Samir Sadek, Mamdouh Bitar:
Global movements found it necessary for humanity to have some kind of reference, to which it could return in certain conflicts between people due to certain differences between them, which in many cases led to unrest. Therefore, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was created, which was essentially founded on the recognition of the existence of differences among humans. These differences between the nature of one human being and the nature of another could lead to crises and produce problems. Therefore, a reference was found to be resorted to and returned to in these cases. In other words, the essence here was organizational, that is, organizing the management of diversity among humans. There is another declaration of human rights, the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights, which differs from the Universal Declaration in essence. If the essence of the Universal Declaration is the recognition of the existence of difference and the necessity of preserving pluralism among human beings, then the essence of the Muhammadan Declaration is different. It is a degrading essence explained by many jurists, among them the most enlightened, perceptive, and understanding was Al-Ghannushi, who considered man to be a naturally imperfect being who exists in a constant state of fluctuation between good and evil. Therefore, he is considered incapable and incapable of producing anything useful, such as the ability to control, manage, and dominate himself. Much jihadist aggression is expected from this creature, meaning that his clashes are eternally inevitable. This imperfect, hostile man does not know how to reconcile with himself and with others, because Muhammadanism does not find any possibility of reconciliation with others except by force, since they depend on the support of the Greatest Heavenly Conqueror. In short, the Muhammadan man is considered guilty by nature and constantly exists in a state of constant baseness. Here we marvel at the Creator’s statement that he created the Muhammadan man in the best image. He considered him to be among the best of mankind, i.e., the best of the nation, and then appointed him as His vicegerent on Earth. Is it reasonable that the All-Powerful would appoint such imperfect creatures as His vicegerents on Earth? In this regard, the Creator has presented strange and wondrous paradoxes. Therefore, we cannot consider these paradoxes to be of divine origin, i.e., the product of ignorant humans. In short, the difference between the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and the Islamic Declaration lies in its essence. The Universal Declaration considered human beings to be inherently good, while the Islamic Declaration considered them to be inherently evil. In other words, the difference lies in the view of human nature. There is a regulatory perspective, and there is a religious, contemptuous one. This difference in essence did not have a significant impact on the situation in the world, because the Universal Declaration was general, while the Islamic Declaration was local and not recognized by international courts and other international bodies. The so-called states that recognized the Universal Declaration had previously recognized the Islamic Declaration. In other words, recognition of the Islamic Declaration was merely formal. Furthermore, the entities that recognized the Islamic Declaration were not among the most important and influential states in the world. They were mostly rogue, corrupt, dictatorial entities that did not meet the conditions for “statehood” set by British Foreign Secretary Straw several years earlier, which the United Nations adopted, adding two additional conditions. The articles of the Muhammadan Declaration differ greatly from the Universal Declaration. Article 2 of the Muhammadan Declaration states that man is born free and is in no servitude except to God. This is not an easy matter, as the issue of whether man is born free or in chains has been the subject of long discussions since Plato and Socrates. In general, it can be said that man is born as a blank slate, and after his birth he may become free or a slave. The contradiction in Article 2 is due to the fact that man is born free but at the same time a slave. There is no difference here between slavery to the unseen or slavery to any other slave. Originally, slavery to God was only a fabrication. Slavery in reality was not for God but for God’s men of jurists. As for Article 5, it rejects everything outside the Sharia, meaning the result is the tyranny of the Sharia and the disappearance of man. There is no freedom of opinion or opposition. Freedom of opinion is the freedom of opinion of the Sharia. “The Sharia, with its basic and approved sources, is the only reference for interpreting and clarifying any article of this document. In case of disagreement, refer to the specialized scholars.” It is not necessary to analyze all the articles of this declaration. The other materials do not differ fundamentally from the materials mentioned
Ghannouchi sees, as can be inferred from any Wahhabi, that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights carries within it “secular features, or features of the human religion based on the priority of man in existence, and on his own making of any legislation that suits him, while the religious concept is keen to link all values to the law of God, which they consider the Creator and Owner of His creations. Here, the Muhammadan Declaration clashes with man, whom it considers a subordinate, owned, i.e., nationalized.” While in reality, man is the owner of his body, and has no need for any legislation outside his mind and will, and following the prophets and angels has only had disastrous results. The free man does not recognize the existence of any law or legislation that is not made by his mind. The religious man is a creature deficient in reason and needs help to return him to the methodology of a sociable life, for man is the creator and the role model.