Contradiction between two points of view about media freedom in Libya makes it seems as if we were talking about two different countries. While international concerns and domestic protests denounce restrictions on freedom of expression, Mufti Dar Ifta (Fatwa House) describes freedoms in Libya, including the freedom of expression, as “too loose.”
International concern
Contradiction between two points of view about media freedom in Libya makes it seems as if we were talking about two different countries. While international concerns and domestic protests denounce restrictions on freedom of expression, Mufti Dar Ifta (Fatwa House) describes freedoms in Libya, including the freedom of expression, as “too loose.”
International concern
In its last report, the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) stated that it “is deeply concerned by several recent incidents, including attacks on media organizations, threats against journalists, and violence against a Coptic church and other houses of worship. These acts violate fundamental human rights, particularly the freedom of faith and freedom of expression.”
“The universal values of tolerance, moderation, and respect for differences are deeply rooted in Libyan society’s religious and cultural heritage,” Special Representative of the Secretary-General Tarek Mitri said. “These values should be the foundation upon which the new Libya is built.”
Anonymous assailants
Respect for such values however seems unlikely to be achieved in Libya any time soon. The widely viewed Alassema TV – and Libya Alhura Channel in a prior incident – was attacked on March 7 by gunmen who vandalized the place and kidnapped members of the staff, including the channel’s manager and CEO. The hostages were eventually released after wide condemnation.
Preceded by similar incidents, this attack led most government and private dailies to suspend their publication on March 12, 2012, in protest of what they described as “silencing the media.”
This suspension was accompanied by a protest in Martyr Square with participation by chief editors and officials of the Press Support and Encouragement Agency, as well as intellectuals. In their statements, protestors expressed objection to “involving media figures in the political struggle” as an excuse to silence freedom of expression “by force of arms.”
Angry statement
Nevertheless, Dar Ifta has not released any statement condemning these attacks, rather adopted a different attitude expressed in its Mufti’s statement issued on February 27, entitled “This is freedom? Where are the limits of God?” He described freedom in Libya as “too loose.”
The Mufti’s statement criticized Libya International TV Channel of the National Forces Alliance led by Dr. Mahmoud Jibril and accused it of “promoting the apostate Shiite doctrine” on the background of broadcasting a lecture by Dr. Adnan Ibrahim, entitled “Libya Between Gaddafi’s Madness and the Revolution Rationality,” despite the fact that the lecture does not refer to the Shiite doctrine at all and despite Ibrahim’s continuous denial of affiliation with it.
Libya International TV Channel’s anchor Reda Fhelboom considered the statement an incitement to harm him and his colleagues at the channel since they were threatened after its release.
Shocking words
In response, Libya International TV Channel issued a statement: “With great disappointment, we have received the Mufti’s shocking statement. Is not the Mufti aware that there is a fine line between infidelity and murder, and that accusation of infidelity is like a license to kill? Will he assume responsibility for his words?”
The channel demanded a public and explicit clarification for the Mufti’s accusations, stressing that it was not defending Adnan Ibrahim despite its condemnation of what it described as “judging individuals by appearances.”
The statement explains that the “annoying” fact about the Mufti’s statement is that it “linked malpractices to freedom, as if the freedom for which thousands have died was an alarming threat, and dangerously related the whole issue to religion.”
“Freedom is a unified system that would lose its value when fragmented. Thus, the Mufti is not entitled to classify individuals and even accuse them of infidelity,” the statement concluded, denouncing the “double standards” of judgments, especially since they came from the “supreme religious authority.”
Disagreements with the mufti
Fhelboom said the reason behind this attack on the channel is due to hosting guests who opposed the ideology of Dar Ifta, referring as an example to the broadcasted interview with economist Dr. Nuri Brion on the subject of Islamic banking system passed by the General National Conference (GNC) recently, in which Brion contradicted Dar Ifta’s opinion, saying, “Bank’s price cost is not Riba. It is better for interest to be clearly defined as in traditional banks rather than hidden as the case with Islamic ones.”
In addition, the channel addressed many issues such as imposing Hijab in Libya with Lawyer Amal Bo Qaiqis who defended unveiled women, and Dar Ifta’s Establishment Law with Mohamed Toumi who challenged its constitutionality during a broadcast aired on 23 February when he also criticized one of the Mufti’s statements which described the celebrations of the revolution’s anniversary as “nightclubs where men and women danced and played Western music.”
Identity thrive
The Mufti, says Ismail Alqriteley, a former journalist in Al Jazeera Network, is entitled to describe the media as “too loose” when it violates ethical and moral values of Islam, the country’s religion and source of legislation.
“I believe the media is not only too loose but also perverted since it does not commit to the professional code of ethics and lacks objectivity and neutrality. The attacks against the city of Bani Walid, for example, would have never occurred had it not been for media incitement which pressured the GNC,” he said.
Alqriteley also expressed his support for government’s interference to prevent media deviation based on the profession’s ethics and controls.
The concept of freedom of expression, said writer Fathi Ben Issa, “is ambiguous to those dealing with public affairs, is related to culture and the general mood of society, and demonstrates cultural and intellectual variation.”
“This ambiguity is clearly noted in Egypt where media production city is cordoned off and media figures are even described as Pharaoh’s magicians. Such is the case in Tunisia and Libya. These communities struggle for identity where each side tries to impose its vision of the state whatever the results, not to mention the trust crisis experienced by all. The road is long and dangerous,” he explained.
