Note! Letter-writing campaign instructions and sample letter below
Oil and water? Your Charter Rights and the formation of the Islamic Party of Ontario
Recall that the C3RF “Update” from 11 January, 2019 brought the formation of an “Islamic Party of Ontario” to your attention. Recall, as well, that the update requested your signature on a related petition that called upon Ontario’s Ford Administration to disallow the official registration of such a political party. The argument was a simple one, the Islamic Party of Ontario proposes to institute sharia law in Ontario as the law of the land and thereby abrogate the rights of its citizens to access the full and unconstrained rights of their own Charter. In short, the sharia law proposed for Ontario by the Islamic Party of Ontario is incompatible with the Western liberal democracy that Canadians currently enjoy and that others around the world envy. Accordingly, Ontario needs to rebuff efforts to introduce any initiative that seeks to instate such an outcome.
Sharia law and "The Reliance of the Traveller"
Contrary to our own Prime Minister’s announcement that sharia law is “not incompatible with Western secular democracy”, it stands apart from Western traditions of “equality before the law” by discriminating against non-Muslims, women and a host of other “identifiable groups”. Perhaps the best evidence of this biased treatment is to be found in Islam’s own sharia “handbook” in the form of “The Reliance of the Traveller”. This classical work was written by an Islamic scholar almost 700 years ago but “is by no means an irrelevant or outdated document. Certificates of authenticity attest to the translation from the governments of Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia– and the text is the first Islamic legal work in a European language to receive certification from the most important seat of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence, Cairo’s al-Azhar University”. Indeed, Al-Azhar University, on its website, has certified the English translation of this currently valid text of published Islamic law as corresponding to the original Arabic edition and to be in conformance with “the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community”. This is no small thing as the Sunni community comprises upwards of 90% of the total, worldwide, Muslim population.
The problem with sharia law
The prime problem associated with sharia law is pinpointed by the Islamic Party of Ontario in its own policy statements. The Party notes that the Islamic “way of life”, or “DEEN”, as manifested through sharia is immutable as “Allah and His Messenger completed and perfected the DEEN (Islam) and made it easy to practice for all”. In this fashion, we see that sharia is prescribed for all and is eternal in nature. This might be a fine thing for those favoured by sharia but all others might be forgiven for wanting to take a pass on a law that, in accordance with the “Reliance”, prescribes the following sample measures:
an Islamic judge can only be a male freeman (“Reliance” 022.1);
a male’s inheritance is two times that of a female (“Reliance” L10.3);
female circumcision is obligatory and involves the cutting out of the clitoris (“Reliance” e4.3);
a husband may forbid his wife to leave the home (“Reliance” ml0.4);
it is not permissible to give zakat (charity) to a Kafir (non-Muslim) (“Reliance” h8.24);
This small list does not even broach the concept of jihad and its mandate to conduct “war against the kafirs to establish Islam” (“Reliance” O9.0). It is readily apparent that sharia proposes a way of life that is antithetical to Western traditions and is capable of creating much social dislocation - if allowed to take hold in a Western host nation. Question is, could it do so?
Could sharia dominate in Ontario?
The answer to this question can be discerned by observing other Western jurisdictions where sharia has been accommodated and even extolled as equivalent to Western legal systems. In every case, across the European Union, the free speech rights of host citizens have suffered greatly as governments crack down on any criticism of Islamic law or traditions. This loss of a fundamental freedom has been further compounded by the rapid increase in migrant populations amenable to sharia. In a disturbing number of cases, the new enclaves created insist on the rule of sharia and become “no-go zones”. These zones resist any control by sovereign authorities with some police forces declaring the loss of any control over them. It would appear that sharia is dominating in an ever-increasing number of European jurisdictions.
We can see the same dynamics beginning to form in Canada. This development is being accelerated by immigration policies that work with global authorities, in the form of the U.N.’s Global Compact on Migration and Refugees and its Human Rights Commission, to prioritize the importation of sharia-amenable populations. This, taken in conjunction with a recent survey that finds that a majority of American Muslims believe they should have the choice of being ruled by sharia, is indicative of a growing likelihood that calls for the accommodation of sharia will intensify. Indeed, Canada has already seen demands for public spaces to make way for Islamic rituals involving prayer, fasting and food consumption. All this to say that a political party dedicated to addressing the growing need for sharia compliancy is positioned to gain political influence if not power. There can be little doubt that this portends knock-on disruptions of the public peace as sharia inevitably infringes on individual Charter Rights.
Is accommodating sharia even a requirement?
It needs to be noted that when religious rites and rituals invade the public space they become political obstructions to those outside of the religion. One could be forgiven for wondering why such accommodations are necessary when other religions seem to be able to work seamlessly within the public square. Fact is, sharia does provide such flexibility through the principles of “lightening one’s burden” (called “tayseer”) and “necessity” (called “darura”). In the former, a Muslim’s obligations can be lightened when the circumstances are difficult and sharia is not in effect. Pork can be handled, for example, if it’s just too hard not to. The second principle of necessity allows for the forbidden to be countenanced. A Muslim could eat non-halal food if halal food was unavailable. Similarly, prayers can be delayed if the environment is not amenable to Islamic prayer schedules. It would seem that sharia rules are much more flexible then some would have us believe.
Sample letter to Premier Ford
Here’s a sample letter to Premier Ford. It asks him to deal with the threat posed by sharia and its introduction into the Ontario political landscape by the Islamic Party of Ontario. A threat that includes the diminishment of the Charter Rights of all individual Ontarians. Please feel free to use this letter or any portion thereof. Also keep in mind that it is likely best to consider the points raised in this “update”, along with your own thoughts, to draft your own correspondence. Please info me at r.cooper@canadiancitizens.org when you send so I can keep track.
Dear Premier Ford, (email: doug.ford@pc.ola.org)
I am becoming increasingly alarmed over the prospect of the introduction of sharia law in Canada. My initial fears were stoked by the Liberal government’s refusal to define the term “Islamophobia” in its Motion M-103 initiative. Now they are being fanned by the institution of a new Islamic Party of Ontario. This Party, by its own policy statements, is dedicated to shepherding “God’s law” (sharia) into Ontario and Canada thereafter.
It is clear from Europe’s accommodation of sharia law, in conjunction with open-door migration policies, that their political, judicial and security systems have been degraded. I fear Canada is on that same path with its signing of the Global Compact on Migration and its apparent unwillingness to defend the Charter rights of its citizens. These rights are suffering from the bully tactics of aggressive “human rights” activists – including those who propose sharia to be a religious right. Problem is, sharia has a political dimension that calls for discrimination against non-Muslims, women, apostates and a wide variety of other “identifiable groups”. When it does so, it becomes a political instrument that flies in the face of Canada’s own, supreme law in the form of the Charter and the Constitution Act.
I fear that our politicians, outside of you, are too concerned with voting blocs to deal with the threat that sharia and the Islamic Party of Ontario pose to Canadian freedoms. I also fear that our judiciary is too concerned with “balancing” the rights of all “identifiable groups” to preserve fundamental Charter rights as a priority. I am hoping that you, Sir, as the leader of the most powerful Province in the confederation will lead on this issue and feel compelled to act by:
disallowing the accreditation of the Islamic Party of Ontario; and
making a law that rejects the use of sharia as a legal instrument within any Province of Ontario jurisdiction.
I know I’m asking a lot but I feel that you have the strength and integrity to stand up for what is right in Ontario and the nation at large. There will be those that say that any group has the right to associate freely to form a political party but they miss the point. The Charter is not a suicide pact and the fundamental rights and freedoms of all Canadians need to be protected above those of special interest groups. After all, it is these common rights that define our free nation and make Canadian society the envy of the world.
In closing it is worth noting that Ontarians, led by a contingent of Muslims that came to Canada to escape the bigotries of sharia, forced the provincial government to back away from instituting sharia family courts in 2005. Nothing has changed and the people of Ontario and Canada still prize their Charter Rights. Please stand up for them and say no to the Islamic Party of Canada and no to sharia.
Sincerely,
Your name
Ongoing operations and trends
As threats to your Charter Rights mount and election 2019 nears, C3RF will be on the lookout for “fake news” from any quarter. The job will be substantial and is complicated by the government of Canada’s own plans to fund “qualified news organizations” while supervising media coverage through its “Critical Election Incident Public Protocol” – a Protocol controlled by five powerful Government of Canada authorities and bureaucrats. What could go wrong?
We need your continued support.
Please note that efforts aimed at preserving the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians are not without cost. For those of you who have recently contributed to our coffers, thank you very much. We cannot continue to operate and progress such initiatives without such aid. The funds you so generously donate go directly into campaigning, events, bookkeeping, technology costs and legal advice. When these basic services are met, we use excess funding to assist other groups in advancing the cause of Canadian individual rights within a strong and free Canada. We also contribute to related legal proceedings, such as the Ottawa Public Library fight, and charitable activities when able. Please consider a one-time donation or a monthly contribution. Monthly donations, no matter how small, even $5/month, help us plan our finances in advance and provide us with greater flexibility.
And while you're considering making a difference, please follow C3RF on Twitter, on Facebook and on our web site and share with friends our great content and a realistic outlook on the continuing battle for Charter Rights in Canada. You can also join our Twitter feed here.
Major Russ Cooper (Ret'd)
Co-Chair C3RF
