Sunday, July 31, 2016
Post coup attempt, Erdoğan's purges are arbitrary & discriminatory
Orders to Purge Civil Servants, Judges; Close Groups Down
July 26, 2016
The first emergency decree under Turkey’s
state of emergency is arbitrary, discriminatory, and unjustified as a
response to the violent coup attempt or other public order concerns.
The July 23, 2016 decree orders the closure of thousands of private educational institutions, hospitals, and clinics, and associations allegedly linked to a movement inspired by Fethullah Gülen, a cleric the government blames for a violent coup attempt on July 15-16.
The decree allows the permanent discharge of judges, prosecutors, and civil servants without any investigation or possibility of legal challenge. The decree also extends police powers to detain some suspects for up to 30 days without being taken before a judge and seriously curtails detainees’ right to private communications with lawyers.
“The first state of emergency decree goes well beyond the legitimate aim of promoting accountability for the bloody July 15 coup attempt,” said Emma Sinclair-Webb, Turkey director at Human Rights Watch. “It is an unvarnished move for an arbitrary, mass, and permanent purge of the civil service, prosecutors, and judges, and to close down private institutions and associations without evidence, justification, or due process.”
The decree was published and became law – no. 667, published in the Official Gazette – on July 23. It is the first such decree by the Council of Ministers headed by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan under Turkey’s three-month state of emergency, which entered into force on July 21.
On July 22, the Turkish government notified the Council of Europe that it was also “derogating” from – that is, temporarily imposing extraordinary limitations on – the guarantees under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), to which it is a party, which the convention says a government can only do “in times of public emergency threatening the life of a nation.”
*Photo courtesy of Reuters
Top clerics reject state decree for unified prayer sermons
Mada Masr
Al-Azhar picks battle with the state over written sermons
Al-Azhar says that directive to follow ministry sermons does not apply to its preachers
Al-Azhar picks battle with the state over written sermons
Al-Azhar says that directive to follow ministry sermons does not apply to its preachers
Monday, July 25, 2016
Mai Shams El-Din
Anger over the decision to unify the Friday
sermon throughout Egypt’s mosques has extended from ministry to imams to
the leadership of Egypt’s prestigious Al-Azhar whose deputy last week
said that the directive to imams to read ministry-issued sermons does
not apply to Al-Azhar preachers.
“Al-Azhar was not officially notified about what is being reported on the written sermon,” Abbas Shouman wrote in a statement on his Facebook page last week. “It is not binding to Al-Azhar preachers, who are provided with a library enabling them to pass on their knowledge. This is apart from the fact there is a careful process through which the preachers were selected and the experience most of them have gained through preaching locally and internationally.”
Earlier this month, the Ministry of Endowments announced the formation of a committee to draft Friday sermons to be distributed to imams across the country, after it had previously moved to unify the topics of each sermon but left the articulation of their particular points to individual imams.
In its statement, the ministry said the decision aims to facilitate imams’ work and guarantee the optimum delivery of the salient points of assigned topics. The ministry justified its move with harsh criticism of imams’ delivery of Friday sermons.
A member of Al-Azhar’s Council of Senior Scholars told privately owned Al-Watan newspaper that the minister is attacking Al-Azhar scholars and lamented the ministry’s position.
“The ministry’s position saddens me,” Mahmoud Mehanna said. “Engaging in conflict with Al-Azhar will negatively affect the country. Egypt is worth nothing without Al-Azhar, it is what brought Islam to the six continents.”
Mehanna raised questions over the source from which the minister receives orders, implying security involvement.
He added that Al-Azhar’s preachers might abandon the Endowments Ministry’s mosques if they are bound by the decision to unify the sermons.
Head of the ministry’s Quranic affairs department in the Qalyubiya directorate, Mohamed Nassar, explains that the ministry uses up to 3000 Al-Azhar preachers to give Friday sermons - on a bonus system. The preachers also regularly give lessons in ministry mosques.
Nassar says that the ministry took this decision on its own without consulting with Al-Azhar, since it sees itself as a superior ministry that can take decisions independently and enforce them on whoever preaches in its mosques.
“The point of contention is that Al-Azhar sees the written sermon as a step backwards with regards to religious discourse in Egypt. Al-Azhar leaders believe that educating imams is the right step towards renewing the country’s religious discourse.”
Nasser expects the conflict between Al-Azhar and the Endowments Ministry to escalate, until Al-Azhar preachers are banned from preaching in the ministry’s mosques unless they adhere to the unified sermon.
Amr Ezzat, religious freedoms researcher at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, says that both sides are competing over control over the religious scene in Egypt.
“Al-Azhar’s Sheikh has the scientific and religious status, but the control over the religious space is in reality and administratively in the hands of the Endowments Ministry,” he adds.
Ezzat explains that the conflict dates back to Al-Azhar Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb’s participation in the June 30 alliance that ousted former President Mohamed Morsi and paved the way for his control over the religious space after the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood.
“Gomaa, the current minister, used to work in Tayeb’s office and Tayeb is the one who recommended him for the Endowments Minister position, but the competition between them intensified after that,” he said.
The move to unify Friday sermons dates back to 2013 when the Endowments Ministry was a principal player in the struggle between the post-June 30 regime and the Muslim Brotherhood, following the overthrow of President Mohamed Morsi. It was one of Gomaa’s first moves, made minister in July 2013.
The ministry was working toward controlling the religious sphere in order to disarm the Brotherhood of one of its strongest weapons: religious discourse.
Ezzat suggests that the diversity of Al-Azhar preachers’ political ideologies might be the reason behind the state’s mistrust in them, as opposed to the Endowments Ministry imams who are under its administrative control.
The common idea that Al-Azhar represents moderate Islam, at the top of which is the Council of Senior Scholars, with Tayeb at its head, is misleading, he says.
“The Council of Senior Scholars is a minority who are carefully picked,” Ezzat explains. “The majority of Azharis belong to Salafi and Muslim Brotherhood groups, some of whom have opposing positions to Al-Azhar and are thus not in line with either the state or the leadership within Al-Azhar.”
“Al-Azhar was not officially notified about what is being reported on the written sermon,” Abbas Shouman wrote in a statement on his Facebook page last week. “It is not binding to Al-Azhar preachers, who are provided with a library enabling them to pass on their knowledge. This is apart from the fact there is a careful process through which the preachers were selected and the experience most of them have gained through preaching locally and internationally.”
Earlier this month, the Ministry of Endowments announced the formation of a committee to draft Friday sermons to be distributed to imams across the country, after it had previously moved to unify the topics of each sermon but left the articulation of their particular points to individual imams.
In its statement, the ministry said the decision aims to facilitate imams’ work and guarantee the optimum delivery of the salient points of assigned topics. The ministry justified its move with harsh criticism of imams’ delivery of Friday sermons.
A member of Al-Azhar’s Council of Senior Scholars told privately owned Al-Watan newspaper that the minister is attacking Al-Azhar scholars and lamented the ministry’s position.
“The ministry’s position saddens me,” Mahmoud Mehanna said. “Engaging in conflict with Al-Azhar will negatively affect the country. Egypt is worth nothing without Al-Azhar, it is what brought Islam to the six continents.”
Mehanna raised questions over the source from which the minister receives orders, implying security involvement.
He added that Al-Azhar’s preachers might abandon the Endowments Ministry’s mosques if they are bound by the decision to unify the sermons.
Head of the ministry’s Quranic affairs department in the Qalyubiya directorate, Mohamed Nassar, explains that the ministry uses up to 3000 Al-Azhar preachers to give Friday sermons - on a bonus system. The preachers also regularly give lessons in ministry mosques.
Nassar says that the ministry took this decision on its own without consulting with Al-Azhar, since it sees itself as a superior ministry that can take decisions independently and enforce them on whoever preaches in its mosques.
“The point of contention is that Al-Azhar sees the written sermon as a step backwards with regards to religious discourse in Egypt. Al-Azhar leaders believe that educating imams is the right step towards renewing the country’s religious discourse.”
Nasser expects the conflict between Al-Azhar and the Endowments Ministry to escalate, until Al-Azhar preachers are banned from preaching in the ministry’s mosques unless they adhere to the unified sermon.
Amr Ezzat, religious freedoms researcher at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, says that both sides are competing over control over the religious scene in Egypt.
“Al-Azhar’s Sheikh has the scientific and religious status, but the control over the religious space is in reality and administratively in the hands of the Endowments Ministry,” he adds.
Ezzat explains that the conflict dates back to Al-Azhar Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb’s participation in the June 30 alliance that ousted former President Mohamed Morsi and paved the way for his control over the religious space after the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood.
“Gomaa, the current minister, used to work in Tayeb’s office and Tayeb is the one who recommended him for the Endowments Minister position, but the competition between them intensified after that,” he said.
The move to unify Friday sermons dates back to 2013 when the Endowments Ministry was a principal player in the struggle between the post-June 30 regime and the Muslim Brotherhood, following the overthrow of President Mohamed Morsi. It was one of Gomaa’s first moves, made minister in July 2013.
The ministry was working toward controlling the religious sphere in order to disarm the Brotherhood of one of its strongest weapons: religious discourse.
Ezzat suggests that the diversity of Al-Azhar preachers’ political ideologies might be the reason behind the state’s mistrust in them, as opposed to the Endowments Ministry imams who are under its administrative control.
The common idea that Al-Azhar represents moderate Islam, at the top of which is the Council of Senior Scholars, with Tayeb at its head, is misleading, he says.
“The Council of Senior Scholars is a minority who are carefully picked,” Ezzat explains. “The majority of Azharis belong to Salafi and Muslim Brotherhood groups, some of whom have opposing positions to Al-Azhar and are thus not in line with either the state or the leadership within Al-Azhar.”
Egypt's propaganda machine celebrates Turkish coup
Open Democracy
Turkey’s coup failed everywhere, except in Egyptian media
Egypt's media welcomed, unabashedly, the Turkish military coup; prematurely hailing Erdogan’s overthrow
Turkey’s coup failed everywhere, except in Egyptian media
Egypt's media welcomed, unabashedly, the Turkish military coup; prematurely hailing Erdogan’s overthrow
On Friday, July
15, in the throes of Turkey's deep crisis which left international media
befuddled by who was truly in power, numerous Egyptian media outlets jumped the
gun in their reportage. They prematurely declared that the attempted coup had ended
in success, heralding the Turkish army's control over the country and overthrow
of President Erdogan.
Within hours of the start of the attempted coup, these outlets exposed their un-professionalism by falling prey to propaganda. Despite confirmed news sources proving that the democratically-elected government remained in charge, and people taking to the streets to support Turkish democracy, several Egyptian state-run as well as privately owned newspapers came out on Saturday, July 16, with headlines and front pages showing a different trajectory.
State-owned Akhbar Al-Youm, announced in its main headline “A military coup in Turkey,” while the subhead said “The military announced it has taken over to protect democracy and human rights, Erdogan calls on supporters to take to the streets to safeguard legitimacy.”
Taken in this light, Egyptian newspaper’s choice of the word “legitimacy” is a reminder of when former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi was mocked for repeating the same word in his final late-night televised speeches when he addressed the nation before being ousted by his army generals three years ago.
Egypt’s privately-owned newspapers had been faring just as badly when it came to their lopsided coverage of the recent tectonic events in Turkey. Under the headline “The army topples Erdogan,” Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper seems to have duplicated Al-Ahram’s headline, however, suggesting their similar biased ideologies.
Other privately-owned newspapers, such as Al-Watan, not only ran the headline “The army takes over, deposes Erdogan,” its subhead also reported that Erdogan tried to claim asylum in Germany at the height of the military coup, citing unreliable western sources.
Unlike the other Egyptian print media outlets that failed dismally at journalism and excelled at propaganda, it was only the privately-owned Al-Shorouk newspaper that delivered impartial and balanced coverage. It ran a headline on its front page entitled “An attempted coup in Turkey, Erdogan announces quashing it.”
Aside from printed newspapers, the Egyptian news website Al-Youm Al-Sabea published a report on its social media account naming “the reasons that led to Erdogan’s fall." The most important of which was Erdogan's animosity towards Egypt.
However, when Erdogan had largely succeeded in quashing the coup, Al-Youm Al-Sabea resorted to publishing a story that claimed the coup was merely an “epic theatrical act” put on by Erdogan himself.
Ahmed Moussa, one of the most popular TV presenters in Egypt, praised the military coup and the Turkish army, defining the events as “a revolution, not a military coup.” Moussa, who hosts a TV show broadcast on the privately-owned channel Sada El-Balad, continued by saying: “Erdogan spent millions of US Dollars on terrorist groups…Erdogan has to learn a lesson: there is a difference between the coup in Turkey and the revolution in Egypt. He (Erdogan) relentlessly tried to label Egypt’s events on June 30 as a coup.”
However, as the events unfolded, Moussa shifted to describe the botched coup as an “ousting trial”, hoping that by the end of his TV show, the military coup in Turkey would succeed.
Similarly, the Egyptian media personality Khairy Ramadan, who hosts a talk show on the privately-owned TV channel CBC described Turkish military action as a "revolution” and “retaliation” against Erdogan’s policy towards Egypt after the June 30 revolution and the overthrow of the former Islamist President Mohamed Morsi.
The Egyptian talk-show host Osama Kamal first mocked Erdogan for appearing on CNN-Turk television, holding an interview via mobile phone during the early hours of the military movement. Then, adopting the same strategy of the news website Al-Youm Al-Sabea, Kamal claimed that Erdogan might have “staged” Friday’s bloody coup to win people’s sympathy and regain his popularity among Turkish citizens which had recently declined.
Some other Egyptian media figures avowedly voiced their opinions in the early hours of Turkey’s attempted coup via their social network accounts, especially Twitter.
Prominent journalist and Egyptian MP Mostafa Bakry wrote on Twitter: “The Turkish army declares seizing power. Go to hell Erdogan.” He even wrote another controversial tweet: “Erdogan has gone and [President Bashar] al-Assad remains. Long live the Syrian Arab Army. Erdogan must be trialed as a war criminal."
Another well-known TV anchor Youssef El Hosiny was gloating over Erdogan’s fall by writing a tweet: “These terms will be circulated worldwide to describe what had happened in Turkey: power transfer, restoring constitutional legitimacy, toppling Erdogan, deposing the tyrant and Erdogan’s fall.”
Shortly after the army released a statement on Turkish TV channels of seizing power, the Egyptian state and privately-owned channels were brim with news tickers such as: “Pro-army demonstrations in Turkey, chants against Erdogan,” “Erdogan flees to Germany, seeks safe haven for him and his family,” “Erdogan threatens to create bloodbaths to restore power,” and the like. It was painful to see.
Today most Egyptian journalists and media figures are siding with the military government. This trend explains why Egyptian media swerved sharply to welcoming, unabashedly, the Turkish military coup, let alone prematurely hailing Erdogan’s overthrow.
Tensions between Egypt and Turkey sparked after the overthrow of former Islamist President Mohamed Morsi in 2013. Since then, the Turkish President, who was an avid supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi, has been harshly condemning Egypt’s military government. He was even seen flashing the four-finger Rabaa sign during several public speeches. Moreover, many of the Muslim Brotherhood’s leaders found sanctuary in Turkey after fleeing from the bloody crackdown in Rabaa and Nahda.
The animosity between the two Middle Eastern countries reached a crescendo when Egypt objected to a United Nations Security Council statement that urged all parties to "respect the democratically elected government of Turkey." Egypt sees that the council is "in no position to qualify or label that government - or any other government for that matter - as democratically elected or not," according to UN diplomats.
On the other hand, Erdogan excoriated President Sisi on his latest TV interview with Al-Jazeera, saying that he “has nothing to do with democracy. He killed thousands of his people."
In conclusion, one could say that the antagonism between Egypt and Turkey will not come to an end anytime soon, especially when both Sisi and Erdogan are still in power, and Egypt’s media seems to be happy to play along with these political games.
Within hours of the start of the attempted coup, these outlets exposed their un-professionalism by falling prey to propaganda. Despite confirmed news sources proving that the democratically-elected government remained in charge, and people taking to the streets to support Turkish democracy, several Egyptian state-run as well as privately owned newspapers came out on Saturday, July 16, with headlines and front pages showing a different trajectory.
TELEPATHY SYNDROME
State-run newspaper Al-Ahram main front page banner headline stated that the Turkish Armed Forces succeeded in ousting President Erdogan. The red headline said “The Turkish army overthrows Erdogan” and was followed by the subhead “The armed forces seize power, declare martial law and Recep Tayyip vanishes."State-owned Akhbar Al-Youm, announced in its main headline “A military coup in Turkey,” while the subhead said “The military announced it has taken over to protect democracy and human rights, Erdogan calls on supporters to take to the streets to safeguard legitimacy.”
Taken in this light, Egyptian newspaper’s choice of the word “legitimacy” is a reminder of when former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi was mocked for repeating the same word in his final late-night televised speeches when he addressed the nation before being ousted by his army generals three years ago.
Egypt’s privately-owned newspapers had been faring just as badly when it came to their lopsided coverage of the recent tectonic events in Turkey. Under the headline “The army topples Erdogan,” Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper seems to have duplicated Al-Ahram’s headline, however, suggesting their similar biased ideologies.
Other privately-owned newspapers, such as Al-Watan, not only ran the headline “The army takes over, deposes Erdogan,” its subhead also reported that Erdogan tried to claim asylum in Germany at the height of the military coup, citing unreliable western sources.
Unlike the other Egyptian print media outlets that failed dismally at journalism and excelled at propaganda, it was only the privately-owned Al-Shorouk newspaper that delivered impartial and balanced coverage. It ran a headline on its front page entitled “An attempted coup in Turkey, Erdogan announces quashing it.”
Aside from printed newspapers, the Egyptian news website Al-Youm Al-Sabea published a report on its social media account naming “the reasons that led to Erdogan’s fall." The most important of which was Erdogan's animosity towards Egypt.
However, when Erdogan had largely succeeded in quashing the coup, Al-Youm Al-Sabea resorted to publishing a story that claimed the coup was merely an “epic theatrical act” put on by Erdogan himself.
“A REVOLUTION, NOT A MILITARY COUP”
Anyone who casually swapped between Egyptian state-run or even privately-owned channels during the chaotic early hours of Friday night knew that Erdogan's government was not in favour.Ahmed Moussa, one of the most popular TV presenters in Egypt, praised the military coup and the Turkish army, defining the events as “a revolution, not a military coup.” Moussa, who hosts a TV show broadcast on the privately-owned channel Sada El-Balad, continued by saying: “Erdogan spent millions of US Dollars on terrorist groups…Erdogan has to learn a lesson: there is a difference between the coup in Turkey and the revolution in Egypt. He (Erdogan) relentlessly tried to label Egypt’s events on June 30 as a coup.”
However, as the events unfolded, Moussa shifted to describe the botched coup as an “ousting trial”, hoping that by the end of his TV show, the military coup in Turkey would succeed.
Similarly, the Egyptian media personality Khairy Ramadan, who hosts a talk show on the privately-owned TV channel CBC described Turkish military action as a "revolution” and “retaliation” against Erdogan’s policy towards Egypt after the June 30 revolution and the overthrow of the former Islamist President Mohamed Morsi.
The Egyptian talk-show host Osama Kamal first mocked Erdogan for appearing on CNN-Turk television, holding an interview via mobile phone during the early hours of the military movement. Then, adopting the same strategy of the news website Al-Youm Al-Sabea, Kamal claimed that Erdogan might have “staged” Friday’s bloody coup to win people’s sympathy and regain his popularity among Turkish citizens which had recently declined.
Some other Egyptian media figures avowedly voiced their opinions in the early hours of Turkey’s attempted coup via their social network accounts, especially Twitter.
Prominent journalist and Egyptian MP Mostafa Bakry wrote on Twitter: “The Turkish army declares seizing power. Go to hell Erdogan.” He even wrote another controversial tweet: “Erdogan has gone and [President Bashar] al-Assad remains. Long live the Syrian Arab Army. Erdogan must be trialed as a war criminal."
Another well-known TV anchor Youssef El Hosiny was gloating over Erdogan’s fall by writing a tweet: “These terms will be circulated worldwide to describe what had happened in Turkey: power transfer, restoring constitutional legitimacy, toppling Erdogan, deposing the tyrant and Erdogan’s fall.”
Shortly after the army released a statement on Turkish TV channels of seizing power, the Egyptian state and privately-owned channels were brim with news tickers such as: “Pro-army demonstrations in Turkey, chants against Erdogan,” “Erdogan flees to Germany, seeks safe haven for him and his family,” “Erdogan threatens to create bloodbaths to restore power,” and the like. It was painful to see.
EXPECTED REACTION
In former President Mubarak's era, journalists were divided into two camps: with the president or the opposition.Today most Egyptian journalists and media figures are siding with the military government. This trend explains why Egyptian media swerved sharply to welcoming, unabashedly, the Turkish military coup, let alone prematurely hailing Erdogan’s overthrow.
Tensions between Egypt and Turkey sparked after the overthrow of former Islamist President Mohamed Morsi in 2013. Since then, the Turkish President, who was an avid supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi, has been harshly condemning Egypt’s military government. He was even seen flashing the four-finger Rabaa sign during several public speeches. Moreover, many of the Muslim Brotherhood’s leaders found sanctuary in Turkey after fleeing from the bloody crackdown in Rabaa and Nahda.
The animosity between the two Middle Eastern countries reached a crescendo when Egypt objected to a United Nations Security Council statement that urged all parties to "respect the democratically elected government of Turkey." Egypt sees that the council is "in no position to qualify or label that government - or any other government for that matter - as democratically elected or not," according to UN diplomats.
On the other hand, Erdogan excoriated President Sisi on his latest TV interview with Al-Jazeera, saying that he “has nothing to do with democracy. He killed thousands of his people."
In conclusion, one could say that the antagonism between Egypt and Turkey will not come to an end anytime soon, especially when both Sisi and Erdogan are still in power, and Egypt’s media seems to be happy to play along with these political games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
