The Quran and passive support for jihadism explained by Fagan J in R v Bayda ; R v Namoa (No 8)
by Ganesh Sahathevan
(Source: Formation and Dissolution of Terrorist Cells:A Process Model and Simulation;Introduction and Executive Summary)
See first :
What is AG Speakman, responsible for keeping us safe from terrorism ,doing about passive supporters of terrorism?
ISIS recruitment & training in Australia-An example of passive support for jihadi activities
Now see,this excerpt from the recent decision of the Supreme Court NSW in R v Bayda ; R v Namoa (No 8) [2019] NSWSC 24
which is worth reading in full:
Terrorists’ reliance on verses of the Quran to support an Islamic duty of religious violence has been seen with more or less clarity in a number of NSW and Victorian cases: see R v Khaja (No 5) [2018] NSWSC 238 at [72]- [78], [98], [101], [122]. The many Australian Muslims who wish to live in peace with the whole community may reflect that if Islam accepts the entire Quran as Allah’s eternal instruction to believers, without explicit repudiation of verses which ordain intolerance, violence and domination, that unqualified acceptance will embolden terrorists to think they are in common cause with all believers and indeed that they are the spearhead of the religion. The scriptural support for the terrorists’ perceived obligation of jihad cannot be rebutted by Australian courts or law enforcement authorities. If the verses upon which the terrorists rely are not binding commands of Allah, it is Muslims who would have to say so. If Australian followers of the religion, including those who profess deep knowledge, were to make a clear public disavowal of these verses, as not authoritative instructions from Allah, then the terrorists’ moral conviction might be weakened.
END
What is AG Speakman, responsible for keeping us safe from terrorism ,doing about passive supporters of terrorism?
ISIS recruitment & training in Australia-An example of passive support for jihadi activities
Now see,this excerpt from the recent decision of the Supreme Court NSW in R v Bayda ; R v Namoa (No 8) [2019] NSWSC 24
which is worth reading in full:
Terrorists’ reliance on verses of the Quran to support an Islamic duty of religious violence has been seen with more or less clarity in a number of NSW and Victorian cases: see R v Khaja (No 5) [2018] NSWSC 238 at [72]- [78], [98], [101], [122]. The many Australian Muslims who wish to live in peace with the whole community may reflect that if Islam accepts the entire Quran as Allah’s eternal instruction to believers, without explicit repudiation of verses which ordain intolerance, violence and domination, that unqualified acceptance will embolden terrorists to think they are in common cause with all believers and indeed that they are the spearhead of the religion. The scriptural support for the terrorists’ perceived obligation of jihad cannot be rebutted by Australian courts or law enforcement authorities. If the verses upon which the terrorists rely are not binding commands of Allah, it is Muslims who would have to say so. If Australian followers of the religion, including those who profess deep knowledge, were to make a clear public disavowal of these verses, as not authoritative instructions from Allah, then the terrorists’ moral conviction might be weakened.
END
Comments
Post a Comment