Mongi Rahaoui, an MP for the Popular Front moves about only when accompanied by his personal guard, even inside the National Constituent Assembly (NCA). His guard was even present during this interview with Correspondents. Rahaoul has been taking such precautions since being threatened with death after  one of his colleagues in the NCA accused him of being an infidel. There is allegedly a fatwa legitimzing Rahaoui’s murder.

Mangi Rahaoui, can you tell us about the fatwa issued that allegedly legitimizes your murder?

Mongi Rahaoui, an MP for the Popular Front moves about only when accompanied by his personal guard, even inside the National Constituent Assembly (NCA). His guard was even present during this interview with Correspondents. Rahaoul has been taking such precautions since being threatened with death after  one of his colleagues in the NCA accused him of being an infidel. There is allegedly a fatwa legitimzing Rahaoui’s murder.

Mangi Rahaoui, can you tell us about the fatwa issued that allegedly legitimizes your murder?

I was informed by competent authorities that there is a fatwa supporting the shedding of my blood but I was not given any other details as to who issued this fatwa or any accurate information about it. According to my knowledge, the interior ministry is following-up on the serious threats that I have received. Intensive security measures have been taken and there are guards who accompany me all the time and everywhere I go, in close cooperation with the interior ministry.

You are known for your hostility towards religion. As a secular thinker, you get tense when the word Islam is mentioned and you want a Constitution that do not mention the words Islam and religion.  This was said about you by Habib Ellouze. How do you respond?

This is hearsay and it is all unfounded. The aim behind these words is to use religion in politics and as a means to put more restrictions on political opponents. According to democrats, the civil nature of the state is based on citizenship, institutions, freedom, democracy and equality. For Ellouze, who is a member of the Ennahda Movement, the civil nature of the state means the conduction of elections, nothing more and nothing less. The other issue is that how can a person like Ellouze give himself the right to classify people, what they believe in and their love of Islam?

Why do you believe Ellouze made this statement?


The reason for this statement is the discussion that took place around chapter one of the Constitution.  During these discussions, I said that the state should have its legal and moral personality.  It should have no religion and that religion is only for the people.  It is only natural that my opinion contradicts Ellouze’s on chapter one and that is why he quickly attacked me and accused me of being hostile towards Islam.  

This means that the first chapter of the new Constitution can be interpreted in two ways?

Yes. Today, there are two interpretations of the first chapter of the Constitution.  The first stipulates that “Islam is the religion of the state,” as presented by Dr. Sadeq Shoro, an MP for the Ennahda Movement, and the second one which I have suggested. The two have contradicting interpretations on the civil nature of the state.  I personally believe that the state has its laws but it has no religion.  The people of Tunisia are Muslims and they have the religion but this religion is not the religion of the state. We thought that we reached agreement on chapter one and that discussions of this topic were completed. However, we were shocked when we heard Sadeq Shoro’s interpretation of this chapter, which shows that he has another understanding of the civil nature of the state.  Unfortunately, we now have two interpretations of chapter one.
 
Do you believe that the statement made by Ellouze was behind the fatwa issued against you?  


Of course it is. He openly accused me of infidelity and he legitimized the shedding of my blood on air.  

The Ennahda Movement renounced the statements made by Ellouze and he personally apologized.  Did you accept his apology?

The apology was not explicit. He always claims that his statements are taken out of context. This is the same as statements made about female circumcision and his threats to martyr Belaid. I believe that Ennahda issued a statement renouncing Ellouze’s accusation because it cannot support public statements like those made by a leading member of the movement because of the political repercussions.  

Do you mean that, behind closed doors, the Ennahda Movement supports Ellouze’s statements?

The Ennahda Movement benefits from its radical leaders in its mobilization efforts and to show that it is safeguarding the Islamic religion which is (supposedly) being threatened.  

Are you genuinely afraid of being killed?
(Smiling) I am just afraid that the country would enter into a civil war if I were assassinated.

There are reports that you have filed a lawsuit against Ellouze.  Is this true?

Of course I am going to file a lawsuit against him. . . to put an end to such practices that are leading to crimes and tragedies.  If I am assassinated, the country will enter into a civil war and I will not contribute to the persistence of those who do not respect the law.

After the fatwa legitimizing your assassination, a paragraph on criminalizing al-takfir was added to the Constitution.  Do you think that this paragraph will put an end to the al-takfir accusations in Tunisia?

With reasonable awareness and sensitization campaigns, I believe that we can put an end to the al-takfir trend invading our country.  

What do you think about the protests that have recently swept the country?

These protest movements, especially those launched against taxes on cars, have proved that the street is still aware of its interests and it still has its revolutionary spirit.  These protests have made the resigned government suspend the tax. The new supplementary finance law is expected to annul it.  However, I call upon demonstrators to use peaceful methods and not to resort to violence in expressing their demands.

What do you think of the country’s new Constitution according to the chapters that have been already approved?

I can only say that I generally feel ok about the new Constitution.  

This means that you are ok with the death penalty as stipulated in the Constitution?

Of course not. I am against any harm to human life regardless of the reasons, but the voting result was in support of death penalty although we, as democratic forces, were against it.