A new and dangerous term is being deployed in Egypt to legitimise the suppression of debates about religion: "faith security".

The phrase was used this week by al-Azhar's Dean of Sciences in connection with the trial of TV presenter Islam El-Beheiry who has been sentenced to five years' jail on blasphemy charges.

The court case followed a complaint from al-Azhar, Egypt's supreme religious authority, that his discussion programme broadcast on a private TV channel made people "question what is certain [sic] in religion".

In the same way that security demands are often cited to justify restrictions on people's freedom, al-Azhar is now invoking them specifically to stifle the questioning of religious belief. Most Arab states already have measures in place to protect Islam – Algeria, for instance, has a long-standing law against "shaking the faith" of Muslims – but al-Azhar's efforts to treat the protection of belief as a security matter are particularly insidious.

In an article for Mada Masr, Heba Afify explains:

"In the current political climate, accusations or grievances are frequently tied to a question of 'security' in order to demonstrate their gravity, and justify subsequent legal actions.

"Al-Azhar scholars argue that any discussion of core religious issues that occur[s] outside the confines of their institution can endanger 'faith security', and thus society at large."

Afify quotes Amna Noseir, a professor of Islamic philosophy and doctrine at al-Azhar University, as saying that anything that "disrespects the beliefs of most people" could be considered a threat to "faith security":

"What I believe – which is a centuries-old inheritance, and which deserves to be believed and respected – should not be questioned. We have a significant legacy that's engraved in our belief system, and Islam al-Beheiry has recklessly assaulted this," Noseir argues.

According to another Azhar professor, Ahmed Koreima (who previously issued a fatwa against watching Beheiry's programme), "faith security" isn't simply about protecting beliefs from being challenged but should be broadened to embrace "Islamic cultural security", by which he means "protecting the core of Islam … which includes its roots, its core values and its legislative sources, and everything that guarantees protection from aggressors and slanderers".

The issue here is partly one of religious authoritarianism. The Sisi regime has put al-Azhar in charge of "reforming" Islam in Egypt – a project mainly intended to counter the Muslim Brotherhood and more radical Islamists but which also regards atheism, scepticism and liberal interpretations of Islam as forms of extremism.

In the context of the monopolistic mission that Sisi has assigned to al-Azhar, contributions from outsiders – and especially those such as Beheiry who are not officially recognised as "scholars" – are unwelcome.

Although Azharites seem to agree there is a need to control discussion of religion, opinions differ over what sort of input from non-scholars might be allowable – if any.

Prof Noseir told Mada Masr that "sensitive topics" such as those Beheiry raised on TV, including questions about the validity of the hadith (the sayings and traditions of the Prophet), can be discussed by society at large, but only "within certain established protocols, and using carefully chosen vocabulary". Prof Koreima, on the other hand, insists they are the exclusive realm of scholars.

This echoes some of the historic debates in Christianity about the rights of lay people (as opposed to clergy) to interpret their faith.The article in Mada Masr also notes that the principle of "faith security" is currently being applied to protect Muslims while Egypt's large Christian community remains largely unprotected from sectarian attacks.

Posted by Brian Whitaker
Thursday, 4 June 2015