Geelani, Mirwaiz not to attend JAH seminar on Talaaq judgment

Hurriyat head appeals scholars, clerics to study court verdict

Ahmed Ali Fayyaz

Srinagar, Nov 3: Even as top functionaries of the Islamic Shariat Court were reportedly undecided, neither of two heads of the separatist amalgam Hurriyat Conference---Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq---would be participating in Jamiat-e-Ahl-e-Hadith (JAH) sponsored conference on the J&K High Court’s recent judgment on Talaaq (divorce) here on Sunday.

According to informed sources, JAH has invited over a hundred clergymen, separatist politicians, academicians and intellectuals in day-long deliberations on the Jammu & Kashmir High Court judge Mr Justice Hasnain Masoodi’s recent judgment on Talaaq. The conference would begin at JAH’s headquarters at Barbarshah tomorrow at 11.00 a.m. Sources said that representatives of all schools of thought in the religion of Islam have been invited by e-mail, telephone and written letters.

It was not immediately clear as to how many of the invitees would make it to the conference but JAH functionaries were expecting a “fairly large gathering”. As regards the participation of Sadar Mufti, who has been heading a traditional Shariat Court for decades, sources said that Mufti Azam Mohammad Bashiruddin was undecided. However, the participation of his representative, most likely his successor son, was not completely ruled out by this evening.

Sources said that the capital city’s most important cleric-politician and Chairman of Hurriyat’s moderate faction, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, too would not attend the conference. However, he is understood to have asked his Secretary (Religious Affairs), Mohammad Sayeed-ur-Rehman Shams, to represent his political out, Awami Action Committee, and the religious organisation, Anjuman-e-Nusratul Islam. Mirwaiz Umar’s aide, Shahidul Islam, confirmed to Early Times that Mr Shams would be participating in the JAH conference on behalf of the organisation.

Sources said that Chairman of Hurriyat’s hardline faction, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who happens to be an eminent Islamic scholar, would not participate in the JAH conference. “We have not considered about participation in this conference till tonight”, Geelani’s aide Ayaz Akbar said.
Earlier today, Mr Akbar said in a statement that Geelani had urged Muslim scholars and clerics to thoroughly study the recent court verdict with regard to pronouncement of Talaaq.

Geelani, according to the statement, observed that the courts under the influence of non-religious administration and influence, were in no way acceptable to Ummah. “These verdicts are no more authentic as long as they serve a non-Islamic set up as there is every apprehension that these judgments could develop misunderstanding and misconceptions vis-à-vis the Shariat laws”, said the statement

“We find that in Islamic Sharia law of inheritance and divorce has been explained with clear detail but it needs a great vision and particular knowledge and competence with power of judgment to reach an acceptable conclusion”, he said quoting Geelani. According to Geelani, a person with ordinary and little knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence and Sunnah could forward and submit his personal opinion but it was very difficult to reach a decision by such individuals.

“Mr Geelani said that in absence of Islamic administration it is very complicated process to understand it in full, until and unless there is an established government administering the law pertaining to day to day needs of a man, and the whole life as per code of conduct provided by Islam. Mr Geelani reproducing his view point said that even an Islamic scholar cannot justify with ease, his verdicts in absence of Islamic Sharia and Islamic administrative set up. He urged Islamic scholars to come forward with their views so that doubts and misgivings produced are rectified without any damage, or giving rise to more suspicion”, Mr Akbar said in the statement.

As already reported, in a 23-page judgment delivered last week, Mr Justice Hasnain Masoodi had decreed that both partners of marital union had equal rights in Islam and the husband’s competence of pronouncing divorce was not arbitrary, unqualified or absolute. The judgment has been delivered in a case in which the wife had initially come up with an application in the trial court seeking maintenance. However, the husband had resisted the application on the grounds that he had divorced her and was not under any obligation to pay maintenance allowance.

END