Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06KABUL1428
2006-03-30 03:37:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Kabul
Cable title:  

PARLIAMENT OPPOSES RAHMAN RELEASE

Tags:  PGOV PREL PINR KDEM AF 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO6450
PP RUEHDBU
DE RUEHBUL #1428/01 0890337
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 300337Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY KABUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9289
INFO RUCNAFG/AFGHANISTAN COLLECTIVE
RHEHAAA/NSC WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/CJCS WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 5764
RUMICEA/USCENTCOM INTEL CEN MACDILL AFB FL
RHMFISS/CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RHMFISS/COMSOCCENT MACDILL AFB FL
RUEATRS/US TREASURY WASHDC
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KABUL 001428 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SA/FO, S/CT, SA/A
NSC FOR AHARRIMAN, KAMEND
CENTCOM FOR POLAD, CG CFC-A, CG CJTF-76
TREASURY FOR LMCDONALD, WBALDRIDGE, APARAMESWARAN, ABAUKOL
STATE PLEASE PASS USAID
USAID FOR AID/ANE, AID/DCHA/DG
REL NATO/ISAF, AUS, NZ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/04/2015
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR KDEM AF
SUBJECT: PARLIAMENT OPPOSES RAHMAN RELEASE

REF: KABUL 1380

Classified By: CHARGE D'AFFAIRES RICHARD NORLAND FOR REASONS 1.4 (B) AN
D (D)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KABUL 001428

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SA/FO, S/CT, SA/A
NSC FOR AHARRIMAN, KAMEND
CENTCOM FOR POLAD, CG CFC-A, CG CJTF-76
TREASURY FOR LMCDONALD, WBALDRIDGE, APARAMESWARAN, ABAUKOL
STATE PLEASE PASS USAID
USAID FOR AID/ANE, AID/DCHA/DG
REL NATO/ISAF, AUS, NZ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/04/2015
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR KDEM AF
SUBJECT: PARLIAMENT OPPOSES RAHMAN RELEASE

REF: KABUL 1380

Classified By: CHARGE D'AFFAIRES RICHARD NORLAND FOR REASONS 1.4 (B) AN
D (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY. Afghanistan's lower house of Parliament,
the Wolesi Jirga, pointedly criticized the GOA handling of
the Abdul Rahman case during several hours of debate on March

29. Most criticism focused on the perception that the Karzai
government caved to foreign pressure, bypassing correct
judicial procedure and the Afghan Constitution, when it
released Abdul Rahman from jail. The Wolesi Jirga voted to
have two committees - Justice and Government Affairs -
investigate the case further, perhaps calling in the Minister
of Justice and Attorney General to testify. END SUMMARY.

Conservatives in Parliament Speak Out Against Rahman Release
-------------- --------------


2. (C) The morning debate in Parliament shifted from the
scheduled agenda of the Cabinet and structure of the
government to the Rahman case at the behest of several
conservative members of Parliament (led by former HIG
commander Najibullah Kabuli from Kabul) and continued for
several hours. Speaker Qanooni had the Wolesi Jirga (WJ)
vote to close debate after Sayyaf and Rabbani spoke.
Emotions were high during the debate, but not out of control.
Around ten women MPs walked out during the debate in protest
of some religious comments, but otherwise the debate was
well-attended.


3. (C) As summarized by Qanooni at the end of debate, the
speakers agreed on four general points:

-- Rahman violated the law when he converted to Christianity.


Most MPs began their speeches with a defense of Islamic
principles and a reiteration that conversion is against Islam
and therefore against the Afghan constitution. One MP
(Mawlawi Shahzada Shahed from Kunar) argued, "Foreigners
should not be allowed to misinterpret and misuse the idea of

religious freedom," stating that religious freedom means the
right of Muslims to be Muslim, Christians to be Christian,
Jews to be Jewish, etc. but not to change religion. Several
noted that they had fought thirty years of war for their
religion and that would become meaningless if they did not
defend it now. Virtually all MPs who spoke equated religious
law and the Afghan Constitution - only one (Shukria Barakzai
from Kabul) mentioned that the Constitution also includes
provisions for the protection of human rights.

-- Rahman should be prevented from leaving Afghanistan.

Several MPs noted that European countries had offered asylum
to Rahman and Parliament wanted to block that action.
(COMMENT: Parliament is likely to be more critical of the
government, and may seek his return, when news leaks that
Rahman has already left. END COMMENT.)

-- Rahman should be rearrested pending further investigation
of the case.

The primary concern of members of Parliament was that the
Constitution and law had been violated when Rahman was
released. All speakers agreed that proper judicial procedure
had not been followed (as a result of foreign pressure) and
that the only proper solution was to have Rahman rearrested.

-- The Wolesi Jirga should investigate the case further
through committee hearings.

While the above points reflect the general tone of debate,

KABUL 00001428 002 OF 003


this final point is the only one that was formally voted
upon. Several committees, including Religious Affairs and
Education and International Relations (Sayyaf's committee),
were interested in conducting further investigation into this
matter, but the WJ voted to have only two committees review
the case - Justice, which oversees the courts and Ministry of
Justice and is chaired by religious scholar Alemi Balkhi, and
the Legal Oversight Committee (equivalent to the Government
Affairs Committees in the US Congress),which is chaired by
former communist Kabir Ranjbar. When debate adjourned for
lunch, MPs commented that it was likely that one or both
committees would call in the Minister of Justice, Attorney
General, and perhaps members of the Supreme Court, for
questioning. The Committees were asked to report on their
findings at the next session of Parliament (on Saturday,
April 1).

Foreign Pressure Criticized
--------------


4. (C) The debate was overall very critical of what was
perceived as foreign intervention in Afghanistan's internal
affairs. The comments of Alemi Balkhi (the Chair of the
Justice Committee) were representative: he stated that this
is a clear issue - it is not about whether Rahman is crazy or
not, it is that he was released because of foreign pressure.
He stated specifically that President Bush, Secretary Rice,
Germany and Italy are interfering in Afghanistan's internal
affairs. Interestingly, Alemi Balkhi noted that he did not
believe that prosecuting Rahman would put aid to Afghanistan
at risk, because foreign nations were here to defend their
own national interest and trade. MPs also seized the moment
to criticize France for not allowing girls to wear the hejab
(veil) at school. Only one MP (Khalid Pashtoon from
Kandahar, a US citizen) stated, after agreeing that the case
was handled incorrectly, that it would be foolish to
sacrifice the benefits Afghanistan receives for the sake of
one individual.

5. (C) Comments ranged from the extreme to the comic: one MP
stated that the release of Rahman was against the
Constitution and Afghan law and that "if this is democracy, I
do not accept it," and that "we don't need aid if they will
take our religion from us," while another stated that not
just Rahman, but the prosecutor and judge in the case, should
undergo examinations for mental fitness. But overall, the
comments seemed to reflect a desire for more respect from the
international community. For example, Mawlawi Din Mohammad
Azimi from Ghor stated that this case shows that Afghanistan
is not an independent country; that if it were a true Islamic
Republic (as its official title states),then the courts
would not have released Rahman. He concluded by stating that
he wants foreign countries to know that Afghanistan takes
religion seriously.


6. (C) While Karzai himself was not mentioned, the most
critical statements were directed toward his government's
actions. As former Minister of Commerce Sayed Mustafa Kazemi
put it, "we are not talking about religion, but about a
mistake made by the government." Debate concluded with
comments by Sayyaf and Rabbani. Sayyaf appeared to make an
attempt at being conciliatory. He stated that religious law
is clear on this matter: that no one can force anyone to be
Muslim or any other religion, but if you are Muslim you
cannot convert. But he went on to say that this case is not
about Rahman, but that it is part of a larger conspiracy by
people interested in having Afghanistan in conflict with the
rest of the international community. Rabbani's arguments
were more conventional, stating that no country should act
against religion, and prescribed further investigation of the
case.

Comment
--------------

KABUL 00001428 003 OF 003




7. (C) While the sentiments opposing the GOA handling of the
case are genuine (one MP noted that he had gotten hundreds of
calls from constituents saying that Rahman should be hanged),
the timing and nature of the debate were very political.
Qanooni let conservatives speak out against the government
for most of the morning, while women and other members (such
as Qayyum Karzai, the President's brother) complained that
they were not given a chance to speak. Qanooni also did not
put his summary of debate to a vote by the entire body,
making it difficult to determine whether these views
represent the entire body or just those speaking. While
Qanooni may not have asked for this issue to come up during
debate, he did take advantage of it to allow critics of
Karzai full rein to speak. The fact that the matter was
handed over to the judicial and government oversight
committees indicates that while religion is important in
Parliament, ultimately the political matters at hand are the
WJ's primary concern.


8. (C) The Rahman case will come up again in the Wolesi
Jirga, but is not likely to overwhelm the Parliamentary
calendar. After discussing Rahman, the WJ moved calmly and
completely to debate on the Cabinet and the structure of the
government, which is likely to remain the Parliament's main
focus over the next month. However, it is within the realm
of possibility that Karzai's handling of the Rahman case will
impact on the list of Supreme Court nominees. Judges
suspected of pro-Western leanings or seen as not fully
supportive of Islamic Sharia law may find themselves subject
to harsh scrutiny. END COMMENT.

NORLAND