A Muslim activist awaits trial over allegations of encouraging terrorism. What does his arrest say for freedom of speech and the position of the Muslim community in Britain today?

Words Reem Maghribi

 

A Muslim activist awaits trial, after bring arrested in January, over allegations of encouraging terrorism. Abu Izzdeen, a convert born to Jamaican parents, is a spokesman for Al Ghurabba, a spin off Al Muhajiroun, a group banned under anti-terrorism legislation passed in the wake of the 7/7 bombing.
 

Abu Izzadeen was arrested under Section 1 of the Terrorism act, which entered Britain's statute books in April 2006 and prohibits the glorification of the commission or preparation of terrorist acts. A speech given by Abu Izzadeen in September 2006 in Birmingham are at the centre of the investigation.
 

What does this arrest say for freedom of speech and the position of the Muslim community in Britain today?
 
I do not believe Abu Izzadeen represents the majority of Muslims in Britain, or the West for that matter. Muslims are certainly frustrated by events in their countries of origin and it is made more frustrating for those in Britain and the US by the fact that the foreign policy of their country of residence - and often of nationality - is to blame, and at fault, for the casualties in their homelands. However Islam does not promote violence or vengeance and Al-Muhajiroun do not speak on our behalf. Blair has argued that it would be in Muslims interests if he, and others like him, were locked up. This is only true if we progressive Muslims raise our voices louder than the likes of Abu Izzadeen and his 'brothers' in Al-Muhajiroun.
 
Abu Izzadeen has often said that he would never denounce the words or actions of a Muslim, but he denounces what he calls progressive Muslim scholars for being afraid of the West and unMuslim in practice. He is therefore saying that he will denounce the words of Muslims if he feels they are not acting in accordance with his Muslim values. This shows a clear divide between what are now referred to as radical Muslims & progressive Muslims. It may well be that progressive Muslims deviate from 'the text' and take into account the environment in which they live in when choosing how to live their lives. But ultimately the Quran is written in such a way as to leave much open to interpretation and debate. Therefore the 'radical' approach adopted by organisations such as Al-Muhajiroun, in enforcing what they perceive to be a written law, is ultimately them enforcing what they have decided is the definition of the words of the Quran. By denouncing Muslims who have a different understanding of Islam as unMuslim they are ultimately saying that they have sole power to represent Islam. They have hijacked Islam.
 

In truth it is not possible to hijack a religion as each person is free to associate themselves with a religion and argue their beliefs. But what Abu Izzadeen and his collective have done is hijack the image of Islam. Though the media, in giving a great deal of air time to such individuals, has not played a productive role in dispelling the minority view of Islam, it is ultimately the responsibility of the Muslims whose views more closely represent those of the majority to step up and be heard. It would be unfair to silence those with whom we disagree simply because they are misrepresenting us. We must represent ourselves. And I doubt that putting Abu Izzadeen in jail would indeed silence him.
 

However the underlying issue here is whether Abu Izzadeen should be sent to prison. The answer, based on the law of the land in which he lives, is yes.
 

I have no quarrel with the government making the glorification of terrorism illegal. Though democracy encourages freedom of speech, some legislation, if only for the sake of our young, is desirable. It has been argued that there is a young generation in Britain that is willing to take the likes of Abu Izzadeen seriously. Imprisoning him will not change that. Another like him, but perhaps less public and more politically aware, will appear. The reason this young generation of lost souls, who are willing to surrender themselves to what they are lead to believe is a great and noble cause, exist is because they have been disillusioned by the actions of their government - a government that has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents without cause, and worst of all without punishment. Enforcing the terrorism act will only enforce such disillusionment so long as the government itself is perceived as a terrorist.
 
Just as ‘progressive’ Muslims will have to raise their voice to change Western perceptions of Muslims and Islam, Blair must raise his voice to change how he and his government are perceived by those contemplating joining the extremist movement. Progressive Muslims may recite from the Quran and the religion’s history in order to present Islam as a peaceful accommodating religion. But the difficulty for Blair lies in the fact that reciting from his government’s history does him no favours.