H.E. Sayyed Nasrallah on seventh night of Muharram: holding fast to public order is our duty
The following are excerpts from the speech made by Hizbullah Secretary-General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on the seventh Ashoura night:
In his speech, His Eminence emphasized the need to abide by the laws related to public order in any place or country in the world, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. In this context, he stressed on compliance with traffic signs and vehicle types (whether petrol or diesel), indicating that non-compliance with traffic laws is a detriment to citizens and public order.
He also touched on the issues of electricity and water, emphasizing the impermissibility of drawing off ‘free of charge' electricity from public power cables, stressing the need for acquiring electricity and water through subscription for State services.
He also stressed the impermissibility of violating building codes or neglecting labor laws in government departments under the pretext of non-compliance with non-Muslim State regulations.
The following are excerpts from that speech:
"Today we hear talk of well established democracies in the world such as Britain, yet Britain is prepared to simply change its judicial system to suit "Israel" and its interests, because the interests of the British government and Britain's position dictate lending unequivocal support to "Israel."
The same applies to the United States of America, while it claims to carry the slogans of freedom, democracy, freedom of expression and speech in the world; we see the U.S. Congress almost unanimously passing a law that penalizes owners of satellites that rent out airspace to some Arab satellite channels, why is that? Because these Arab satellite channels tell the Arab peoples the truth and the facts about occupation, aggression and the U.S. project.
They toy with the law according to their whims and moods."
His Eminence touched on several questions such as:
"In these current times, Muslims live in different countries of the world, some of which are entirely Muslim countries with entire Muslim populations, even though they may have some non-Muslim minorities, the overall character is Islamic, and therefore such a country may be governed as an Islamic State.
Elsewhere in countries where the general overall character is non-Islamic, and Muslims form a minority or an ethnic community, as in America, France, Germany and Russia, Brazil ...etc, how should these national Muslim minorities or communities living in this non-Muslim country conduct themselves?
Others yet again may live in a mixed country of Muslims, Christians and possibly followers of other faiths as well; a country with its own particularity as a result of its pluralism and diversity, where an Islamic state is not available and therefore a non-Muslim state exists.
So suppose we live under any of these three categories:
1- In the first: there exist a government, regulations, laws and a State that is non-Muslim
2- The second: The system in such a State may believe in God, respect personal status law, and respect religions and sects
3- The third: An atheist state which denies the existence of God in its constitution, yet rules
According to established laws it deems appropriate, which may sometimes be identical to or incompatible with the provisions of Islam...
Here, questions must be drawn about the main challenges political parties and Islamic movements face in the Arab and Muslim worlds, and the world at large where Muslims exist.
For example: Do we or do we not participate in a given political system, do we boycott, oppose, confront or not?
Is there a scope for participation; whether by engaging at Parliamentary level or parliamentary elections, participating in government or whether we are an Islamic movement represented by ministers in the government of a country run by a non-Islamic system?
These are all valid questions.
Another question is related to posts in departments.
An employee, manager or general director is an executive or is in procedural post, which we do not refer to as political participation but as employees under the command of political authority, as they fall under a different category of participation in the various functions and departments of a State.
Hence the question is do we participate in these posts or not?
Is it admissible to participate or not?
Is it Halal (proper and fulfills Muslim codes) or Haram (improper or forbidden)?
Among these questions are queries about the laws of a State if its constitution is issued by a military government or an elected parliament, seeing that laws affect every area of life such as trade, defense, education, security, customs, traffic, construction and so on... where a Muslim person in a country ruled by a non-Muslim State, may want to know the proper conduct amid the enforced laws in the framework of such a country.
When we want to know the position of Islam on a particular subject, we can not ask Muslim intellectuals about a new sensitive issue that requires real professional scholarly research....
Just as we refer to doctors in questions of medicine, engineers in engineering, legal experts on constitutional law, astronomers in astronomy, accordingly questions of doctrine must be referred back to jurisprudence scholars specializing in jurisprudence, all of whom concur as obligatory the compliance with laws that maintain public order."
His Eminence referred to the situation in Lebanon today saying: "We find that one of the biggest dilemmas we say is facing the economic situation is the destruction of the productive sectors. Today we have a nearly devastated agricultural sector and the same with the industrial sector.
National industry and agriculture are two productive sectors. We reject the idea that our country be based solely on service industries i.e. banks, hotels and tourism, we also want productive sectors, provision of employment opportunities and domestic capabilities. Industry and agriculture are among the sectors that give inbuilt capabilities to the country, because a service based nation collapses when faced with sanctions.
What do we do if the U.S. passes legislation that bans dealing with Lebanese banks?
Or if Lebanon is blockaded we would be finished! Yet manufacturing and planting our own constitutes a self-sown strength for the country.
Do you know that tariff rules constitute one of the most important issues that protect industrial and agricultural production in case the state decides to provide such protection? When a State sets taxes as well as tariff and import rules, these protect the economy.
But if the State sets rules that provide protection at the time when smuggling goods - which is one of the major reasons that inflict production sectors- as it provides the markets with goods of prices cheaper than that of national products, what do we benefit then?
Here also, the answer of scholars is very clear. The following are some examples, where the main title is public order. It is the order related to people's affairs, to their interests, lives, stability, and prosperity. Rules should be respected and worked by, and such rules do not conflict with religion or Shari'a whether in Lebanon or elsewhere.
My speech is for all the people in the country, Muslims and Christians, whether they are interested in religious matters or not. I direct my speech to a human community living in one homeland under the protection of the State, sharing a common life and common interests , as the airport and port, the economy and agriculture, industry and budget, deficit and debt, these are for all of us.
What happens in the country affects the whole country, therefore, the interests of people and society is to respect this kind of law-related public order without discussion, because this is the interest of the country.
The matter is not related to an opposition or a majority, to an Islamic system or non-Islamic one, to whether we approve the system or not, whether it is a dictatorship or not, this kind of law regulates people's lives.
If we get to the topic through religion, I call religious brothers and sisters to revise their calculations on this subject, each from his/her place, for our benefits as a human society and also for our afterlife as well as our religion.
What compels us to speak about religion in the first place is to increase motivation, because recently some have commented on Hizbullah and Amal movement announcement of Order [comes] from Faith campaign and asked why we use religious speech. We say that there is no doubt that the religious discourse increases motivation and this religious speech serves as a national, humanitarian and moral goal, and then there is no problem in the matter.
In the second place, the goal of religious discourse is to alert people to assign the inadmissibility of violating laws, and in the third place it serves to respond to charges targeting Islamic movements or religion. Such accusations are fake and untrue, for the existing atmosphere in Lebanon prevailed despite religion, before thirty or forty years ago, most people in Lebanon were not religious, and their actions came as a reaction to the failure of the State, as the state was absent.
And when the state existed, it did through oppression, collecting taxes, causing harm to people and launching military campaigns as what happened in the sixties in Hermel. The State ignored people and deprived them from their rights so the people's reaction against neglect and deprivation, oppression and ignorance was that they resorted to violating laws.
This is the real description of what happened during the last decades, it is not true to hold people the whole responsibility, for who hold responsibility before people are the state and the successive rulers.
As a matter of fact we called for the government to the suburbs, but it rejected, and thank God it agreed to do that now, it's most welcomed. Some were also talking about the freedom of the government to spread its law, well where doesn't the government spread its law, they used to say there are security bases, well where are these security bases now, "Israel" put them down during the war.
Anyhow, today we are ahead of a new situation, and we are all asked to cooperate.
I end by saying that the main idea we wanted to assure tonight is that the aim of the prophets, sacrifices, rules, and religions is to achieve the best possible life conditions for people within their security, stability, freedom, joy, development, education, luxury, and their religious and moral perfection.
Therefore, there is a set of rules that preserves people's lives and life style, whether it is in a Muslim government or a non-Muslim government, for these kinds of rules aim at the same target of the prophets and their movements, and all the good ones throughout history, so that it would be respected and taken into consideration because it is of people's benefits, and this is the Islamic stance seen by our sagacious scholars.