Tunisia's adoption – 54 years ago this month – of the most protective women's rights legislation in the Arab world is increasingly used by President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali as a veil to hide his declining human rights record.
Tunisian women undoubtedly benefit from the pioneering personal status code, which abolished polygamy, instituted judicial divorce and required that marriage be based on mutual consent of the future husband and wife. Their enriching participation in the country's social and economic life is made possible by other groundbreaking reforms, also initiated by the late President Habib Bourguiba in the wake of independence from France in 1956.
Today, though, Tunisian women are not spared from the long and ruthless war on freedom of expression and association, of a kind unseen even under the French protectorate and which can no longer be camouflaged by the personal status code or Ben Ali's "achievements" or by western public relations firms.
The launch of this dirty war in the early 1990s coincided with new amendments to the personal status code and more rhetoric about Ben Ali's trumpeted commitment to women's rights, widely seen as an "attempt to project an image of modernity and democracy" while hiding another part of Tunisia's picture. The raging war at that time in neighbouring Algeria (between the military-backed government and armed groups infuriated by the cancellation in 1992 of the results of legislative elections the Islamists were poised to win) led many to overlook the merciless repression in Tunisia.
The first victims among women were scores of alleged supporters of two banned political opposition parties. They were jailed or held for interrogation, intimidated and threatened with prosecution and rape at police stations and the interior ministry, according to local and international groups. Most of them were close to or related to the jailed or exiled activists of the Islamist an-Nahda movement. A few others have been accused of supporting the Tunisian Workers' Communist party. None of the thousands of prisoners used violence or advocated the use of force to achieve their political goals.
The war on freedom of expression and association, which saw nearly 40 political detainees die under torture or of lack of medical care, never abated. Women from different walks of life, including academics, journalists, lawyers, medical doctors and students, are routinely harassed or assaulted by ubiquitous plainclothes police agents for seemingly harmless things such as signing a petition, or even for heading to meetings at the offices of authorised groups or to government agencies to register an NGO or apply for a licence to establish a newspaper or a radio station.
The right to establish media outlets seems to have become a privilege solely bestowed on Ben Ali's relatives and supporters. The last to enjoy such a privilege is one of Ben Ali's daughters, the owner of a business group, which received a licence to start broadcasting its new radio station, Shems FM, next month.
Repeated applications to establish a private radio station or a newspaper by many journalists, including Naziha Rejiba (a winner of the Committee to Protect Journalists international press freedom award) and Sihem Bensedrine, managing editor of the banned Kalima radio and magazine, have been ignored over the past years.
Women played an active role in the struggle for independence and a better status, and under Bourguiba campaigned against autocratic rule and discrimination and for bringing Tunisian legislation into conformity with international standards for women's rights. But they never came under the kind of Soviet-style persecution typical of Ben Ali's "new era".
Many of those who used to gather each Saturday at the Tahar Haddad club in Tunis nearly three decades ago to discuss ways to further protect women's rights or to contribute to the now-defunct feminist magazine, Nissa'a, have been forced gradually to retreat from public life. Haddad, who in 1930 authored a book, Our Women in the Shari'a and Society, still inspires women's rights advocates.
The widening repression and smear campaigns are not only engulfing female rights defenders and critical journalists and their families, but also women whose children, husbands and brothers have been jailed for political dissent or peaceful protests against unemployment and corruption or simply for covering these protests for a media outlet.
Even women inclined for professional reasons to keep away from public life, like Kalthoum Kennou, secretary-general of the democratically-elected board of the Association of Tunisian Magistrates (AMT), which was toppled by the government in 2005, have been facing with their families different forms of persecution for discreetly calling on Tunisian authorities to protect the independence of the judiciary. Kennou, who was assaulted in 2009 while performing her job at the Kairouan court, and other leading figures of AMT, including Wassila Kaabi, Raoudha Karafi and Leila Bahria, have been arbitrarily forced over the past five years to work hundreds of kilometers away from their families.
"If such a punishment is inflicted on honest magistrates whose sole crime is to defend the independence of the judiciary, which is one of the cornerstones of the republican regime, what would they do to powerless ordinary people?" Kaabi asked earlier this year during a meeting at the beleaguered and harassed Tunisian Association of Democratic Women.
Comments in chronological order (Total 46 comments)
25 August 2010 3:09PM
Sadly hugely unsurprising.
25 August 2010 3:14PM
Tunisia has the best guarantee for women's rights. Tunisian women undoubtedly benefit from the pioneering personal status code, which abolished polygamy, instituted judicial divorce and required that marriage be based on mutual consent of the future husband and wife. As long as this is not being changed, things are still better than any other Arab or Muslim country.
Women must fight to keep those rights. Anything less for the sake of Islam should be treated with suspicion. It starts with small steps and at the end there is no return. It is good that you highlight this infringement. Thank you.
25 August 2010 3:20PM
I think it sad the only reason why women have so many rights in Tunisia is because it is an authoritarian state,if it was a Democracy or Islamic theocracy i'm sure that it's women folk wouldn't have it anywhere near so good.
25 August 2010 3:26PM
Shalone
***As long as this is not being changed, things are still better than any other Arab or Muslim country. ***
What an utter tragedy for all women in any Arab or Muslim country then.
How can anyone with even a modicum of intelligence let alone humanity,deny that women absolutely deserve equal rights and opportunities?
It is simply obscene that such cultures still exist anywhere.
We are no longer living in the 8th C.
25 August 2010 3:27PM
The simplest way to "adjust attitudes" in this area is for the EU to start pressure on Tunisian exports to the EU. Or alternatively, a flight ban - that should focus the minds of the Tuisian rulers quite nicely.
At an individual level - while this goes on - don't take a holiday in Tunisia.
25 August 2010 3:50PM
"I think it sad the only reason why women have so many rights in Tunisia is because it is an authoritarian state,if it was a Democracy or Islamic theocracy i'm sure that it's women folk wouldn't have it anywhere near so good."
That's right Ricky, those damned democracies always denying women basic human rights etc etc
25 August 2010 3:56PM
SELAVY, I agree with you. I was just comparing women status with other Muslim countries and in this comparison Tunisia is still top. If you have to get excited turn to other countries where polygamy is allowed and women cannot walk outside their homes without a male 'protector', or can't drive. It is easy to blame west for handing out big contracts, but the movement for the rights of women must come from within. I say women should stop sleeping (having sex) with those men who want to imprison them again. You will how quickly men change their minds. Most of the men only listen to the penis requirements.
25 August 2010 3:59PM
Sadly, the attitude that 'At least things aren't as bad as they are in [some other country]' is pretty prevalent, even in the Western world, especially when people dare to examine their own backyards before (or while) critiquing foreign governments. The idea that there is simply no more advancement to be made in terms of women's rights, or that everyone should rest on their laurels while other, worse countries catch up, or that at the very least we should all complain very quietly and be happy for the rights we've got... not wonderful for progress, in Tunisia or anywhere else.
25 August 2010 4:14PM
This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
25 August 2010 4:49PM
This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
25 August 2010 5:38PM
@SELAVY
Maybe someone with a modicum of intelligence needs to educate themselves about what islam gave women fourteen hundred years before the Suffragette movement begain in the UK, and before the Christain church accepted that women had "Souls"
1. The right and duty to obtain education.
2. The right to have their own independent property.
3. The right to work to earn money if they need it or want it.
4. Equality of reward for equal deeds.
5. The right to express their opinion and be heard.
6. The right to provisions from the husband for all her needs and more.
7. The right to negotiate marriage terms of her choice.
8. The right to obtain divorce from her husband, even on the grounds that she simply can't stand him.
9. The right to keep all her own money (she is not responsible to maintain him or any relations).
10. custody of their children after divorce.
11. to refuse any marriage that does not please them
And most importantly
12. The right to get sexual satisfaction from her husband.
A right I'm sure that many women reading this post still have'nt manage to get. !
25 August 2010 6:06PM
one day women in the uk might even attain equal rights .. until then we might as well carry on bashing the muslims .. as our smokescreen
25 August 2010 6:22PM
Quest2008, Of the 12 listings, none fit to Islamic teachings. Are you making us look stupid? I have read quran and many scholars of Islam, including Maududi and Bokhari and have yet to find any indication, let alone instruction, which tells us what women want. Not a single sentence in Quran. In quran it says that women are like fields and you can water them whenever you want. Hardly human rights for fields. And does not say that women want fore play and how they should be sexually satisfied. Negative. Property rights equal to men: Negative. Men can have sex with infidel slaves without any marriage. All excepted. And custody of children after divorce? A woman gets a one time haq maher, that is all. If you agree to pay her 1000 if you divorce her, she gets that one time sum and then she can see how she can make both ends meet.
Are you wiser now? Or shall i carry on.
25 August 2010 6:45PM
I find this a rather elusive article. The problems invoked don't actually seem to centre around the women as *women* - but around the apparently autocratic nature of the government. There is no evidence here, I don't think, that women are treated any worse than men, or that women's rights are being eroded.
Quest2008 - your points seem to have little relevance. I'm interested in what rights women have,and in which countries, right now. You can't rest on your laurels!
25 August 2010 7:05PM
Kemal,
All fair enough. But how about us first adressing the de facto rights and opportunities open to Moslem women in the UK before having a go at Tunisia? .
Or, whilst we are on the subject, non Moslem women in the UK.
25 August 2010 7:22PM
The colonial-minded modern Brit just can't seem to stop lecturing the "natives" of other countries. Have you learned nothing from your vibrant multicultural society of today? Islamic women do not want your so-called Western women's "rights". If they did, they would have them. Stop oppressing the daughters of Allah with your presumptuous and imperialist attitudes about what they "should" have.
25 August 2010 11:11PM
@ shalone
@ Sarah8
Are you people for real ?
Do you really know so little about islam or the Muslim world ?
The tweleve points I listed are basic rights for women known to most teenage practicing Muslims. And implemented throughout the Muslim World for the last forteen hundred years.
As for having reading the Quran you obviously missed Surah Al Baqarah (Chapter 2) and surah Nisa and the numerous hadiths within Bukhari about honoring women.
If islam really is so oppressive to women as the media or so many on this forum like to portray then why in America for every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam.
Lets try to make this easy for you if you are genuinely are interested in finding the truth about Islam which to be frank I'm not sure you are. I suggest you start by having a look at the link below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvi-g88d5XI
A series of lectures about womens rights in islam.
25 August 2010 11:27PM
@shalone, as a Muslim, I am 100% sure all those are 100% Islamic teachings. You can find exactly a daleel (evidence) for each of the 12 points in either the Qur'an or Sunnah. I am no expert on Islam, but even I know that all these are 100% are Islamic teachings. What do you mean that the Qur'an doesn't tell what women wants? You mean like you would want the Qur'an to say women want shoes, make-up etc? The Qur'an isn't a book of everything that tells what every man and woman wants, or should do. It is just a relatively small book (half than the number of bible pages) and concentrates on important issues.
You are right that the Qur'an says women are like field (tilths) although you quoted the verse incorrectly (not surprising as everything you wrote is completely false) but do you know what it means, and do you know the context on which the verse was revealed? Often, people who think they know about Islam, take a verse as it is, don't know the context and have no idea what it means really. The exact verse is "Your wives are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth, when or how you will." This verse was revealed as the Jews in Medina at the time claimed to the Muslims that if one has sex with his wife from behind (in the vagina), their offspring will become cross-eyed. The verse was revealed to refute this claim. The tilth here is a metaphor to the womb, just as we sometimes use seeds as a metaphor to the male semen.
As for foreplay, you, the Islamic expert apparently doesn't even know what are the Islamic sources of Sharia. You presume Islamic shari'a comes only from the Qur'an. Allow me to educate you on this. Islamic shair'a has four main sources:
1. Quran
2. Hadeeth (Sunnah)
3. Ijma' (Consensus)
4. Ijtihad(Independent interpretation by a mujtahid, an expert in an Islamic law)
Things like foreplay are vastly discussed in hadeeth and the other sources. In fact, in my opinion, Islam has one of the most liberal views on sex and sexual discussion is soooo common in Islamic laws, compared to other religions, where it might get hushed. I can't be bothered to go to the details as I am not preaching here. Suffice to say that we had women asking the prophet about the ruling on female ejaculation (wet dream) more than 1400 years ago! No, I am not kidding but I will leave it to our Islamic expert to explain that to all of us.
You claim women have no property rights in Islam. Property rights in Islam is treated differently. Whatever a woman acquires in Islam, it always remains hers. Islam sees the man as the sole provider, so in Islam, even if the women earns a million dollar, she doesn't have to pay for the family upkeep. It is, repeat is, the sole responsibility of only and only the man to provide for the family. So whatever a wife acquires in marriage shall remain hers, from an Islamic point of a view. If they divorce, she will get, along with the dowry which is compulsory, whatever properties that belonged to her.
To be honest, you seem to have agenda, and the recommendations to your completely false post indicates either a misinformed public or people who don't care, and say "yeah, so it is Islam, it must be evil!" I wonder what your agenda in spreading all these lies? I will leave it to the readers to ponder.
25 August 2010 11:41PM
Resistance 1 Islamaphobs 0 :-)
26 August 2010 12:17AM
Quest2008 and Resistance it is you who have the agenda. Your agenda is to relentlessly defend your religion even if that means spreading lies and insulting any one who does not like your belief system and choses to say so in this 150 year old secular-liberal English newspaper.
Quest2008
The orthodox Islamic position on marriage, divorce, inheritance and custody is not open to debate, at least so far as it is decreed in the Koran. Sharia family law is inconsistent with the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the UN Declaration itself.
That is simply a fact. It is even accepted by the numerous Muslim countries who have entered reservations to the the above conventions, and created their own ones, to ensure that sharia law remains the main source of legal authority.
You don't have to like the idea of international human rights, but if we are to use them as a yardstick (and we do) then sharia law falls considerably short.
Resistance
Ijtihad is not used these days and has hardly ever been (perhaps you were thinking of qiyas?). Ijma is also only a secondary source, at best, as it cannot exist independently of the primary sources of the Koran and the hadith.
And what do the Koran and hadith provide for again? Let's refresh our memory what they say about women:
-That they may not marry a non-Muslim
-That as daughters they are to receive half the inheritance of sons
-that they should be subject to at least some degree of 'marriage guardianship'
-That they may not repudiate a marriage unilaterally, or divorce independently of a sharia tribunal
--that they may be legitimately subject to domestic violence in certain circumstances
-that they have custody of children only until the child reaches a certain age, at which time custody passes in law to the father
-that they may not marry more than one husband (whereas polygyny is legal, although not in Tunisia)
-that they are intrinsically inferior
From the 1950s onwards, Tunisia has done an admirable job of militating against these harsh, and 'divine' rules. Admittedly the inheritance rule has remained in place the whole time, as it must because it is so expressly stated in the Koran that no amount of interpretation can limit its effect.
Too bad that according to this TUNISIAN JOURNALIST author (note: he is not a "colonial-minded modern Brit," saxonamerican) it seems the place might be going backwards now.
And I'm sure Quest2008 and Resistance are quite happy to see it happen.
26 August 2010 12:27AM
Thanks for shedding some light on this deplorable situation. Every man or women should have the right to tell his/her government and their honorable/corrupt ministers to go fuck themselves.
All the rights of the world don't mean crap if they are just written on pieces of paper. As a heart-felt token of my regards, let me state with pleasure the following:
A Great and Glorious Fuck You to the Honorable President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia
Heymat, one free to speak his mind in the world of liberty.
26 August 2010 1:54AM
Any foreign national, regardless of origin, who publishes in the Guardian can only be considered an imperialist lackey.
26 August 2010 4:00AM
@Quest
We have the same situation here but the reason for conversion is that many undereducated non attractive indigenous women think that they will find a muslim husband this way otherwise they may be left on the shelf. Besides, they can cover up and hide their lesser attractions.
Why is Islam so focused on the sexual rights of muslims - the one thing that seems to be against the rights of women is marital rape? According to the Ahadith women cannot refuse sex (even if at the oven) and I think you left out the inference in the Koranic verse about women being tilth where it says "when and how you want".
Of course these things are not pointed out to the women who marry muslims until after the event, but given that they have converted only to attract a refugee husband that is probably all the the only sexual or marital relationship they will ever have in their life until the husband's citizenship is awarded which gives him access to the more wealthy land of OZ. Note, I say 'him' as the wives are usually divorced and left behind for the state to take care of whilst husband is off to try and find an attractive white girl on the land down under.
Sad but true.
26 August 2010 5:49AM
This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
26 August 2010 6:55AM
This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
26 August 2010 7:30AM
Resistance: So you are 100% sure. Obviously 100 does not reach those countries where women are treated like 2nd rate humans. You should spread your truth to those women in Saudi or many parts Islamic world, where they are not allowed even to leave their homes.
Ali, son in law of Muhammad used to say: Women are evil, but a necessary evil. Implying men need them for sexual satisfaction. Another Calif, Umar was of he opinion that men who spend too much time with women become evil too. Shall I go on?
This bit about why quran used the word fields for women, is absolutely wrong. Quran is not a book for one period but for all the times, according to Muslims. So it is ridiculous to claim it had something to do with some local Jewish statements. And in Qur'an there is no reference to your claim what Jews said. Did you invent it? Quran contains clear messages and if the above had any reason it should have stated it. I think readers know who is telling the truth. And if it was because of what Jews said, is this verse not valid anymore? Careful, if you say no, you will be considered a kafir.
Your accusation of Jews claim is an insult to Jews. Perhaps blasphemy. But no blasphemy and Islamophobia is used by you know who.
26 August 2010 7:53AM
What I find peculiar is before Islam was invented and when Mohammed was a young man --- his wife Khadija was independent, business-owning, educated, literate, free to choose her own husband (a young man in her employ -Mohammed) or remain freely single and flourishing. So the rights of women seem to have been well-established prior to Islam being invented and then we get Islam and it is all burkas and bollocks and women as the property of men and cover yourself up (because the men have suddenly turned into uncontrollable rapists during Mohammed's lifetime or something), child marriage etc. etc. etc.
When they had such rights previously how on earth did they go backwards so far, so fast?
Was it purely brutal repression from the new Islamists? Was it do this or we kill you and/or rape you - ergo you have no choice? This is the new law and we are taking away all your rights and if you don't like it, here's the back of my fist or the edge of my sword. Oh and by the way, darling, it is all 'for your own good'. I do it because I care......
What on earth happened?
26 August 2010 8:56AM
And we will have the lefties and islamicists telling us that it's their own choice !!!
26 August 2010 9:16AM
@quest - No I'm *not* particularly interested in Islam or the role of women in Islam because I don't think the teachings of religion should have any impact on the position of women in law. If Islam was progressive at the time, great, but the teachings you mention have been equalled and overtaken. The law in America ensures (pretty much, give or take) that women are treated equally. So there is no disincentive to convert. But although Tunisia sounds quite progressive from the point of view of women's rights, other Muslim countries are much less favourable. If I ever comment on something to do with Islam it's more usally to moan about bigots, disagree with minarets, burkas etc being banned, and to deplore the hysterical response to GMZ or halal KFC. Sorry, but illogical responses like yours just provide fuel for the antimuslim bigots. (There goes my chance of getting 'recommended'!)
26 August 2010 9:31AM
It's hilarious this constant struggle to seclarize Muslim societies. It's a choice of secular tyranny, that allows women the sort of social rights that Westerners consider sacrosant, but at the cost of political repression (think Algeria and Turkey's military, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Saddam-era Iraq) of varying degrees of brutality; or give the people a choice and they choose Islamic laws, which curtail the social freedoms of women. What to do as a freedom-loving Western liberal..?
26 August 2010 9:55AM
@Resistance and Quest 2008
You sound like you are trying to get Westerners approval for Islam. Why not accept the reality that islam is actually a prison for both men and women? A prison of the faithful's choosing and it certainly wouldn't appeal to most people as they don't have that intangible thing called faith. Westerners don't respect people who try and use double-talk to try and impress them.
26 August 2010 11:21AM
This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
26 August 2010 11:48AM
I am I am Tunisian and I agree that the situation regarding civil liberties is degrading.
However I find it a tad cynical to describe the outrageous abuses committed by the government as an attack on women rights. No they are not, they are attacks on HUMAN RIGHTS, they just happen to affect women as much as men. As far as I can tell there are no plans to retract gender-equality laws.
I understand that squeezing a box in the "OMG women's rights are backtracking" may mobilise more people than a post on plain old political rights. It's sad and cynical.
That said, women's rights are indeed regressing, certainly not because of political repression, but because of a revival of Islam and a renewed piety in the general population. Religion is, has been and will be the darkest and more powerful force of female subjugation. A dictatorial regime, like malaria, simply doesn't care about your gender.
26 August 2010 12:10PM
I agree - making the a post about women was unhelpful and distracting. Many unpleasantly authoritarian regimes have been quite egalitarian from a gender perspective - off the top of my head I'd say the Soviet Union and Ba'athist regime in Iraq fell into that category. Women suffered - but only (on the whole) in the same way men suffered.
26 August 2010 12:16PM
Religion is, has been and will be the darkest and more powerful force of female subjugation.
As soon as people start turning to hate, the first victims of their evilness and hatred always tend to be women.
Another thread here on the comment section re. the Congo,details the indiscriminate rape of women and children for no particular reason except that these people are filled with violence and hatred and have (must have surely) somewhere along the lines been brutalised.
It is really sad but I can't understand this sudden surge in anger and fear and hatred. When did this all start, this ramping up of Islamisation and rhetoric and equally the trumpeting of capitalism and Western values? As an only either/or not both option?
Is it ALL generated from Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia --- if so, that is one powerful piece of hate rhetoric machinery! The devil himself must be spinning it!
Perhaps we need a third world war - and of course it is hard to get people to fight each other, if they are all getting along perfectly well so this is the preliminary stages, why must we always seem to have to FIGHT and kill and so on and so forth ........................... and with such self-righteousness too. :-(
26 August 2010 12:34PM
@ Sarah8
Having seen two detailed posts on Womens rights in Islam and a link to a series of lectures outlining women role in Islam you still do'nt get it.
The fact is there is'nt a "Muslim Country" like there is'nt a "Christian Country" in the World, there are Muslims and Christains inhabiting these countries.
My point is that for practising Muslims living in any country a womens rights are encorporated at the core of her religious belief.
@ Others
As a "westerner" the phrase "rightwing trolls" comes to mind !
As I suspected there is no genuine desire to engage in a genuine exchange of idea's. The objective is to demonise Islam and Muslims.
I'll let the readers judge for themselves.
26 August 2010 1:35PM
Quest2008 - you brought up Islam, not me. The main point in my first comment had nothing to do with Islam. It doesn't really matter what rights are incorporated into the core of one's religious belief if the state doesn't honour those rights. I think it's disingenuous to say that there are no Muslim or Christian countries, particularly when Islam is at the core of Iran's whole system - it's called the Islamic republic of Iran!
26 August 2010 4:47PM
Sarah8,
The article is about the use by a dictator of a legislation promulgated in 1956 to protect women's rights as a smokescreen to hide his rising attacks on human rights and promote his image in western capitals. Over the past two decades, the lack of free speech and toerance for critical thinking everywhere, including schools, led to the emergence of young people often less open-minded than their parents and less inclined to get involved in public actions or oppose the rising tyranny and injustice.
While in other countries in the region like Egypt and Morocco, women seem gaining more ground and paying less price for expressing themselves and criticizing their respective governments, highly educated Tunisian women are persecuted and harassed and called names by Ben Ali's plainclothespolice and media. Why should the price for the right to freedom of expression or association be much higher in Tunisia than Egypt, Morocco or Lebanon?
Christenj and Moretheylie,
The main issue is autocratic rule. All religions have been used over the past centuries to persecute, enslave and kill men and women. Islam is still used by dictators to deny and particularly women basic human rights. These dictators keep paving the way for chaos and ignorance and consequently for the emergence of frustrated and humiliated young people easily influenced by fanatics and inclined to take the law into their hands.
The main obstacle to freedom and better life for men and women in Tunisia and elsewhere is dictaorship. The situation of men and women will not improve as long as Ben Ali and his autocratic autocrats are in power and paving the way for their relatives or cronies to take over from them. The support they are getting from Western governments allegedly to combat terrorism or preserve stability in the region will in the long run make matters worse.
26 August 2010 5:30PM
Christenj and Moretheylie,
The main issue is autocratic rule. The main obstacle to freedom and better life for men and women in Tunisia and elsewhere is dictaorship.
What can you do? What are you thinking of doing?
I have always thought that the American idea of eight-year-terms max is the best idea I have ever heard. Power corrupts. Even if you have the noblest heart at the beginning, it is extremely hard not to get corrupted. In fact, there is a saying from somewhere "If you want to test a man's character don't give him obstacles, give him power".
I wish we would have mandatory only eight-year terms in the UK. Perhaps we can consider it. Everyone can see it - longer than eight years and the majority of leaders start to go completely nuts. They just can't take longer than that.
26 August 2010 5:53PM
Christinej,
I totally agree with you on this. But this is much more urgent in countries where both the legislative branch an the judiciary are under the thumb of a dictator.
There is an urgent need to continuously campaign to limit terms in office to two 4 or 5 years max. everywhere. In Tunisia, the ruling party and police are currently orchestrating a campaign aimed at changing the constitution to allow Ben Ali to run for a sixth term in 2014! Ben Ali has been in power since 1987; his neighbour and close friend Gaddafi since 1969; Mubarak since 1981; Saleh of Yemen since 1978!
26 August 2010 6:04PM
Is there an opposition party in Tunisia? (please excuse my enormous ignorance...)
26 August 2010 7:34PM
Don't worry. Many in Tunisia do not know that there are "opposition" parties. Because either they are totally in the pocket of the country's dictator or too scared to openly denounce his autocratic and corrupt rule. There are at least 7 "opposition" parties acknowledged by the government. Some of them have been established by Ben's cronies and flatterers.
Five of these rather small parties have seats at the chamber of deputies overwhelmingly dominated by Ben Ali's RCD. The less obedient of them, Ettajdid Movement (former communist party), has less seats. Two other "opposition" parties, PDP and FDTL, have been denied access to parliament because of their lack of enthusiasm, as far as praising Ben Ali's "achievments."
The most critical parties, such as the Islamist An-naha movement and other secular parties, are simply banned and their leading figures are in jail or under house arrest or in exile.
26 August 2010 10:03PM
Perhaps because Islam permits a man to have up to four wives at one time.
U.S. state laws prohibit bigamy, but they cannot prevent marriages recognized solely by Islam.