The mufti of Egypt, Dr. Ali Jomaa, has issued a fatwa to the effect that deaths caused by speeding motorists should be treated as premeditated murder which is punishable by death.
The problem with this fatwa is that the mufti did not consult the Islamic Fiqh Academy in the Kingdom or any other body before issuing a ruling with far-reaching consequences.
In the past, the mufti has issued a fatwa which bans any dealings with countries launching attacks against Muslim states — Israel, the United States and Britain. It seems the fatwa ignored both the political reality and the prevailing conditions in the Muslim world.
Politically, countries such as Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon — all victims of aggression — have dealings with the US and Britain. Some have direct relations with Israel.
Conditions in the Muslim world suggest that it is incapable of boycotting those countries either now or in the immediate future. I don’t think the mufti meant to say that all the regimes in Muslim countries which maintain ties with aggressors are infidels. If he did mean that, it is tantamount to giving the green light to extremists to attack them. The man may not have been seeking media attention but he was far too quick in issuing the ruling.
I have no objection to issuing fatwas but when it comes to matters of direct concern to the nation and its present and future political stance, there must be a consensus involving experts who have carefully weighed the pros and cons of any move. If religious rulings deal with people’s day-to-day lives and transactions, no harm should be expected from such fatwas. In the absence, however, of a strong legal entity uniting all Muslims and since each Muslim state has its own mufti, ruling on basic issues entailing political and economic consequences and others affecting people’s convictions will bring more harm than benefit. Politicizing fatwas can prove very dangerous and disruptive.
— Arab News Local Press 13 November 2003
