steer the discussions towards the statements in the Quran and
Hadith rather than away? (Which is the way the meeting progressed). So an
inconclusive answer from Ayatullah Sistani is okay but the statements in the
Quran and Hadith are far from being adequate for our MC and fellow Khojas.
The MC managed o convince the public that the communal assets gathered
as a result of generous donations from Khoja and non-Khoja alike were the
property of Khoja and hence non-Khojas (however religious they are), could
not be trusted with their administration. May I take this opportunity to remind
everyone that the masjid and its assets are the 12th Imams, not Khojas or
any other person on this planet but the 12th Imams alone. Hence the most
religious of the community despite their race should be able to administer the
assets. Those people that look upon the Quran and Hadith for guidance. The
factual point that non-Khojas also contributed to the assets of the mosque was
disregarded by the MC. What justice is this, where we discriminate and don’t
allow those who helped gather these assets any say in the administration of
these assets?
From a young age I was taught that a masjid is for all Muslims regardless of
their race or background. I’m sure this is what you teach your children as well.
Then why are we allowing constitutions that discriminate against our Shia
brothers?
The meeting bought up an argument in which a bohra was previously not
allowed membership in the Leicester jamaat. The argument here is simple he
did not share the same religious beliefs as those for whom this mosque was
built, whereas the new constitution is simply discriminating on race with no
consideration of religious values.
To save the property of our Imam becoming caught up in a racist constitution
the Chairman of the Building Committee maintained that he would go to any
extent within the boundaries of Islam to save the rights of our Shia brothers.
Whether that means resulting to English Law as Shariah law doesn’t seem
to be having an effect on the Leicester Jamaat (“we don’t want to hear from
the Quran and Hadith”). When Mr J. Bhojani responded to the chairman’s
statements with bitter hopes of the chairman’s bankruptcy I started to wonder
again, where was this code of conduct? Where was the equality and justness
the president spoke of? Better yet where were the Islamic morals that teach us
not to wish bad’duah on our neighbour? I don’t understand why the MC didn’t
enforce their code of conduct on all contributors at the meeting.
Despite the clear discrimination and division this constitution will generate
among Shias the constitution was passed. The meeting finished with a speech
from an elder member of the community; Mr Fidahussain which touched my
heart. He outlined that this constitution was unfair and a middle root should
be found. We should allow our fellow Shias a vote in their jamaat whether they
are allowed in the MC or not as they will be paying membership. This basic
human right of a member having a voice and opinion should be respected. At
the end, we will all be responsible for our actions on the day of judgement.
