Maryam Namazie left Iran as a refugee as a result of the suppression of the Iranian Revolution by Islamism. Now settled in Britain, she has worked in a number of fields of human rights. As a leader of apostates from Islam, she has received many threats from Islamists. She is a rights activist, commentator and broadcaster. She is the Campaign Organiser for Iran Solidarity, which has been formed in July 2009 to mobilise support and stand with the people of Iran against the Islamic regime of Iran. She is also spokesperson for Equal Rights Now - Organisation against Women's Discrimination in Iran, the One Law for All Campaign against Shari’aLaw in Britain and the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, which is a MO of IHEU .                                                                                 

IHN: You are well known for your work in setting up and running the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain. Did you have a Muslim upbringing?

Maryam Namazie: I had quite an open-minded upbringing, even though my father’s upbringing had been quite strict. My last name actually comes from the word namaz which means “prayer”. His father was a clergyman and he had to pray several times a day. To this day, he has never touched wine, nor had pork, so his upbringing was quite different from mine. I didn’t really feel much pressure when I was being brought up.

IHN: Can you explain the development of your views on Islam?

Maryam Namazie: It’s hard, because I can’t really think of a specific time and place when I changed my mind. It was a gradual process, but it was the result of having lived under the Islamic Republic of Iran and felt its effects. For many people who are brought up in a certain religion, they may never feel the need to publicly renounce it, as it has very little impact on their lives. However, when you’re confronted with religion and political power, it becomes a different phenomenon. So it was the result of the whole process of flight, and then working for refugee rights, that started me thinking about what Islamic power really means for people. I gradually realised that it was something I was opposed to. There was no question of converting to another religion: I realised that all religions were fundamentally the same.

IHN: What would you say are the differences between Islam as manifest in Iran and elsewhere in the world?

Maryam Namazie: A lot of apologists will say that what’s happening in Iran is not really Islam. Other people will argue that stoning, for example, isn’t Islamic and that Islam is all about choice. They will also say that there are different types of Islam all over the world. But the reality is that, if Islam is different between one country and another, it is because of the secular and Humanist movements in those countries, the progressive social movements that have pushed back religion’s role in the public sphere, and it is in that sense that some places seem better. What’s important about Iran is that there is actually a very strong secular Humanist movement there against Islamism and if it succeeds it will have huge consequences internationally.

IHN: What are the principal political influences you have encountered?

Maryam Namazie: Definitely, it’s been socialism. I came across the Worker Communist Party of Iran when I went to Turkey to help Iranian refugees there. I hadn’t heard of them before. The party’s founder, Mansoor Hekmat, impressed me as profoundly Humanist, and I felt I was finally at home with the party’s stance on the issues I cared about, such as opposition to the death penalty, human beings being sacred, and religion and culture not being so, and also the right to freedom of expression, secularism, equality and so on. So socialism has definitely been an important influence in my life. I think socialism is fundamentally Humanist. The Soviet Union and China aren’t true reflections of socialism. Communism has gained a bad name because of what I would call state capitalism rather than socialism, but I think fundamentally socialism is about equality not just before the law but socio-economically too. I don’t think it is idealistic to demand that people’s needs and welfare come first rather than profit. The Iranian revolution too has had a tremendous impact on my life. Though it was suppressed by the Islamic movement, its effects are very much felt today, just as we still feel the effects of a French revolution. Coming to Britain 10 years ago and becoming more involved with the Humanist and secularist movements has also had an important impact on my life.

IHN: What would you say most needs changing in Britain?

Maryam Namazie: Obviously, I think a lot of things need changing, but fundamentally, a first and minimal step is the strengthening of secularism in this country and in the world. We are witnessing the rise of political religious movements, particularly Islamism. It’s helping advance other religious political movements as well. We need to work on strengthening secularism. In a sense, it’s a pre-condition for many of the freedoms and rights that people deserve to have in the 21^st century, but which they can’t have if religion claims a strong role, for example in faith-based services or in education. A lot of work needs to be done here in Britain.

IHN: About the Council of Ex-Muslims: Mina Ahadi founded the first one, in Germany. Was she a great source of inspiration for you?

Maryam Namazie: Definitely. I think Mina is an inspiration in a lot of the work I and many others do, including the work she is doing now against stoning and against executions, and supporting ex-Muslims. She is a veteran political activist, well known, now globally of course, but initially amongst Iranian political activists.

IHN: How many Councils of Ex-Muslims are there now?

Maryam Namazie: Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Britain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark – I think eight.

IHN: Why do you think there aren’t more?  

Maryam Namazie: There are other groups of ex-Muslims: there are the Former Muslims United in the USA, for instance, with Nonie Darwish and Wafa Sultan and others. And there was a Council of Ex-Muslims in Holland which disbanded after the President received a lot of threats. It is obviously very intimidating.

If you look at the experience of most of the Councils in Europe, though, they have been Iranian-led initially, because, I think, of our history of battling the Islamic regime in Iran for over three decades. Obviously, now, each of the Councils has taken on the characteristics of the ex-Muslim population of the country they’re in.  So, in Britain you have many more Asians than you do Iranians, for example. But in my experience a group of strong left-wing Iranian political activists is invaluable for providing a kick start. The group in the USA is different because we did not start it. It is pro-US and anti-Islam but not as strongly against other religions. And it promotes western civilisation as opposed to seeing that the demand for secularism comes from many, including those not living in the west. Our councils are part of an atheist movement: the point is we’ve renounced religion altogether; we are not promoting one religion over another. We argue that Christianity has done the same as Islam when it’s had enough political power, such as during the Inquisition. We need to oppose all religious power. Islamism is of special concern because it is in political power today, and, for example, apostasy is punishable by death in many countries.

IHN:  In Britain, why is the sort of work that you do not getting more support, in general, from the Left?

Maryam Namazie: Well, the Left has got into bed with the Islamists. They support them because they are opposed to US imperialism but only in a half-hearted manner. They had no problem when the US helped promote Islamism in order to form a ‘green belt’ around the then Soviet Union. They also don’t mind what the regimes they consider anti-imperialist do to people in other countries as long as they seem to be opposing the US Administration. Take Unite against Fascism. We had a rally against Shari’a law here recently, and they joined Al-Muhajiroun, an Islamic group that wants Shari’a law in Britain. Their rationale was that “there is no such a thing as Islamic fascism”. You also have the far Right jumping on to the anti-Shari’a bandwagon to promote their anti-immigrant agenda. We are not going to leave the field open for them to do what they want, because they have no concern for human rights or about religion’s role in society in general either. It’s just Islam they are concerned about, because it’s seen as being a foreign religion; they have no problem with Christianity’s role in society. It is therefore important for us to step up and push the far Right back, defend people’s rights, irrespective of their beliefs, and defend secularism. A few days ago, I got a letter criticising me for speaking at the Protest the Pope rally, saying “Look I am anti-Shari’a; I am not a secularist…” I wrote back, “Well that’s your problem: you are not a secularist; that’s what we are, that’s what we are fighting for and that is the only way we are going to push back religion’s intervention in people’s lives”. We have to push religion out of the public sphere, whether it is Shari’a law or the Vatican’s role in denial of family planning and contraception.

IHN: In the west now we are seeing many women completely covering their faces with burqas or niqabs. I know you are not in favour of that – but the argument given is that it is a human right to wear what one wants.  How do you react to that?

Maryam Namazie: We’re seeing a rise in face-covering in the same way that we’re seeing a rise in Shari’a law. It has nothing to do with the demands of Muslims; it is the demand of Islamists. It’s a result of the rise of the Islamist movement, which seeks to restrict the rights of citizens, including Muslims. I always find it funny when people talk about the burqa as a human right. To me, it’s like talking about female genital mutilation (FGM) as a human right, or foot binding as a human right, or the chastity belt as a human right, or sati (when women burn themselves alive on the pyre of  their dead husband) as a human right! It just shows how perverse the whole discussion of human rights has become, so that something so degrading to women, and so restrictive, is now deemed to be a human right. The reality of the burqa is that it is a human body bag, a mobile prison. The idea that women have a “right” to cover themselves because religion says their bodies shouldn’t be seen, that their hair and face shouldn’t show, because men are such animals that they would not be able to control themselves, and that if they are seen it would cause chaos in society is absurd. When you think about the reasoning behind it, you realise the absurdity of the argument about the burqa as a human right.

IHN: The argument may be stupid, but quite a number of Muslim women are giving voice to it.

Maryam Namazie: You’ll always find people who’ll defend the burqa, just as you’ll always find women who hold down their girls to have them mutilated. That still does not tell me whether it is right or wrong. Even if you had every single Muslim woman saying it was good, it would still not make it so. The reality is that, for the vast majority of women, the veil and the burqa are imposed. Of course you’ll find some who really wear them out of free choice, but socially speaking the veil is first and foremost an imposition. Look at the situation in Iran, where the veil is compulsory. There are a lot of threats and intimidations around this issue. It would be interesting to see how many women would actually wear the burqa or the veil if there were no threats or intimidation, but that would, of course, mean no Islamist movement.

IHN: I’d like to ask you about the One Law for All campaign: what was the motivation for that?

Maryam Namazie: Shari’a law operates to restrict people’s rights and freedoms. We needed a separation between this campaign and the Council of Ex-Muslims, so that anyone who wanted to could join without necessarily allying themselves with ex-Muslims if they didn’t want to. We focus on Shari’a law because it’s really so crucial. We talk in general terms about secularism and the separation of religion from the state, and Shari’a law is a prime example of religious law. It affects many people, and the point is it’s not just in countries where Islam is the main religion; it’s happening to large segments of the population here in Britain.

IHN: Yes, but some Muslims who agitate for Shari’a law in Britain claim that it’s only family law. They say we are not going to have stoning, and we are not going to have death for apostates, so it’s actually quite benign.

Maryam Namazie: It just shows how poorly they view women’s rights and freedom. Family law particularly concerns women: the right to divorce, to child custody, to inheritance, to choice in marriage. Under Shari’a, a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man. Our argument is that personal status laws are some of the most oppressive laws against women in countries under Islamic law. Many women flee as a result of these laws. In Britain, people’s hands aren’t being amputated, and there isn’t stoning to death, but we should be just as concerned about the denial of rights to women and children in the family here as elsewhere.

IHN: You mentioned that the One Law for All campaign has support from some practising Muslims. How easy is it for you to cooperate with practising Muslims in your campaigns?

Maryam Namazie: I think it’s very easy. I always make a distinction between Muslims and Islamists. The vast majority of Muslims are against Shari’a law, they are against stoning, they are against women’s testimony being worth half that of a man’s. Obviously, with the rise of Islamism, we are seeing a larger number of people joining that movement, but the reality is that a majority is still firmly opposed to Islamism. They are battling Islamism every day, in various forms. Few of them would want an ex-Muslim, for example, to be executed. We need to try to work together and become a force to be reckoned with. Islamism is a global movement; we have to be the same in order to push back Islamism.

IHN: A lot of your focus, naturally, is on Iran where the human rights situation is terrible, but where else in the world are you most concerned about human rights?

Maryam Namazie: Obviously, when you are concerned about human rights, it concerns you everywhere. However, there is only so much that you can realistically do, and so generally human rights campaigners will focus on specific issues or countries. I would say that my focus, other than Iran, is on secularism and general women’s rights issues in the Middle East and countries under Islamism or Shari’a law. So, that applies whether it is happening here in Britain or in Iran or elsewhere.

IHN: What would you say to those who claim that the whole idea of universal human rights is an attempt to impose western values on the rest of the world?

Maryam Namazie: I would ask them why, for example, they think that stoning is part of the people’s culture in Iran and that’s it is a western value to demand an end to stoning? The son and daughter of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtianiare fighting for her life, writing open letters to people of the world, and yet, they have never travelled one day outside of Iran. He is a transport worker; Sakineh herself has had fifth-grade education. Opposition to stoning and opposition to Shari’a law in general is not something only people in the west feel strongly about. The concept of universal rights is not just western; universal rights belong to everybody, are demanded by everybody! When an Islamic regime wants nuclear technology, they don’t say, “Oh wait a second, that’s a western technology: you’re not allowed to use it!” When it comes to human rights, suddenly, it becomes western!

IHN: What do you think about the very vigorous attempt by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to establish the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, to be interpreted entirely by the Shari’a , as a UN human rights document?

Maryam Namazie: I think it is equivalent to the racist apartheid government of South Africa establishing a Declaration on racial rights and equality: it’s a farce. Shari’a and rights are antithetical. Shari’a law violates rights; how can there be a declaration of rights, based on Shari’a law? This is all a result of the rise of Islamism.  They are pushing however they can, wherever they can, from the UN to courts here in Britain. We are pushing back as hard as we can as well. It’s an ongoing battle, and one we must win!

IHN: What message would you like to give to give to International Humanist News readers around the world?

Maryam Namazie: IHEU has given great support both to the Council of ex-Muslims of Britain and to One Law for All. In particular, I would mention Roy Brown and Sonja Eggerickx of the IHEU, and also A.C. Grayling and the National Secular Society. I do feel though, that the Humanist movement in general needs to provide a lot more support to our movement than it currently does. Perhaps some of the issues that are addressed are uncomfortable ones. I remember when I was working at Amnesty International USA, you could talk about political prisoners elsewhere, but when I and a co-worker were beaten and arrested for opposing the war in Iraq in 1991 in New York, it was not something they wanted to deal with – it was too political; they wanted to talk about political prisoners somewhere else. It’s as though people retreat when it comes close to home and they are faced with the issues of Shari’a law in Britain or the question of the burqa. I think that the Humanist movement has become too comfortable with criticising Christianity.  It’s easy to organise a protest against the Pope, for instance, but not so easy when it comes to a rally against Shari’a and religious laws and for equal rights for all. The Humanist movement is an old one with ample resources, space and contacts. It could do a lot more in one of the most crucial struggles of our times.

People need to understand the specific position we are in, battling an Islamic Inquisition. Today, we are at the forefront of that battle and beset by threats and intimidation. Despite all the difficulties, supporting us is a major task and duty for Humanists and secularists everywhere.