Need a lawyer

[Shahu]

As per Bohra faith. Dai-ul Matlaq is sole owner of all the properties, even your soul as per the Misaq. That is why until he waqafs, it can not be used by Bohras. So if any functions that takes place within this property is considered as private matters. This is why they are not showing expense reports of local jamaat. Questioning about it, means questioning your faith. Interestingly everyone here knows that once you are under oath you have to follow the dictate. They have put sign at the entrance of one masjid I know of "Only Dawoodi Bohra are allowed..."

[seeker110]

Picture the sign and print it in various newspapers of diff. countries.

[Fatwa Banker]

Accountability,

Any place of worship can not have exclusivity, relgious places are not owned by any one, thus are deemed public places

You are incorrect, public places are built by the government and a place of worship (unless built by the government) is owned by its congregation (ideally) or the donors or some entity other than the government . A place of worship can have exclusivity and some do, incuding churches.

Emotions aside, since the UN turns a blind eye to gross violations of religious freedoms in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries, I doubt if they will be interested in someone denied admission to a funeral service.

[seeker110]

They would be interested if there is any chance of making some money.You dont think UN gives favors for nothing.They might be interested just to show how they are working for common man.

[accountability]

FB, I am very correct, place of worship is a public place, and there cannot be exclusivity to worship places according to every constitution of any country. I give you an example, besides us, only catholics have excomminucation, but eve after excommunication they do not refuse the person entry into any catholic church.

Public place do not have to be neccessarily built or managed by government, any government subsidized place will become a public place, mosques and places of worship do not pay property or any other tax, they are charged subsidized rates on utlities.
I have worked with amnesty international, and we have dealt with these kind of cases. so what i am saying is not just in air. if you want i can file a complain on your behalf, if you were ever denied entry into any mosque, i will file petition for you, and i guarantee you will get entry no matter where in world except middle eastern countries because they are not signatory to un charter of human rights, that includes saudi arabia.

[bohra_manus]

As per Bohra faith. Dai-ul Matlaq is sole owner of all the properties, even your soul as per the Misaq. That is why until he waqafs, it can not be used by Bohras. So if any functions that takes place within this property is considered as private matters. This is why they are not showing expense reports of local jamaat. Questioning about it, means questioning your faith. Interestingly everyone here knows that once you are under oath you have to follow the dictate. They have put sign at the entrance of one masjid I know of "Only Dawoodi Bohra are allowed..."

I know there use to be a sign on the entrance to the bohra masjid in Toronto: Members only. Not sure if it is still there.

[ghulam muhammed]

Public place do not have to be neccessarily built or managed by government, any government subsidized place will become a public place, mosques and places of worship do not pay property or any other tax, they are charged subsidized rates on utlities

This goes well even with regard to kabrastan where at times some bohras are denied burial, the land for kabrastan and/or any other cremation ground is given by the government almost free but bohras are made to pay thru their nose. I know of a bohra family who had to shell out Rs.2.52 lacs for getting his relative buried at nariyalwadi kabrastan, mumbai somewhere in the mid nineties. Typical KAFAN CHORS.

[Fatwa Banker]

Accountability,

I don't mean to be argumentative but you are just flat wrong and spreading misinformation.

middle eastern countries because they are not signatory to un charter of human rights, that includes saudi arabia.

It just so happens that Saudi Arabia is currently on the UNHRC, United Nations Human Rights Council and as you may recall Iran is on the Commission on the Status of Women.

any government subsidized place will become a public place

By your definition GM, Citigroup and AIG are now "Public places" ?

I give you an example, besides us, only catholics have excomminucation, but eve after excommunication they do not refuse the person entry into any catholic church.

That is a matter of policy, not law as the same excommunicated member cannot be married in that church or hold a funeral service there.

What happened to Anajmi is plain wrong, as a matter of principle, not law.

[accountability]

fatwa banker, neither do i want to be argumentative, having said that, I do not post any thing which i am not sure about.

Accountability,

I don't mean to be argumentative but you are just flat wrong and spreading misinformation.


"middle eastern countries because they are not signatory to un charter of human rights, that includes saudi arabia.It just so happens that Saudi Arabia is currently on the UNHRC, United Nations Human Rights Council and as you may recall Iran is on the Commission on the Status of Women.


this is wikipedia site, saudi arabia is among those members who has neither signed not ratified International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

this is the site check for yourself, but before accusing i would say some research should be done.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... r_ratified


"any government subsidized place will become a public placeBy your definition GM, Citigroup and AIG are now "Public places" ?


not a very inteligent answer, GM citigroup and aig are not publicly subsidized charitable organization, please correct yourself.

I give you an example, besides us, only catholics have excomminucation, but eve after excommunication they do not refuse the person entry into any catholic church.That is a matter of policy, not law as the same excommunicated member cannot be married in that church or hold a funeral service there.

I did say that they are not denied entry, excommincated member can not have marriage done, but they can be buried as catholics. please do not argue , i have many catholic priest, and i argue with them regularly.

What happened to Anajmi is plain wrong, as a matter of principle, not law


By law anyone can not be denied practice of his her religion or religious obligation, burial participation is fundamental human right.

[Fatwa Banker]

this is wikipedia site, saudi arabia is among those members who has neither signed not ratified International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

this is the site check for yourself, but before accusing i would say some research should be done.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... r_ratified

You started off by saying "UN Charter of Human Rights" and now you switch to "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights " which according the the link you posted is "a separate body to the Human Rights Council".

not a very inteligent answer, GM citigroup and aig are not publicly subsidized charitable organization, please correct yourself.

I reread your post and you have not mentioned the word charitable just "public". Besides, charitable organizations work under different laws than religious institutions.

if you want i can file a complain on your behalf, if you were ever denied entry into any mosque, i will file petition for you, and i guarantee you will get entry no matter where in world

Please contact Dr. Engineer as he has been trying to get this done for decades.

burial participation is fundamental human right

Simply not true, you are blowing smoke.

[accountability]

simply not true,

You mean if my father (he is already expired) dies, and i am denied to participate in his burial, that will not be violation of fundamental human rights, I think you are blowing smoke.
I am not just getting, why are you bent on defending a practice that you your self think is morally wrong. and I believe that indian constitution guarantees right to religion and practice thereof. so it is wrong by law. Or prove that indian constitution does not guarantee that right.

Dr. Engineer or for that matter anyone cannot be denied entry into any mosque by law.

[natkhat pari]

All are brother and sisters are welcomed
ahalen wasa len "

[Sufi monk]

Thanx Natkhat for reviving dead threads, but it is interesting to see old matters digged up once again

1) Anjmi what happend with your search for lawyer did you filed any case?

2) reading my old posts makes me glad I was never a brain dead abde.

ALHUMDOLILLAH RABBIL ALAMIN

[Rebel]

These gang of clergies are severely derangned and demented to nth degree. They are inhuman and are devoid of any conscience, compassion or empthy for their fellow humans. They need to be crushed and hanged in the public. How can ever prevent someone from attending a funeral. I have seen non-bohra attending bohra funeral and they can't say not to attend someone's funeral. Their can only persecute and humilate their own people because they know that they have the power to ex-communicate us, stop attending funerals, weddings and other auspicious events in the community.