KABUL: A Taliban government spokesman has said the Afghan authorities were committed to engagement with the international community after a new morality law sparked tense exchanges over women’s rights.
The United Nations and the European Union have warned that the law — requiring women to cover up completely and not raise their voices in public — could damage prospects for engagement with foreign nations and international organizations.
Deputy government spokesman Hamdullah Fitrat was responding to comments by a spokesman for the UN secretary-general assuring continued engagement with the Taliban authorities after Afghanistan’s morality ministry said it would no longer cooperate with the UN mission in the country, UNAMA, over criticism of the law.
Fitrat said the authorities were “committed to positive interactions with all the countries and organizations in accordance with Islamic law,” in a voice message to journalists on Saturday.
“Interaction is the only way to achieve solutions to problems and for the progression and expansion of relations,” he said, urging nations and organizations to engage positively with the Taliban authorities.
Since taking power in 2021, no state has recognized the Taliban government but it has made diplomatic inroads recently, including attending UN-hosted talks on Afghanistan in Qatar.
On Friday, the spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said, “We will continue to engage with all stakeholders in Afghanistan, including the Taliban.”
“We have always done so following our mandate and I would say impartially and in good faith, always upholding the norms of the UN, pushing the messages of human rights and equality,” said Stephane Dujarric.
“We would urge the de facto authorities to, in fact, open more avenues for diplomatic engagement,” he added.
Earlier Friday, the morality ministry had said it would no longer cooperate with UNAMA over its criticisms of the “Law on the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice,” which was ratified last week.
The law, which includes rules on many aspects of Afghans’ lives according to the Taliban’s strict interpretation of Islamic law, sparked concern among Afghans, various countries, human rights advocates, UN agencies and the EU.
It prohibits women from raising their voices in public and requires them to cover their entire body and face if they need to leave the house “out of necessity.”
Men’s behavior and dress are also strictly regulated by the law, which gives morality police powers to warn and detain people for non-compliance.
UNAMA head Roza Otunbayeva said last week that the law offered “a distressing vision for Afghanistan’s future,” adding that it could set back cooperation efforts, a warning echoed by the EU.
The Taliban government has consistently dismissed international criticism of its policies, including restrictions on women that the UN has labelled “gender apartheid.”
Chief government spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid has said the law is “firmly rooted in Islamic teachings” that should be respected and understood, adding rejection of the law showed “arrogance.”
Afghan Taliban says ready to engage with world on morality law as per Islamic teachings
https://arab.news/mzu85
Afghan Taliban says ready to engage with world on morality law as per Islamic teachings
- New law by morality ministry requires women to cover up completely and not raise their voices in public
- Law has sparked concern among Afghans, various countries, human rights advocates, UN agencies, EU
Top UN court to hear Rohingya genocide case against Myanmar
THE HAGUE: Did Myanmar commit genocide against its Rohingya Muslim minority? That’s what judges at the International Court of Justice will weigh during three weeks of hearings starting Monday.
The Gambia brought the case accusing Myanmar of breaching the 1948 Genocide Convention during a crackdown in 2017.
Legal experts are watching closely as it could give clues for how the court will handle similar accusations against Israel over its military campaign in Gaza, a case brought to the ICJ by South Africa.
Hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims fled violence by the Myanmar army and Buddhist militias, escaping to neighboring Bangladesh and bringing harrowing accounts of mass rape, arson and murder.
Today, 1.17 million Rohingya live crammed into dilapidated camps spread over 8,000 acres in Cox’s Bazar in Bangladesh.
From there, mother-of-two Janifa Begum told AFP: “I want to see whether the suffering we endured is reflected during the hearing.”
“We want justice and peace,” said the 37-year-old.
’Senseless killings’
The Gambia, a Muslim-majority country in West Africa, brought the case in 2019 to the ICJ, which rules in disputes between states.
Under the Genocide Convention, any country can file a case at the ICJ against any other it believes is in breach of the treaty.
In December 2019, lawyers for the African nation presented evidence of what they said were “senseless killings... acts of barbarity that continue to shock our collective conscience.”
In a landmark moment at the Peace Palace courthouse in The Hague, Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi appeared herself to defend her country.
She dismissed Banjul’s argument as a “misleading and incomplete factual picture” of what she said was an “internal armed conflict.”
The former democracy icon warned that the genocide case at the ICJ risked reigniting the crisis, which she said was a response to attacks by Rohingya militants.
Myanmar has always maintained the crackdown by its armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw, was justified to root out Rohingya insurgents after a series of attacks left a dozen security personnel dead.
‘Physical destruction’
The ICJ initially sided with The Gambia, which had asked judges for “provisional measures” to halt the violence while the case was being considered.
The court in 2020 said Myanmar must take “all measures within its power” to halt any acts prohibited in the 1948 UN Genocide Convention.
These acts included “killing members of the group” and “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”
The United States officially declared that the violence amounted to genocide in 2022, three years after a UN team said Myanmar harbored “genocidal intent” toward the Rohingya.
The hearings, which wrap up on January 30, represent the heart of the case.
The court had already thrown out a 2022 Myanmar challenge to its jurisdiction, so judges believe they have the power to rule on the genocide issue.
A final decision could take months or even years and while the ICJ has no means of enforcing its decisions, a ruling in favor of The Gambia would heap more political pressure on Myanmar.
Suu Kyi will not be revisiting the Peace Palace. She has been detained since a 2021 coup, on charges rights groups say were politically motivated.
The ICJ is not the only court looking into possible genocide against the Rohingya.
The International Criminal Court, also based in The Hague, is investigating military chief Min Aung Hlaing for suspected crimes against humanity.
Another case is being heard in Argentina under the principle of universal jurisdiction, the idea that some crimes are so heinous they can be heard in any court.
