Water, Human Rights and Governance in the Middle East: An Essay Illustrated by Conflicts over Water Between Israelis and Palestinians

Water Nepal ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Brooks
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-202
Author(s):  
Siti Rohmah ◽  
M. Syukri Ismail ◽  
Moh. Anas Kholish ◽  
Mona Novita

Some circles suggest that the phenomenon of intolerance and religious conflict in Indonesia will be reduced by a religious education model dominated by a mono-religious approach. The approach that focuses on deepening the knowledge of all religions is considered to be the cause of the persistence of interfaith stigma and prejudice. However, there are objections from various circles to the concept and application of interreligious education which requires close dialogue and interaction, an appreciative attitude, and openness to adherents of other religions. This article argues that the development of a peaceful and diverse mono-religious education approach is possible. This study employs Mohammed Abu-Nimer's theory as an alternative model of Islamic peace education that is strategic, participatory and practical; it focuses on his experience in conflict areas and in the Islamic education environment, which is often stigmatized conservatively in the Middle East and Africa. This study confirms that monoreligious education provides room for peace education that builds pedagogy of tolerance, diversity and human rights.


2014 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Stuart

Historians identify many connections between human rights and religion, including the influence of religious organizations on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Protestant ecumenical movement and American Protestantism played important roles in this regard. Historical analysis has so far taken insufficient account of another contemporaneous phenomenon important in terms both of religion and of rights—the British Empire. Its authorities typically offered a “fair field” to Christian missionaries irrespective of their nationality or denomination. They might also offer protection to religious minorities. In Egypt the situation was complicated. An Islamic country and a vital part of Britain's “informal” empire in the Middle East, Egypt was also an important area of missionary activity. To Egyptian government and British imperial representatives alike missionaries asserted their right and that of Christian converts to “religious liberty.” Focusing in part on Anglican mission in Egypt, this article examines the complex interplay of empire and Anglo-American ecumenism in missionary assertion of religious freedom. It also shows how imperialism and debates about “religious liberty” in Egypt and the Middle East influenced both “universal” and Egyptian national ideas about freedom of religion up to 1956.


1976 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 38-43
Author(s):  
Eddison Jonas Mudadirwa Zvobgo

As a lawyer, a law-teacher, a Board-member of Amnesty International (U.S.A.) and, more importantly, as an African revolutionary, matters of human rights are of grave concern to me. With racism and fascism gaining ground in the West, reactionary bourgeois chauvinism on the rampage in many of the newly liberated states in Africa, the Middle East and Asia, and statist revisionist tyranny masquerading as revolutionary socialism in some of the socialist countries, few can afford ivory-tower debates involving human rights. Certainly I cannot, having spent seven years in Salisbury Maximum Security Prison as Ian Smith’s political prisoner.


2001 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 167-171
Author(s):  
Mohammad Fadel

This work grew out of a series of lectures that were delivered over atwo-year period between 1996 and 1998 at the Centre of Islamic andMiddle Eastern Law (CIMEL) at the School of Oriental and AfricanStudies (SOAS), University of London, on the genera] subject of the rule oflaw in the Middle East and Islamic countries. Subsequently, materials wereadded dealing particularly with issues relating to human rights law. Thecontributors to this work are a combination of legal academics, human rights activists, lawyers and judges, who hale from various countries in theArab world, Iran, the United States, Great Britain and Germany.There are a total of fourteen separate chapters, of varying length andquality. The book is not lengthy - including notes and authors’ biographies,it is 180 pages long. The average length of each chapter is between ten andfifteen pages. Despite the diversity of countries surveyed, all the essays areconcerned with generic questions regarding the rule of law, whether in atheoretical sense, viz., whether the notion that legitimate governmentalaction is limited to those acts that are deemed lawful by a pre-existing setor rules, or in a practical sense, viz., assuming that the formal legal regimeof a given state recognizes the rule of law in a theoretical sense, whetherthe coercive apparatus of the state in fact recognizes legal limitations onits conduct.Perhaps the most interesting (it is certainly the most lengthy, at 35 pages),and most important, essay in this work is the very fiit one, authored byAdel Omar Sherif, an Egyptian judge, wherein the author provides a digestof the landmark decisions of the Egyptian Supreme Constitutional Court.While the work can be criticized for taking on the appearance of a meresurvey of decisions, without taking a critical perspective to the Court’sprecedents, it is nonetheless a very valuable contribution for those lawyersand scholars who cannot read Arabic but nonetheless wish to gain insightinto Egypt’s legal culture. The modest task of relating the decisions ofEgypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court is especially important given thecliches regarding the absence of effective judicial institutions in the Arabworld. Sherifs contribution effectively dispels that myth. His article revealsthe Egyptian Supreme Constitutional Court to be a vibrant institution thattakes its constitutional duties seriously, and discharges those duties withintegrity, and when it finds that the government has acted unlawfully, it willstrike down the offensive legislation, or rule against the government ...


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Sara Duodu

In 2005, Turkey entered into negotiations for membership with the European Union. Turkey has been an important strategic ally to the European Union in the Middle East, explaining the mutual desire for closer ties between the two. While these negotiations showed promise early on, it has become increasingly apparent that Turkish accession to the European Union will not come easily, if at all. Officially, the European Union cites Turkey’s shortcomings on issues such as human rights as the reason for the stall in negotiations. However, upon closer inspection, it is evident that there is more at play, particularly as the European Union has been inconsistent in their approach to addressing human rights violations. Member states such as Poland and Hungary, which have recent human rights violations, have not faced the same kind of condemnation that Turkey has from the leaders of the European Union. The reality is that the European Union is largely united by its shared Europeanness and Christianity. As a result, due to questions over Turkey’s Europeanness and its large Muslim majority, the European Union is apprehensive to afford it full membership. It can be said that the European Union has maintained that Turkish accession is still possible in order to continue reaping the strategic benefits from close relations with Turkey.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document