Thank you so much. And as allow for the warm welcome and indeed, thank you so much for the invitation.
It's an absolute pleasure to be here with you today. And thank you also to those who joined us today.
Give considering the Zoome fatigue that we are all experiencing, it means a lot.
And I hope that this will be worth your while. I'm really excited for the opportunity to share with you the case of the women in mosques in Turkey
and what kinds of questions this case raises about women's human rights and more specifically,
women's rights to freedom of religion or belief,
and how international human rights law actually deals with this kind of lesser infringements of women's rights.
My presentation is based on the draught article I'm writing for the Religion and Human Rights Journal.
My colleague Roger Fuzzily and I are co editing a special double issue for the Religion and Human Rights Journal on Women's Religious Freedom,
Religion and Law, which will be published in twenty twenty one.
So I will share my presentation with you.
I hope this will make it more interesting. So first, a little bit about my interest in this topic.
I have been intrigued by the women in mosques campaigns since its beginning in 2017,
not only because it seems such a brave and sincere way of engaging with a practical question that of the space allowed for women in mosques.
But it also spoke volumes about the place of women in mosques.
The lived experiences of women who gave their voice to the campaign raised many questions about the relevance of human rights to this issue.
And I became interested as a researcher. The case presents a good opportunity to test the effectiveness of human rights law,
to address what Professor Frances Red-Eye calls the lesser infringements of the lesser infringements.
I'll come to this in a bit later in the presentation. But I'll just say briefly that the lesser infringements of women's rights based on
religious freedom arguments may be considered acceptable under human rights law,
largely relying on the autonomy of religious institutions. But it is generally accepted that this is not a blank cheque.
But the question I'm interested in is how and to what extent international human
rights law provides the tools to scrutinise this sphere usually afforded an autonomy.
And since it's difficult to talk about these things in abstract,
talking about it in relation to a specific case provides lots of opportunities to learn as well.
This is the why for this study. And some of the key points I will look at today will be a description of the women in mosques, campaign or movement.
And briefly, we will look at the Turkish legal framework, the applicable aspects of it,
and key provisions of international human rights law and more specifically, freedom of religion and our belief and non-discrimination.
And I will have some concluding remarks or concluding questions.
So the Web site of the women in mosques defines it as a campaign that was started
by a group of Muslim women with a view to improve the place of women in mosques.
So I'm not including any comments in this part of the presentation.
I'm just really relaying the information provided in the Web site and in the social media accounts, I think.
Yeah. So since 2000,
seventeen groups of women meet in mosques to identify the problems that women encounter in mosques and discuss what how they could be solved.
And the goals seem to be two fold. Open the ways for women to more effectively participate in the mosque community.
And this includes changes or problems related to physical conditions and the social environment.
And here you see a picture of a typical room that is allocated for women's prayers.
It's kind of a bit like a storage room.
Also, no view. And yeah, it might be cold.
And this is this is a picture I've taken from the Twitter account of women in mosques.
And this is a typical way of information sharing for the women in mosques.
Members of this group that whenever they go to a mosque and see a problematic space, they posted on the Twitter account or other social media venues.
So when it comes to the physical conditions,
they find that the places that are allocated for women are inadequate and mostly unclean and disorderly spaces are seen fit for women,
and not all the mosques have clean, free and open, accessible ablution rooms so needed for the ritual cleansing before the prayers.
And where the space, for example, is on the upper floor, upper levels of the mosque.
They tend to be that the stairs leading up to the room tend to be very steep and narrow and making it hard for the elderly,
disabled and also women with children difficult to access the room, especially if they have, for example, strollers.
And inside the mosque and the mosque community are often not cannot be seen.
And therefore, this makes it difficult for the women to feel part of the community,
mosque community and enjoy actually the beautiful whole prayer hole that the men are enjoying.
And yet here again in the picture, you can see how it is very much a limited view indeed.
And they are also saying that the social environment is problematic and needs improvement in Turkey, in the mosques.
There is usually private security personnel present and they can limit the movement of the women in mosque, for example.
They can tell them not to stand here, not to move there, not to talk here and sit there or go to this specific place.
And so there are times to move within the mosque or see the main assembly hall are often countered with
insults or harsh reactions by the man their for their prayers or by the imam or by the security staff.
And this as a result, the women feel uneasy in worship and they feel excluded from the mosque community.
And the their demands. They have very specific demands.
They would like to see that they move the offices, which are thus as responsible for the administration of a mob of mosques in a given city.
They would like the mufti offices to create a centralised complaints mechanism.
They would like to see the mosque staff trained about these issues,
and they would like to see the reorganisation of the mosques physical capacity for to accommodate the whole mosque community,
obviously, which includes them. And they would like to see the rebuilding of a mosque culture that is inclusive and that a dialogue is
started with those who feel that they are treated unfairly and that they also become a part of the.
Solution in their third year. They have already had a number of meetings with different Mufti's and also with the presidency of religious affairs,
which is responsible for all the mosques in Turkey, and they have been collecting the complaints and also archiving the experiences of women.
And they are in the process of creating a Web site where women can review
different mosques and give them points in relation to the very different aspects.
So a few observations. The Women in Masks campaign.
The demands. They don't really include demand to pray in.
For example, a mixed group of men and women. Or they don't demand to see female imams.
So actually, their demands are very specific and very much in line with the theological framework that's usually accepted in in Turkey.
That is, men and women pray in separate, separate sections of the mosque.
Yet they still felt the need for this campaign.
And the campaign indeed was met with mixed reactions.
According to the women in mosques Web sites,
thousands of women interacted with them and said that these demands actually also resonate with them and that they should have shown solidarity.
But they also have been criticised a lot.
For me, it's interesting to observe that this kind of social activism is coming from within religious community.
And it's very much based on religious arguments and a general reference to justice.
And also in. And many of the articles that one finds on the Web site,
arguments for the women's presence in the mosques is related to the social standing of women in every other aspect of social life.
So they would say that women are already present in every aspect of life outside of the mosque and they should also be present in the mosque.
And there is no explicit reference to the international human rights law framework and also the when the members have not made any complaints,
have not actually utilised any of the national or international legal remedies.
And this I was really curious about this because I thought that actually utilising a human rights.
Discourse would strengthen their case. And when I try to understand why this was not the case and I spoke to more.
Close, closer observers to the movement. This is what I understand.
First of all, they may not be very familiar with international human rights law framework,
and thus it's not within their framework of reference and they may not know the international human rights compliance control mechanisms,
how they work. So they are not utilising them. But also, I understand that actually utilising this kind of discourse could involve some risks.
And this relates to the alienating factor of international law references.
They find that this. As far as I understand, it may lead to more accusations they might receive from their critics.
It would be like, oh, this. This group is complaining about us to Europe or to western areas.
So there is kind of this possibility of being accused.
And they also find that maybe this arguing for the women's presence,
equal presence in the mosques with through religious arguments could fill a void because often secular
women's groups are using international human rights references for the case of women's rights.
But it is rare to find that religious arguments are actually put forward for these kinds of issues.
And they feel that in that sense, they might be actually filling a void.
I can talk a little bit more about the reactions to this group if that comes up in the questions, but now I'll move on to the national law.
So in Turkey. We have a constitutional protection of freedom, of religion or belief.
And also, this right is protected is through various provisions in the legislation.
The principle of equality before law is protected under Article 10 and Article 24 protects the rights to freedom of conscience and religion.
Although the provision in our Constitution is much more narrowly defined in comparison to,
for example, Article nine of the European Convention of Human Rights.
In the recent years, the Constitutional Court has said that the provision will be interpreted in in line with the European Convention on Human Rights.
So it's it actually affords protection to a fairly broad range of activities or acts of worship or acts of teaching and observance and practise.
And also in the Turkish constitution provides.
Well, under the Turkish constitution, Article nine, international human rights treaty provisions supersede national law wherever there is a conflict.
The presidency of religious affairs is on the books.
Is the constitutionally established public body, which administers all mosques in Turkey.
It has its own law. And currently, as of end of 2019, there are eighty nine thousand two hundred fifty nine mosques.
And all mosques have to be administered by the presidents of religious affairs and also under Turkish criminal code.
Article one 115. It's a criminal offence to prevent individuals, individual or collective worship,
by force or threat or any other unlawful means that would result in prison sentence.
And it's also a criminal offence to interfere in and attempt to change the lifestyle once lifestyle emanating from their beliefs,
thoughts and or convictions. So we see a national protection provided for freedom of worship for everyone looking at international provisions.
Of course, the first and most fundamental principle to start with is the right to freedom of religion or belief is everyone's rights,
including women, men, LGBTI plus persons or children.
And when this right is restricted, all infringements must be justified in order to be permissible.
So when restricting human rights, when restrictions on human rights are scrutinised,
provisions related to restrictions need to be applied to both states and religious or belief groups if they have regulatory powers.
And it's also important to mention Sedol and articles one and two, the Convention on Elimination of All Kinds of Discrimination Against Women.
Article one describes discrimination in Article two provides measures policy measures that states
need to take in a wide range of areas in order to ensure women are not discriminated against.
Here, I would like to refer to a number of developments that have taken place in the last few years,
looking closer to the interaction between religious freedom, religion, women's rights.
So this great report written by Mozilla Women and Religious Freedom actually makes the distinction of harmful practises and lesser infringements.
So on the one hand, we know that freedom of religion or belief cannot be used as an argumentation to to continue with harmful practises.
So this will not be acceptable under international human rights law.
And today, our case doesn't really deal with harmful practises, but more with what Frances Red-Eye refers to as lesser infringements.
So can freedom of religion or belief be used as the basis for violating other,
less extreme rights to women's equality, for example, in relation to women's access to places of worship?
Women's roles within religious communities are personal status codes that restrict their equality or obligatory dress codes, for example.
And this this is the area that interests me.
So the the women in mosques, the demands and the problems that the members of the women in mosques encounter, if they were to become a legal question.
This is the area that they would be located in.
So they would be considered this lesser infringements of their freedom of religion or belief.
So how to scrutinise lesser infringements?
This this is this is the question.
And I looked at the two reports published by the UN Special Rapporteur is the one in 2013.
By the then special rapporteur, Hina Bielefeld looked at freedom of religion or belief and equality between men and women.
And when in his report, he looks at these kinds of questions, the kinds of questions that we are dealing with.
The key interpretive into two tools seemed to be autonomy of a religious institution.
So states cannot interfere in the autonomy of religious institutions so they can determine how the internal affairs are ordered,
which also includes, obviously, how worship is structured and the rights to dissent.
So everyone should have the right to dissent, to the practises within the religious community.
And the state has a responsibility to protect the dissenters.
And the other related responsibilities to protect the rights of the dissenters, to establish a new or religious new religious, our belief communities.
But beyond that,
it appeared that the autonomy sphere seemed fairly broad in the two thousand twenty report of the UN Special Rapporteur Ahmed Shaheed.
A look at freedom of religion or belief and gender equality,
and building up on the 2013 report and adding that when this dissenting is not so straightforward,
it can be it can have very detrimental effects on people who are dissenting or who will have to leave,
or their only option if their only option is to leave the religious community.
This is not a very clean cut solution to the problem.
So while not really providing a very practical way of dealing with such situations,
the special rapporteur emphasises that the rights of individuals should be protected even within the groups.
By creating an enabling environment where dissenters are protected against
incitement to violence and are able to assert their agency through the exercise of.
Fundamental human rights, which includes all the range of human rights,
basically including freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression and freedom from coercion.
So how to how to apply this to the case at hand?
This is my last slide, and I am not.
I am not offering us solution here, but I'm maybe offering different questions.
So these interpretive tools, which I mentioned, amongst others, autonomy, right.
To exit protection of dissenters. How would they apply to the case of women in mosques if it were to become a legal case?
And also, what does the case of the women in mosques demonstrate in terms of the nature of these tools?
Yeah. What does it say about the tools that we have? Are they adequate and practical?
There are certainly some safeguards, but also I think the case raises some questions or similar cases as raise important questions.
First, I would like to highlight the impact of the of the general measures that states have
to take in order to eliminate discrimination against women in every area of life.
So which comes from the set? Said all Article two, because as I said before,
the women in mosques members often referred to be women being present in every social area of life outside of the mosque.
So they see them in the workplace. They see them in the parliament.
They see them in in the school everywhere outside.
So there is a certain freedom that women have achieved outside of the mosque.
And this this, in a way, it seems to me, trickles down or permits to the religious sphere.
So it's it has an impact on the religious sphere without being directly related to the religious sphere.
So that that is one thing that's it seems important to me.
Secondly, states have the obligation to protect everyone's right to worship, including access to places of worship.
And if there is a different treatment, this whether this can be objectively justified, this needs to be shown by states.
So if there is an obstacle before women accessing places of worship.
This is not automatically. This would not be seen in the sphere of autonomy of the religious institution,
but that there needs to be some questions that need to be asked to show why this is the case.
And this is particularly important in the case of Turkey, I think, because in Turkey, the present.
Over the places of worship. So the state responsibility is even more in in the case of Turkey because it is Knot's.
Solely up to the religious communities to determine how individuals or groups access the place of worship.
So. There is these tensions about access to places of worship may be explained by theological considerations about women's
place in a mosque and their role in the mosque community between those who have regulatory powers and the dust,
those who dissent to to their position.
So both of them. The last report of the UN special rapporteur refers to autonomy of religious institutions.
But I, I would like to say that actually none of the human rights treaties or provisions refer to autonomy of religious institutions.
The the Human Rights Committee's general comment 22 refers to freedom in the entire internal
affairs of internal affairs and freedoms related to Inter Grill acts integral to worship.
So I would refrain from extensively using the term autonomy of religious institutions, which which sounds a bit rigid to me.
I would like to question that and ask whose autonomy we are talking about.
It would be more helpful to look at the autonomy of the community and who actually makes up the community.
So maybe a bit more scrutiny about the concept of autonomy would help.
In. Is scrutinising the legitimacy of the infringements and protecting the dissidents.
Obviously, this is a very strong safeguard coming from the international human rights provisions.
They need to be protected against physical harm, bullying, insults and threats.
And the rights to exit needs to be looked at more closely.
And this is what I think the latest report of the U.N. special rapporteur is highlighting,
that this is not seen as a very clean solution as it's it's it seems in theory there is a positive
obligation on the states to ensure that this positive possibility is a safe possibility.
And, of course, training of religious personnel is also an.
Especially in the case of chart. Turkey is an important one because, again, all the imams are trained by that and the public institutions.
So there is also a greater positive obligation on the Turkish authorities to
ensure that they they do not endorse any bullying or insults against dissidents.
And they understand the gender dimension of freedom, of religion or belief.
And finally, I would like to point to the procedural aspects of decision making within religious communities.
And here what I mean is when we look at the different cases and here I'm looking at the women in mosques group,
it's it's possible to see that actually there are ways of participation for women in the administration of mosques,
which is disconnected from their religious authority.
For example, all of the mosques have associations which take care of the mosque or are responsible for the physical spaces.
And this is not necessarily all I'm not saying it's totally secular institution, but it is distinct from the religious authority.
And women can be represented in these associations.
So that might be, for example, one other way off, including women's voices and demands in the running of place of worship,
which then has an impact on the social environment. The worship takes place.
As I said, maybe I'm not answering the whole I'm not solving the whole puzzle, but I am just raising some more questions about.
The way autonomy is granted to religious institutions.
Maybe this is not so clear in the international human rights provisions that protect freedom of religion or belief for all.
Thank you so much for your attention. And over to Nancy.
Thank you, man.
This theme of protest within a religious framework is one that has come up in in various guises in the seminars we've had over the last 10 years.
You perhaps? Yes. The puzzle remains because the puzzle has different solutions and approaches,
and each of them has costs and benefits and a variety of audiences and allies.
But it's indeed a very intriguing and interesting case.
Thank you so much. I mean, I think just the sheer numbers of participants from so many continents speaks to how much we
appreciated your topic and the way in which you were able to engage us and how you present it.
It's also interesting that we have a very coherent theme through this this term and our seminars.
So on the 18th of November, also Wednesday at two o'clock.
You're very welcome to join Benjaman. Who also asked the question?
Benjamin will be addressing God does not discriminate. Inclusive mosque politics in France and the UK.
So I hope you all be able to join us.
And I hope you'll you'll join a virtual clap of appreciation for Mina and a virtual having a cup of coffee together after the talk.
Thank you so much, me. Thank you, everybody, for your active participation.
And take care. Thank you very much.