درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Often when speaking of supporting vulnerable victims, including women, everyone's offender-oriented approach turns to a specific criminalization or aggravation of punishment, however the question is whether such an approach is in the best interest of the victim and will lead to maximum support for her. It seems that constant recourse to criminal intervention is not only insufficient for stopping victimization of women, but sometimes criminal intervention apart from significant costs can lead to aggravation or recurrence of victimization.  It seems that providing extra-criminal protective options, decriminalization, or depenalization of behaviors that some women are forced to commit in certain circumstances provides better protection for women victims rather than focusing solely on criminal punishment. In this article, an attempt has been made to use analytical-descriptive method, while referencing the current criminal law and its shortcomings in protecting women victims, to suggest some measures such as decriminalization of abortion after rape or accepting extra-criminal options in crimes including domestic violence in light of restorative justice teachings as an alternative or supplementary approach.  

Since the adoption of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI) in 1990, there was an ongoing debate between Western and Muslim states regarding the compatibility of its provisions with human rights standards. The adoption of Ten-Year Program of Action in 2005 was a turning point in the OIC human rights agenda. The establishment of the Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission (IPHRC) paved the way for the revision of the CDHRI in 2020 and it was described as a monumental success. This article shall review the in which the OIC has re-engaged to human rights after 30 years of controversies with a descriptive and analytical method. First, we will study the general framework of the revised Declaration and the challenges of the adoption process, and then we will evaluate the changes made in its content by comparing the two declarations. The paper concludes that the revised declaration may bring OIC human rights rhetoric in alignment with UN human rights language, nevertheless, the IPHRC failed to carry out its mandated task in bringing human rights standards in harmony with Islamic teachings and values, especially where it simply copied and pasted the text of international human rights instruments.

Western discussions of human rights have led to the coalescence of two distinct positions regarding the fundamental, inalienable liberties that citizens should be able to enjoy as a matter of principle. The first, commonly known as the cosmopolitan perspective , asserts that one set of basic human rights is valid for all societies. The other claims that citizens of different societies may possess different sets of human rights, albeit ones that any thoughtful person would acknowledge to be essentially decent and appropriate to the cultural and historical circumstances of the community at hand. Among a great many prominent cosmopolitan theorists, David Held stands out as the most consistent and vociferous champion of a universalist conception of human rights. Arguably the most influential proponent of distinct packages of rights for various social milieux is John Rawls, whose controversial notion of the Law of Peoples explicitly calls on liberal societies to tolerate, if not actually respect, alternative ways in which a minimal cluster of basic rights might be articulated. This paper demonstrates first that these two, generally opposed poles of the debate over human rights have moved much closer to one another than one might expect.

India is home to a remarkable variety of religions, and a major challenge that the country faces today is that of conflict between various religious communities. This has taken on menacing forms in recent decades. Incidents of violence between Hindus and Muslims, in which often agencies of the state play a central role in directing anti-Muslim violence, have now become endemic in some parts of the country. This form of communal violence, generally instigated by right-wing Hindu forces, is sought to be given religious sanction and is also projected as a crusade to save the Indian “nation”, which is described and portrayed in Hindu terms. Communal violence and anti-Muslim pogroms in various parts of the country have resulted in mounting human rights violations, particularly of marginalised communities such as the country’s Muslims, who number more than 150 million.

The word dialogue comes from the Greek word ‘dialogos’ and is commonly used in the meaning of conversation between two people, two groups and/or communities or organizations. Dialogue is not a debate to win or lose or to convince the other of a particular way of thinking. Dialogue is communicative conversation that involves intensely creative process with a goal to create peaceful and respectful relations among participants and in a community. When religious communities or organizations nominate a representative to participate in the intra or interfaith dialogue, they make sure that their nominees are trained in the art of dialogue. First, that he/she represents the community and second, that if he/she is not trained in the art of dialogue they understand that there may be a negative impact on the intra-faith or interfaith dialogue. For a healthy intra-faith and interfaith dialogue, the organization or community representatives must be trained in rights, responsibilities and skills of dialogue. This paper will discuss some of those rights, responsibilities and skills essential for a successful dialogue in the light of those principles and guidelines initiated in the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Freedom of religion in the sense of freedom of belief and of religious manifestations; in teaching, practice, worship and observance is one of the basic human rights laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art. 18. Freedom of religion in this sense is considered to be an important right and to play an important role in keeping up social peace in society. Germany, being a secular state with a historical connection to Christian religion, has anchored this right of religious freedom in is constitution in Article 4.According to Art. 7/3 religious education in state- run schools is accomplished in accordance with the religious communities. This religious education is normally provided for by the Catholic and Protestant Churches, but also by the Jewish community.  There are 3,2 Mio Muslims in Germany , especially from Turkey, but also from the Arab countries and Iran. Most of these Muslims do not plan to return to their native countries and will remain in Germany.They do enjoy freedom of religion in the above-mentioned sense. In my paper I will deal with the question of how religious manifestations of the Muslims in Germany “in teaching, practice, worship and observance “is accomplished. <br />I shall focus on their religious education and endeavor to answer the following questions: What does Islamic education mean in Germany, in a secular state? Who provides for it and how? How does it differ from religious education in Islamic countries? How is it seen by the German society? I will deal with these questions on two levels (1) on the national level and (2) on the local level. On the national level a clear effort of the German state can be seen to integrate the Muslim minority as a religious group into the German state. <br />For this reason the German Minister Wolfgang Schäuble convened in 2006 the so called “Islamkonferenz inviting jurists, scholars of Islamic studies and representatives of the different Muslim communities as well as independent persons to talk about the situation of Muslims in Germany. The unsolved question still is: how the different Islamic groups comprising Muslims from different social, political and religious backgrounds and from different countries as Turkey, Arab states, Iran, Afghanistan with different national Islamic traditions could find a common platform of religious Islamic belief in a secular state. By establishing the Coordinating Council (Koordinierungsrat) of Muslims in Germany in April 2007, some larger Islamic organizations tried to create a common structure for the representation of all Muslims. So far this organization has not been recognized by the German state as the official representative of all Muslims, but the discussions at the “Islamkonferenz” are not yet finished and are still going on. <br />One of the main aims of the Muslim Organizations is to gain the right to give Islamic religious lessons at German state-run schools. Whereas on the national level the integration of Islam as a religion within the secular system is discussed, on the local level religious teaching is currently taking place within different projects in many selected state schools in Germany as well as in local mosques. Religious teaching at mosques will be discussed by taking the example of mosques in Goettingen, a small university town in Central Germany. There are two main mosques in Goettingen: one belonging to the Turkish community (Ditib) and the other being an Arab mosque. <br />I shall sketch the concept of religious education given in this Arab mosque with regard to its content and the way it is taught to the children, whether it corresponds to the classical Islamic education and which concepts, beliefs, rituals and cultic acts are being considered important for children growing up in a completely secular context? <br />Finally, I shall compare this approach at the local level with the efforts made on the national level and discuss how these different efforts are judged by the German society. 

After the atrocity’s committed during the Second World War, the citizens of the world cried out for a universal code of ethics. On December 10th 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a universal declaration of human rights, thus setting a new standard for all nations to follow. According to Article 18 of that declaration “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 teaching, practice, worship, and observance”. People, and women in particular, who are born in different parts of the world have different cultural, as well as religious identities. It is time for education on, and a universal understanding of, the identity differences of Muslim women to be made universally accessible, and understood. Although the ultimate result was the near obliteration of an entire race, and a worldwide war, the groundwork was laid in a much quieter manner. The Nazi party slowly began working their ideals into society. First espousing the sovereignty of the German race and then planting the seeds for the loathing and contempt that would follow for all other races. Near the end of the Second World War Adolph Hitler described Jewish people as “something aggressive” the same words that French president Jacques Chirac recently used when petitioning Parliament to pass a law banning the wearing of hijab in France?

The emerging right to democracy (e.g. Franck, T) within international law favors a liberal, democratic packaging. Yet as Abedolkarim Sourash argues, there has been a conflation of liberalism and democracy, which must be decoupled.  It is from this point of departure that this paper will examine the international legality of militant democracy and interrogate when and how a constitutional democracy can legally act in an anti-democratic manner to combat threats to its democratic existence.  Militant democracy was a term introduced in 1937 by Karl Lowenstein. It refers to a form of constitutional democracy authorized to protect civil and political freedom by pre-emptively restricting its exercise. Lowenstein’s writings, at the time, were concerned with the limitations of democratic institutions in containing fascism. Militant democracies stand in contrast with the principles of legal pluralism, but the extent to which international law authorizes transformative political agendas that seek to implement forms of religious, cultural, or national autonomy is unclear.