Supporters of the ban argue that the minarets are a symbol of political and religious claims to power, not just a religious sign, while those who oppose the ban say the initiative goes against freedom of religion and potentially will create tension and polarization in Swiss society.
Speaking to Sunday’s Zaman, Directorate of Religion Affairs Deputy Chairman Mehmet Görmez said: “It is sad to see religious precepts taken to referendum. In the case of a negative result, I am extremely concerned that this will spread across Europe. Besides, I don’t think this will serve the advancement of peace.” According to government data, less than 15 percent of Swiss Muslims actively practice their faith. Indeed, only four of the roughly 150 mosques in Switzerland have minarets.
Laws against noise pollution forbid mosques from using minarets to hold speakers for the call to prayer. Yet the Swiss government has tried to distance itself from the initiative, fearing that a clash over Muslim minority rights may have a negative impact on business and political interests for the country.
Stressing that the Swiss laws guaranteeing religious freedoms and human rights are being violated by this decision to hold a referendum, Ahmet Gökhan Sarıçam, deputy chairman of Turkey’s parliamentary Commission on Human Rights, told Sunday’s Zaman that their commission will take action to make sure that any human rights violations caused by the results of the referendum will not serve as precedents.
In an interview with Sunday’s Zaman, Ahmet Faruk Ünsal, chair of the Association for Human Rights and Solidarity with the Oppressed (MAZLUMDER), said, “Discussing the acquired rights in a referendum contrary to their ontological character will promote hatred and build enmity and bellicosity.” Akın Birdal, a member of the parliamentary Commission on Human Rights, also told Sunday’s Zaman that the Swiss referendum is no different than holding a plebiscite over the mother tongue of a group.
Recalling that the Sept. 11 attacks have contributed to the emergence of discussions in Europe on the visibility and publicizing of Islamic symbols, Görmez underlined that the impact of these discussions was best observed in the pressure and restrictions against the construction of mosques in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium and Switzerland. Noting that it took a long time for Muslims in Germany to get approval to construct a mosque in Munich because of political wrangling, Görmez further said: “The construction of a mosque in Cologne has been a matter of debate for years. Demonstrations were held to protest the initiation of the construction of this mosque last week; everybody knows what a placard depicting a crossed mosque image means in Europe.”
Noting that the construction of mosques is a part of the right to religious freedom, Görmez said mosques and places reserved for worship serve as shelters for Muslim people in Europe. Görmez, who underlined that Muslims spend their weekends at these places, where they pray and socialize, further noted that mosques are extremely important for the minorities in their attempts to coexist with other communities in peace.
Stressing that the discussion of religious values and precepts in a referendum is not a good sign, Görmez referred to the probable repercussions of a negative vote; he noted that in such a case, Swiss Muslims may develop negative feelings about their neighbors who voted against the construction of minarets.
Minarets hold no non-religious meanings
Görmez noted that limiting the debate for the construction of minarets to a simple referendum creates a double standard, considering that special places are reserved for religious observance for many different religions, even in workplaces. He also pointed out that the trend against Muslim mosques and prayer rooms is spreading to other countries in Europe, a development he calls alarming. “There have been some comments on minarets. For instance, a far-right party made a statement in Vienna. They argued that mosques are political places rather than venues reserved for prayers. It was regrettable to witness a political party make such a grave statement over the religious buildings and places of an old religion.”
Recalling that some argue that minarets are linked to violence, Görmez drew attention to the seriousness of the distribution of pamphlets and fliers claiming that the minarets represent violence. Stressing that such allegations offended Muslims, Görmez said: “The minarets have a single meaning. This symbolic meaning is the Islamic belief and faith referring to the unity of God.” Görmez further recalled that the belief in the unity of God is a prerequisite for being a Muslim.
Noting that it would be unfair to assign non-religious symbolism to minarets, which are integral parts of mosques, Görmez said: “To whoever attributes violent and misleading meanings and symbols to minarets and makes improper comments based on these meanings, Muslims will see this not only as a misunderstanding but also as a distortion of the facts.”
Görmez further noted that Muslims have a fundamental right to construct mosques and minarets on their registered properties and land in compliance with local building laws, just as other religious groups have. “Wherever they live and reside, Muslims should have the right to construct their mosques and to establish places where they are able to perform and observe their prayers” he added.
“It is sad to see that this basic right is being violated under pressure from dominant groups in the country,” Görmez said, adding that he believes reason and wisdom will prevail in Switzerland. “Swiss skies are vast enough to host synagogues, steeples, churches, mosques and minarets” he said.
Noting that he is still hopeful that the Swiss people will extend their support for religious freedom, Görmez stressed that a positive outcome of the referendum, confirming the rights of Muslims by the Swiss people, will serve as a good model for other countries.
Vote is no different than discussing education in the mother tongue
Member of parliamentary Commission on Human Rights Akın Birdal: Issues relating to religious freedom are not eligible for referenda. If they are, it would be no different than holding a referendum to discuss the right to education in one’s mother tongue. This is unacceptable in modern democracies; to the contrary, these rights are protected. Undoubtedly, communities and individuals are not pleased with the obstacles to the enjoyment of their religious freedoms and rights. Their stance towards those who introduce the restrictions will inevitably change. Islamic communities will be the first to change their attitudes because some groups will no longer be tolerant due to this practice. Some concerns will be raised over the fate of a peaceful environment. Other religious minorities will be worried that the intolerance affecting Muslims may undermine their rights as well.
***
Many Swiss politicians are aware of serious mistake
Member of parliamentary Commission on Human Rights Ahmet Gökhan Sarıçam: By misinterpreting Swiss law, extremists have made several advancements in their bid to violate human rights. Under Swiss law, an issue may be brought to a national referendum if a certain number of signatures are collected in a petition drive. A basic fact is that a fundamental rights issue may not become the subject of a referendum. Many Swiss politicians are aware of this grave mistake and stress that a referendum is not needed on the issue of acquired rights. Unfortunately, we are observing attempts in many European countries to introduce restrictions against liberties via manipulation. If a fellow believer of a religion other than Christianity makes a request for the free enjoyment of his faith, such a request is not considered a humane demand. If it is really necessary to clarify how a place of worship will be built this should be asked of the people who plan the construction of the building rather than the Swiss people.
***
Fundamental rights are not subject to others’ approval
Chairman of the Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples A. Faruk Ünsal: I think that holding a referendum on fundamental rights symbolizes distrust. These rights are inherently and ontologically legitimate; holding a referendum on the enjoyment of these rights is not acceptable; is it possible to hold a referendum as to whether use of a native language in a certain part of Switzerland should be permitted? Legitimization of the use of a mother tongue is inherent and ontological; it does not require the consent and approval of others.
The UN seeks to establish mechanisms that will ensure mutual understanding between people via the introduction of a project called the Alliance of Civilizations. A group of extremists in Switzerland seek to undermine the values of other civilizations by relying on the use of the state apparatus. They are exploiting the institution of the referendum to wield state power effectively.
Benzer Haberler 
National
