The court ruling which stopped at a point
in march 2019, the court of cassation issued a ruling obligating an employee of the ministry of endowments to pay a fine of 20,000 dinars for violating the laws and customs of national unity, by publicly inciting to hate a group of society, inciting sectarian strife and ridiculing, demeaning and belittling a religious sect during a sermon. the employee is a clergyman and gives religious lessons in the mosques of the ministry of awqaf.
from the pulpit of one of the mosques before the maghreb prayer, he spoke about the interpretation of some verses. however, he left the subject of the sermon and delved into the relationship between sunnis and shiites, despite his knowledge in advance that the subject was emotional and grudge-inducing and he knew there were people among the faithful who were recording what he was saying, and that’s what actually happened.
the relevance of this article and the return to the verdicts issued years ago and implemented this preacher has returned to his previous habit, albeit in an indirect manner. also, this ruling and its merits never appeared in public, and only the specialists and those concerned with the matter knew about it, and it was necessary to know the largest number of the ruling and act accordingly.
it is also necessary for those who are ignorant of this to know that verbally assaulting any sect of the nation requires punishment. the most important thing is to note that the convicted party has not been deterred so far, and is still spreading his poison, and sabotaging the relationship between groups in society.
it seems that he enjoys the consent of one of the parties, as he often still occupies guidance and directional position in the ministry of endowments, and this condemnation requires his dismissal so that his words do not have an official capacity representing the government, in its new era.
i repeat for the tenth time: i am not sectarian, and i do not belong to any sect, and my neutrality towards such issues is well known, knowing that i am harmed by the words of this extremist or others, whether i belong to that sect or not. the majority judge others by their emotions and previous attitudes, and not by their reason and logic.
finally, we ask: what benefit this preacher reaped from spreading hatred in society against a group, other than addressing the mob, tickling their feelings, and making material and moral gain from that?
did he succeed in persuading an individual to leave his religion or sect and catch up with him?
