France discusses the law against radical Islamism

 The discussion that starts in the French National Assembly on cultural and religious separatism seeks to strengthen the secularism of the state while pursuing, at the same time, the result of creating a regulation of religious cults and, in particular, the impact that the Muslim religion, especially the more radical one, he produced on French society. The issue is deeply felt on French soil and involves fundamental issues, such as religious freedom, the containment of the social isolation of the suburbs, which has often produced natural religious terrorist phenomena, the control of radical preachers, capable of aggregating social discontent and direct it against the scaffolding of French society, through the criticism of institutions. It is a set of phenomena that clash mainly against the founding values ​​of the French republic, such as tolerance and secularism, framed in a context of democracy, often in contrast with the radical ideas expressed by the Muslim communities. Certainly the Islamic objective is not explicitly declared by the will of the bill, however the relations between the state and the Catholic, Protestant or Jewish communities do not register problems such as to justify a law on cults and religious associations, where the strengthening of the principles of the Republic; this need is directed towards the Islamic religion, so much so that it becomes a need to be regulated with extreme urgency. Perhaps, indeed, on these issues we are already late, considering that the episodes of urban violence, which marked the first quarter of 2020 and the fundamentalist attacks of last September and October, were only the most recent events of a oldest phenomenon. In the meantime, we want to hit proselytism by the more radical imams, to allow us to contain, first of all, the possible separatism from French society and the establishment of areas where loyalty to France and its laws becomes suspended, if not really rejected. The basis of this reasoning is the awareness that for the guides of the most radical mosques there is a belief that the prevailing law is Islamic over that of France, making the transgression of the principle of territoriality of current legislation objective; it is a sort of self-referential extra-territoriality that is inadmissible for any sovereign state. The path chosen is that of a strict judicial, police and economic control, foreign funding is essential for the survival of these organizations outside the constitutional framework and their persecution is the logical consequence; the closure of places of worship that do not comply with state regulations and the arrest of individuals who do not comply with the provisions will be the deterrent measures provided. The protection of the victims of these radical associations is another fixed point of the intentions of the bill: episodes such as social hatred expressed through the internet will be punishable, to avoid tragic consequences as happened recently in France against teachers challenged for their methods teaching contrary to the most extremist Islamic ideologies. The more moderate imams said they were in favor of the bill, finding the intention of the legislator to coincide with the will to eliminate radical groups and allow Islam to be presented as a religious form that respects French laws. The comments of the members of other religions are more nuanced, who, even if they see a potential interference of the institutions in the religious sphere, cannot but agree with the desire to eliminate a concrete policy for democratic life. On the other hand, the legislator does not prohibit any cult, but aims to contain only some potentially very harmful effects for society. It goes without saying that France, with such a law, opens the way for supranational regulation, within Europe, to combat a dangerous phenomenon of separatism and affirmation through violence, which seems destined to grow without adequate countermeasures, even if for now the French emergency is well beyond the situation that is registered in the rest of the European Union, however the growth of radicalism has repeatedly reserved unwelcome surprises that it is advisable to anticipate, without, however, damaging the freedom of worship exercised within the laws in force and in compliance with society as a whole.

What do you want to do ?

New mail