A new media monitoring watchdog, Muslim Media Watch, published its first edition today featuring a cover story alleging that a Malaysian cult leader who was reportedly now in New Zealand could “create social unrest”.

Named as Suhaini bin Mohammad, he was allegedly posing as a Muslim religious leader and was said to be wanted by the authorities in Malaysia for “false teachings” that contradict Islam.

His cult ideology was identified by MMW as SiHulk, which was banned by the Johor State Religious Department (JAINJ) in 2021.

In an editorial, the 16-page publlcation said a need for “such a news outlet” as MMW had been shown after the mass shootings at two Christchurch mosques on 15 March 2019 and the Royal Commission inquiry that followed.

Fifty one people killed in the twin attacks were all Muslims attending the Islamic Friday prayer — “they were targeted solely because they were Muslims”.

The editorial noted “the shooter was motivated largely by online material. His last words before carrying out the shootings were: ‘Remember lads, subscribe to PewDiePie.’”

“It is therefore disappointing that, while acknowledging the role of the media in the shootings, none of the 44 recommendations in the government’s response to the [Royal Commission] relate to holding media to account for irresponsible reporting, or even mention media; the word does not appear in any recommendation,” writes editor Adam Brown.

Often not neutral
“Indeed, the word Muslim appears only once, in ‘Muslim Community Reference Group’.
It has long been acknowledged that media reporting of Muslims and Islam is often not neutral.”

The editorial cited an Australian example, a survey by OnePath Network Australia which tallied the number, percentage and tone of articles about Islam in Australian media in 2017, in particular newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp: The Daily Telegraph, The Australian, The Herald Sun, The Courier Mail and The Advertiser.

“Over the year, the report found that 2891 negative articles ran in those five newspapers, where Islam and Muslims were mentioned alongside words like violence, extremism, terrorism and radical. This equates to over eight articles per day for the whole year; 152 of those articles ran on the front page,” said the MMW editorial.

“The percentage of their opinion pieces that were Islamophobic ranged from 19 percent
to 64 percent.

“The average was 31 percent, nearly a third, with one writer reaching almost two thirds. Also, as OnePath comment, ‘Even though they are stated to be “opinion” pieces, they are often written as fact.’”

Editor Brown said the situation in New Zealand had not improved since the shootings.

“Biased and unfair reporting on Muslim matters continues, and retractions are not always forthcoming,” he wrote.

Examples highlighted
The editorial said that the purpose of MMW was to highlight examples of media reporting — in New Zealand and overseas — that contained information about Islam that was not
accurate, or that was not neutrally reported.

It would also model ethical journalism and responsible reporting following Islamic practices and tradition.

MMW offered to conduct training sessions and to act as a resource for other media outlets.

On other pages, MMW reported about misrepresentation of Islam “being nothing new”, a challenge over a Listener article misrepresentation about girls’ education in Afghanistan, an emerging global culture of mass Iftar events, an offensive reference in a Ministry of Education textbook, and the ministry “acknowledges bias in teacher recruiting”, an article headlined “when are religious extremists not religious extremists”, and other issues.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A new media monitoring watchdog, Muslim Media Watch, published its first edition today featuring a cover story alleging that a Malaysian cult leader who was reportedly now in New Zealand could “create social unrest”.

Named as Suhaini bin Mohammad, he was allegedly posing as a Muslim religious leader and was said to be wanted by the authorities in Malaysia for “false teachings” that contradict Islam.

His cult ideology was identified by MMW as SiHulk, which was banned by the Johor State Religious Department (JAINJ) in 2021.

In an editorial, the 16-page publlcation said a need for “such a news outlet” as MMW had been shown after the mass shootings at two Christchurch mosques on 15 March 2019 and the Royal Commission inquiry that followed.

Fifty one people killed in the twin attacks were all Muslims attending the Islamic Friday prayer — “they were targeted solely because they were Muslims”.

The editorial noted “the shooter was motivated largely by online material. His last words before carrying out the shootings were: ‘Remember lads, subscribe to PewDiePie.’”

“It is therefore disappointing that, while acknowledging the role of the media in the shootings, none of the 44 recommendations in the government’s response to the [Royal Commission] relate to holding media to account for irresponsible reporting, or even mention media; the word does not appear in any recommendation,” writes editor Adam Brown.

Often not neutral
“Indeed, the word Muslim appears only once, in ‘Muslim Community Reference Group’.
It has long been acknowledged that media reporting of Muslims and Islam is often not neutral.”

The editorial cited an Australian example, a survey by OnePath Network Australia which tallied the number, percentage and tone of articles about Islam in Australian media in 2017, in particular newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp: The Daily Telegraph, The Australian, The Herald Sun, The Courier Mail and The Advertiser.

“Over the year, the report found that 2891 negative articles ran in those five newspapers, where Islam and Muslims were mentioned alongside words like violence, extremism, terrorism and radical. This equates to over eight articles per day for the whole year; 152 of those articles ran on the front page,” said the MMW editorial.

“The percentage of their opinion pieces that were Islamophobic ranged from 19 percent
to 64 percent.

“The average was 31 percent, nearly a third, with one writer reaching almost two thirds. Also, as OnePath comment, ‘Even though they are stated to be “opinion” pieces, they are often written as fact.’”

Editor Brown said the situation in New Zealand had not improved since the shootings.

“Biased and unfair reporting on Muslim matters continues, and retractions are not always forthcoming,” he wrote.

Examples highlighted
The editorial said that the purpose of MMW was to highlight examples of media reporting — in New Zealand and overseas — that contained information about Islam that was not
accurate, or that was not neutrally reported.

It would also model ethical journalism and responsible reporting following Islamic practices and tradition.

MMW offered to conduct training sessions and to act as a resource for other media outlets.

On other pages, MMW reported about misrepresentation of Islam “being nothing new”, a challenge over a Listener article misrepresentation about girls’ education in Afghanistan, an emerging global culture of mass Iftar events, an offensive reference in a Ministry of Education textbook, and the ministry “acknowledges bias in teacher recruiting”, an article headlined “when are religious extremists not religious extremists”, and other issues.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The widow of the final victim in the 2019 terrorist attack says things have not improved for New Zealand Muslims.

Hamimah Amhat was recently exercising in Christchurch when a passing motorist screamed at her to go back to her country.

“That shook me, I just had to sit down and let myself calm down.”

Amhat said she did not stoop to the level of such hatred but found herself feeling bitterly disappointed.

“It was broad daylight and in a university area. That is just one of the recent incidents that has happened to me but I know of plenty of others too which is very discouraging.”

New Zealand’s annual gathering on countering terrorism and violent extremism, He Whenua Taurikura Hui 2022, got underway in Auckland today.

Members of the Māori, Pasifika, Jewish, Muslim, rainbow, and many more communities will unite at the Cordis Hotel for the two-day hui.

Conversations crucial
Amhat said conversations were crucial to prevent another mass murder.

Zekeriya Tuyan was the 51st victim of the 15 March 2019 terror attack, passing away 48 days after being shot in the chest.

He was survived by his beloved wife and two sons.

“The boys were very young, we lost a great friend, husband and father.”

Amhat said her husband treated her like a queen and she was still getting used to opening doors for herself as Tuyan always insisted on doing this for her.

“Simple things like that, he put me on a pedestal.”

Amhat is the chair of the Sakinah Community Trust, a kaupapa created by the daughters, wives and sisters of March 15 victims.

Strength and well-being
“It involves promotion of strength and well-being in the community.”

Among the many initiatives the group is involved with is Unity Week, which runs from March 15-22.

“It is about galvanising our allies, and touching the hearts of those sitting on the fence.”

The week acknowledges the affected communities which Amhat said were not just the people who were directly impacted by the events.

“It’s also the people who pulled up their sleeves and got together even though they were grieving as well and in shock, they made time to help the families and make sure the community continued to function.”

Amhat said the Muslim community could not sit back and wait for tolerance to come to them.

“People find it hard to approach us, just recently my driving instructor told me, ‘I didn’t know how to react to a Muslim woman,’ and I just had to tell him to smile, we are human beings.”

She said education was key to dispelling fears and myths.

‘Sharing our space together’
“We invite them to share our space together. Cut through our skin and we bleed red blood.”

While we were moving forward as a nation, things could be faster and more effective, Amhat said.

She cited recent incidents in Aotearoa including the Dunedin student who had her hijab ripped off, New Zealand soldiers linked to white supremacist groups and school board nominees spouting hateful ideology.

Amhat said anti-Chinese racism was also prevalent during the pandemic.

“It was as if people had forgotten about March 15 and racism actually increased towards the Chinese and everyone else who looked Chinese to those discriminatory people.”

Formalities at the hui began by acknowledging the survivors of the 2019 terrorist attack in Christchurch.

The morning then focussed on the consequences of colonialism and near two centuries of Pākehā dominance in Aotearoa.

‘Colonial entitlement’ still rife
Auckland University professor of indigenous studies Tracey McIntosh opened panel discussions looking at why the country needed to face deep but necessary discomfort over the impact colonisation had for Māori.

This included relocation, confiscation and invasion.

“Of all the times I hear government agencies say Te Tiriti, if there is one word that seems to avoid their tongue, that’s the word colonialism,” McIntosh said.

Those impacts included dishonouring the Treaty with impunity, mass incarceration, immigration policies and racialised myth making, she said.

“The forces that brought us here today are no less than pure, distilled, colonial entitlement.”

There was a responsibility of powers to humbly engage with the issue of racism, McIntosh said.

“You have centrist power mongers who passively protect and maintain colonial privilege while presenting themselves as benign allies.”

Independent body
Māori deserved an independent body to monitor threats, she said.

“While extremists get the most attention, because they are the loudest and most violent, they hold less structural power.”

Both the Crown and government agencies had a lot of work to do, McIntosh said.

“Taking on a Māori name and logo but not sharing power is not equality.”

New Zealand had seen the rise of groups that represented hate and hostility through online emboldenment, she said.

The 2019 terror attack disturbed New Zealand’s complacency, McIntosh said.

Another prominent Māori leader said his people continued to endure terrorism at the hands of the state.

Enduring terror acts
Bill Hamilton of the National Iwi Chairs Forum spoke of the terror acts his people had endured such as invasion and abduction.

“Our children were taken and continue to be taken by the likes of Oranga Tamariki, and those are violent terrorist acts on our people.”

Aotearoa still had very subtle and sneaky forms of racism today, he said.

Hamilton said what was supposed to guarantee protection, equality and a mutually beneficial relationship — Te Tiriti o Waitangi — had instead seen the demonisation of Māori leaders, beatings for use of te reo, and widespread invasion.

“Our grandparents were beaten as kids for speaking their language.”

The state needed to apologise for the terror inflicted on the Māori people, he said.

Hamilton believed there had been a residual effect across society where people viewed Māori as less than equal.

He Whenua Taurikura Hui 2022 continues tomorrow with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern scheduled to speak about 9am at Cordis Hotel.

The topic will be diversity in democracy, creating safe spaces online and countering messages of hate.

Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) is represented at the hui by Auckland University of Technology communications academic and Pacific Journalism Review assistant editor Khairiah A Rahman.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Three years on from the Christchurch terror attacks on 15 March 2019, Mahvash Ikram writes an open letter to her young son telling him one day he will learn how the Muslim community was targeted, but that shouldn’t scare him from going to a mosque.

Dear son,

You’re not yet two, but you’ve already been to the mosque several times. You don’t understand what happens there, but you love to copy what everyone does. You already know how to say Allah-o-Akbar, and it has become an essential part of your ever-growing vocabulary.

Some would say Muslims start early with their young and I agree wholeheartedly.

So, here’s your first lesson — never be ashamed of your beliefs.

But, remember your vocabulary also includes salam, which means peace. So, practise your faith in peace.

Not long from now, you will understand the concept of standing in prayer behind the imam.

And that’s when we will take you to the mosque for your first ever Friday prayer, Jummah.

We will most likely go as a family, and maybe a few friends will come along too. I will make a big deal out of it. Mothers are embarrassing in all cultures — especially your mum, just ask your older sister.

A white shirt
We will dress you in new clothes, probably a white shirt that will be a bit tight around your pudgy little tummy. It will no doubt get stained with your favourite lunch, which will be ready for you when you come home.

Soon you will learn Friday prayer is a bit of a celebration for Muslims — clean clothes, a hearty home-cooked meal and lots of people to meet at the mosque. It will be an important part of your social calendar, second only to the two big festival prayers.

I look forward to all of it, except one thing — one day you will learn about the March 15 terrorist attacks.

You will learn someone targeted innocent members of your community for their faith.

And that’s your second lesson, sometimes you will be treated unkindly for your beliefs. You are not alone, there are other communities that suffer the same fate.

Remember — this has nothing to do with you. You are not responsible for a fault in another person’s head.

Trust me, it will be a rude awakening — just like it was for the rest of our country. It is often called the end of Aotearoa’s innocence. Lots of people, including children, were killed and injured that day.

It still hurts
One of those who died was a three-year-old who went to the mosque with his older brother.

Another child was shot but survived. Lots of children lost their parents too. It still hurts.

Most grown-ups around you are trying to make sure something like this never happens again in Aotearoa and around the world.

Sometimes we fail, but we are trying.

Hate is an ugly emotion, too big for one’s body. When it takes over, it makes people cruel. They say and do things that can seriously hurt for a very long time. The worst part is these people don’t even realise how horrible they are.

You will also hear of people who practise your faith, but carry a similar hatred. Stay away from them. They, too, destroy families. Denounce them openly.

People may call you names, they may provoke you to fight back and say your religion teaches violence. It is not true. Ignore them.

Keep this verse of the Quran close to your heart and have patience with what they say and leave them with noble (dignity).

Don’t be scared
Don’t let all of this scare you from going to the mosque.

In fact, when you are a bit older I encourage you to go to all sorts of places of worship, whether it’s a mosque, a temple or a church, you will find tranquility and calm.

Don’t be afraid to know others and learn about their views, it is how we rid the world of hate.

Our religion teaches us to respect all other humans regardless of their faith, race, ethnic origin, gender, or social status.

I understand all this information might make you a bit nervous. It is a lot to take in for a little boy your age. But some grown ups just never got on to it and look at what that’s done.

So, let’s get started. After all, we Muslims do start a bit early with our young.

All my love,

Xoxoxo

Mummy

Mahvash Ikram is on the staff at Radio New Zealand. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A counter-terrorism hui intended to help heal the wounds inflicted in Christchurch two years ago sparked a walk-out which hit the headlines. The news media were also there to be questioned about their rights and responsibilities after 15 March 2019.

When police National Security Adviser Cameron Bayly revealed that two possible shootings in Christchurch had been foiled in 2019 – one before and one after the atrocity on March 15 – it quickly made headline news.

The revelation came last Tuesday morning during a panel discussion at He Whenua Taurikura – an annual hui recommended by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack.

He Whenua Taurikura means “a land at peace”. But the hui created rancour when an invited speaker, Jewish Council spokesperson Juliet Moses, referenced a rally in Auckland’s Queen Street in 2018 at which some had expressed support for Hezbollah.

That had not been condemned and leaders should be consistent when confronting terrorism, Moses said.

That prompted members of the Christchurch Muslim community to walk out.

One  – Azad Razzaq Khan from the Foundation Against Islamophobia and Racism – said this “implied New Zealand Muslims support terrorism”.

This led news bulletins that evening and next morning – and the anger was amplified by the fact no victims or witnesses of the mosque atrocities were among speakers at the hui.

Following the startling news that a film studio wants to tell the March 15 story without consulting with victims or Muslim leaders in the city, this was a problem waiting to happen.

However, it didn’t derail He Whenua Taurikura’s second day on Wednesday, during which Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand leader Anjum Rahman gave an eye-opening talk on online extremism after the Christchurch attacks.

Rahman, who is an adviser to the Christchurch Call and the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism, showed how social media’s hyperactive algorithms still spread anti-Muslim stuff that extremists latch onto.

The He Whenua Taurikura livestream.

Media leaders face up

“Listen and respond. Do not write narratives about us without us. Do not talk over us or for us.”

— Khairiah Rahman

Leaders from New Zealand’s news media also faced questions at the hui last Tuesday.

Stuff chief executive Sinead Boucher admitted news media coverage of ethnic issues and communities is often only surface-deep and through a European lens.

But she insisted our news media have a social conscience that social media does not.

“I can think of a handful of examples in recent years where media have not published information because of the risk it could bring to someone’s safety,” Boucher told the hui.

New Zealand Herald head of premium content Miriyana Alexander said those gathered at the hui would have different ideas about how news serves the public interest.

“We are often asked not to report something, because a certain group doesn’t believe it’s in the public interest,” Alexander said.

“We are fiercely protective of that right [to report], while we acknowledge that rights carries responsibilities.”

Reporting if gunman’s crimes
A case in point was the reporting of Brenton Tarrant’s crimes back in 2019.

Stuff didn’t publish his name for a while and only minimal details of his background and apparent beliefs. The NZ Herald published a lot more about him back in March 2019.

All mainstream news media agreed on protocols for reporting his trial last year and stuck to guidelines designed to ensure he couldn’t grandstand or promote his beliefs.

“I’ve never seen that happen before in my time in media and I think it was a great credit to all organisations involved,” Alexander said.

“It was a powerful thing to do and it laid a strong foundation for the ongoing coverage and relationships.”

RNZ head of news Richard Sutherland said individual media organisations would probably have followed the same principles anyway, without a binding pact in place.

But some free speech and media freedom advocates were alarmed by that.

Media crisis meetings
Alexander  – the current chair of the Media Freedom Committee which represents the mutual interests of the news media – said the media had been meeting twice a year with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (which organised this week’s hui), with terror attacks or crises in future in mind.

“Some protocols have been drafted,” said Alexander.

“I’m not aware of this happening in any other jurisdiction and it’s evidence of the media’s desire to be a responsible member of our community.”

Providing a Muslim community perspective on the panel was Khairiah A Rahman, a senior lecturer at the School of Communication Studies at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) and a board member and researcher of AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.

She analysed Representations of Islam and Muslims in New Zealand Media in 2017 and in March 2019 she told Mediawatch she had found reporting lacking in several ways.

About 13,000 of just over 14,000 stories in the New Zealand media that included the word Islam also mentioned either terrorism or Islamic Jihad — and most were from from overseas sources.

“There appears to be a growing misconceived hatred for a faith supported by 1.5 billion of the world’s population, but more importantly, this destructive trend is promoted by the media, consciously or not,” Rahman’s paper concluded.

Praised media response
Last Tuesday in Christchurch, she praised the media response to the mosque attacks, but pointed to examples of reporting from the past that had caused offence.

She cited coverage of the so-called “jihadi brides” issue.

In 2015, Prime Minister John Key called New Zealand women travelling to Syria and Iraq “jihadi brides.” The director of the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) said the numbers were rising.  But in 2016, the SIS revealed none of the women involved actually left from New Zealand.

Rahman also warned visual elements of stories could be discriminatory and cited a Sunday Star Times story from 2014: Fears of terror in our own backyard.

The story was published at a time when government ministers were considering new measures to stop New Zealanders heading overseas as foreign fighters.

The main photo portrayed was of Sheik Abu Abdullah outside his home in West Auckland, under which a caption read: “FIREBRAND OR MAN OF PEACE?”

“You have to wonder what was the purpose of that,” Rahman said.

Experienced journalists
The story was written by two experienced journalists and focused on this controversial figure, also known as Abu Hamam, who had been barred from the Avondale Islamic Centre.

“He was not interviewed in the story so how is it fair to call him ‘Firebrand… or man of peace?’

“If you understand the people you’re reporting on in the marginalised position that they come from it’s not that difficult,” she said.

The story included comment from Muslims in Auckland who knew him, followers and Muslim experts. On the face of it the story has the kind of context and community input critics say is often missing.

“I disagree. If you were to run that story past the Muslim community there will be some things they will point out to you. You find that the voices are diminished, because at the end there is a list of people who have been through Australia and joined ISIS.”

At the foot of the article was a list of four “Kiwi Jihadis”, including Daryl Jones and Christopher Havard, killed in a US drone strike alongside al-Qaeda militants in 2013. The paper said Havard’s family claimed he was radicalised at a mosque in Christchurch.

“If you have a good introduction, but the final part is horrible, you go away thinking Muslim people are horrible,” Rahman said.

‘Largely negative’
Her research on how the New Zealand media treated Muslims before the Christchurch attacks showed coverage was “largely negative”.

“But in the Royal Commission’s report, there was no mention of the media having any responsibility. I made a submission to the Royal Commission pointing out that the media was responsible for perpetuating negative stereotypes and ideas – largely from international media,” Rahman said.

“I think it’s a start to recognise this.”

Rahman left the media with this message last Tuesday:

“Listen and respond. Do not write narratives about us without us. Do not talk over us or for us.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has shared warm greetings as the month of Ramadan ends and has wished the Muslim members of the Fiji community and all Fijians a Happy Eid today.

Bainimarama said he understood the importance of Eid for Muslims and thanked them for their willpower in observing the covid-19 coronavirus pandemic restrictions in place.

All houses of worship were closed throughout the duration of Ramadan.

READ MORE: Muslims in Fiji and around the world celebrate Eid today

The Prime Minister said that without physically gathering as a community, this year’s Ramadan felt different. However, he was proud to watch Fijian Muslims like all other religious bodies show that faithfulness could not be broken by distance or disease.

“I thank those who showed patience by forgoing the usual mass prayers. And I thank those who fortified their faith, knowing that these changes to our routines were for the greater good.”

Bainimarama added that the sacrifice for the past months had proven Fiji’s commitment to eliminating covid-19 and that the people of Fiji could “emerge as victors”.

Fiji has had 18 confirmed cases of covid-19 and all have recovered.

Koroi Tadulala is a multimedia journalist of FBC News.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

In 2017, the New Zealand media featured 14,349 stories that included the word Islam – nearly 13,000 of those stories mentioned either terrorism or Islamic Jihad.

The stats are from an academic article in Pacific Journalism Review by Auckland University of Technology’s senior lecturer and Pacific Media Centre board member Khairiah Rahman and Azadeh Emadi of Glasgow University:

READ MORE: Representation of Islam and Muslims in New Zealand media

LISTEN TO MEDIAWATCH

The pair wrote that the paper was necessary because:

“there appears to be a growing misconceived hatred for a faith supported by 1.5 billion of the world’s population, but more importantly, this destructive trend is promoted by the media, consciously or not, and has the potential to ultimately cause an unnecessary and irreparable rift in civil society.”

And they wrote:

“The media can rectify their misrepresentations of Muslims by adopting intercultural dialogue. The outcome would present a holistic story that uses the voices of those involved respectfully.”

In the days since the mass murder at the mosques in Christchurch Muslim voices are finally being heard. It’s beyond tragic that it’s taken an act of such murderous evil to bring that about.

Unsurprising to Muslims
If there’s been a unifying theme among many of the op-eds published in recent days it’s that as shocking as the white supremacist attack was – it wasn’t surprising to Muslims.

Waleed Aly, a co-host of the Australian version of The Project, began last Friday’s programme with an editorial. He said:

“Of all the things I could say tonight, that I’m gutted and I’m scared and I feel overcome with utter hopelessness, the most dishonest thing, the most dishonest thing would be to say that I’m shocked. I’m simply not. There’s nothing about what happened in Christchurch today that shocked me. I wasn’t shocked when six people were shot to death at a mosque in Quebec City two years ago. I wasn’t shocked when a man drove a van into Finsbury Park mosque in London about six months later and I wasn’t shocked when 11 Jews were shot dead in a Pittsburgh synagogue late last year or when nine Christians were killed at a church in Charleston. If we’re honest, we’ll know this has been coming.”

The video has been shared 12 million times and seen Prime Minister Scott Morrison threaten Network 10 with a defamation case.

Writing on the Vice website lawyer and chairperson of the Khadija Leadership Network Pakeeza Rasheed wrote:

“I am sad that this happened but I am equally angry that little had been done to address the issues leading up to this event. As Muslims we have been told our anger is dangerous, our anger is unacceptable. … For so long we have been told to be quiet, to be invisible, to know our place and apologise for our very existence. To be grateful that we were allowed to be a part of a utopian paradise. But let’s not fool ourselves. We have never really been a part of New Zealand. We have merely been allowed to exist—never embraced, never included, never accepted. Muslims have been in New Zealand since the 1800s but we are still treated as outsiders.”

‘We ignored it’
Donna Miles-Mohab writing on Newsroom said:

“Islamophobia: you cannot tackle it if you don’t acknowledge it exists. Let’s face it; we ignored it. We chose to look away. We chose to refuse to acknowledge that Islamophobia is a problem in New Zealand. It’s a hard pill to swallow, I know – especially now that most of us feel so devastated by the news and feel so shocked that such an evil act can happen in a country full of love and tolerance. But to many Muslims, especially hijabi Muslim women, the hate that gave rise to this evil act is not entirely unfamiliar.”

And she noted: “An informal survey of 100 young Muslim women conducted by the Islamic Women Council of New Zealand (IWCNZ) showed 80 percent were harassed or discriminated within the previous year.”

On RNZ’s website Saziah Bashir wrote:

“Muslims have been dehumanised and demonised in the media the world over since 9/11. The failure to include Muslim voices in this narrative has left unchallenged the stereotypes painted of us, as if we are a two-dimensional monolith, a single monstrous Other.”

And she had some suggestions…

“Share on social media the commentary from Muslims who are sharing their thoughts and experiences and if you are white then share the immense platform you are often privileged to occupy.”

Plenty of sharing
There’s been plenty of sharing going on. The Manukau Police posted a video on Facebook of Inspector Naila Hassan – New Zealand’s highest ranked Muslim police officer – addressing a vigil marking the tragedy.

In a profile of Inspector Hassan published by Stuff last year, she revealed that it had taken her 20 years to admit to her colleagues she was Muslim – clearly it’s not just the media that at times has felt less than welcoming to Muslim views.

Green MP Chloe Swarbrick used her Facebook page to let her friend Mukseet to tell his story. The post has been shared 10,000 times.

Mukseet writes candidly about growing up in a racist country and then shares this anecdote: .

“I watched my mum bursting with pride as she recounted to my aunty in Bangladesh the story of how she went for a walk this morning, and a white woman came up to her, greeted her as a friend, took her hands and said ‘I’m so sorry for your loss’.”

He continued: “Your messages mean a lot. Your support means a lot. They have brought me to tears, helped to keep me grounded, and brought me back from some really dark places. But if I’m to be honest; they’re not enough. Action is so much harder than apathy. But look where apathy and complacency got us.

“In these times when hate and bigotry no longer have to hide in the shadows; listen to minorities, talk to those around you, if you hear someone spouting hate, call that shit out.”

Earthquake shelter
Dr Anwar Ghani of the Federation of Islamic Societies was asked on TVNZ’s Marae on Sunday about that lack of surprise at the attacks but he had other things he wanted to say first:

“This particular mosque at Deans Avenue was a place for shelter when we had the earthquakes and they used to serve meal to three to four hundred people every day. And the community made a point of going the provide at least whatever they could. That was their sense of doing community good.”

And then Dr Ghani answered the question about why the attack hadn’t come as a complete surprise to Muslims.

“While we are not surprised but we are certainly shocked that it could happen at this level, this magnitude. We are lost for words. We also know that New Zealand stands together. We have seen at the vigil in Hamilton – such a small community but six seven thousand people came and showed solidarity.”.

One of the biggest challenges coming up for the media is how to deal with the upcoming trial of the man responsible this crime. Anjum Rahman, of the Islamic Woman’s Council, was asked on TVNZ’s Q and A programme about the accused mass murderer’s plan to represent himself in court.

She replied that he would represent himself and like all New Zealanders he had that right but the media had a responsibility not to report everything just for the sake of it. “I would be asking all media to show extreme restraint in terms of which of his messages they choose to put out to the public. Don’t let him play the game.”

If Anjum Rahman was looking forward to the media reporting responsibility, the Spinoff’s Duncan Grieve was looking at how the media was handling some of its less edifying efforts from the past. In an article titled: ‘The quiet deletion of the Islamophobic archives,’ Grieves pointed out that a photo Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking holding up a tee-shirt with the Okay symbol that is popular with white supremacists had been removed (Hosking has said he was unaware of the symbol’s associations with the alt-right); and that an article by fellow ZB host Chris Lynch that asked “Does Islam have any place in public swimming pools?” had also been removed.

On-air apology
Mediawatch hasn’t read the the scrubbed op-ed but presumably it objected to women only hours – often popular with non Muslim women as well – on the grounds it was buckling to Islamic demands.

Lynch made an on-air apology.

Newsroom’s Thomas Coughlan took a look at the recent history of politicians criticising Islam and Muslim immigration to New Zealand. (He spoke to Bryan Crump about it on Monday night on Lately.)

He pointed our current foreign and deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters is a repeat offender. Peters is quoted as saying: “They say – ah yes – but New Zealand has always been a nation of immigrants. They miss a crucial point. New Zealand has never been a nation of Islamic immigrants…” .

Coughlan’s list was far from comprehensive. In 2002 Richard Prebble – then the leader of the ACT Party – warned of the dangers of people from desert cultures and advocated taking in white farmers from Southern Africa instead – who he described as real refugees.

The comments barely rated a mention with Scoop and Australia’s Green Left Weekly being the only places online with articles mentioning the press release.

Didn’t rate a mention
And in his self-published 2014 autobiography Don Brash dedicated a whole chapter to the question fundamentalist religion.

Most of the chapter is made of an article that Brash wrote while he was the leader of the National Party but was never published because his colleagues at the time warned him that it would confirm people’s impression that he was a racist.

In it he quotes approvingly from a paper by a former Australian Treasury secretary – “not some kind of extreme right-wing nutter,” according to Brash – which advocated bringing Muslim immigration to a virtual halt because, he claimed, Islam was a culture that “for the past 500 years or so failed its adherents as its inward-looking theocracy has resulted in it falling further and further behind the West”.

Brash’s book was the subject of quite a few interviews but as far as Mediawatch is aware his support for massively restricting Muslim immigration didn’t rate a mention.

This article is republished under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Thousands of New Zealanders flocked to the “Love Aotearoa Hate Racism” rally at Aotea Square in central Auckland today in solidarity with the Muslim community in the wake of the terrorist attack on two mosques in Christchurch just over a week ago.

The colourful and vibrant rally vowed to “maintain unity” and spokespeople said this was another example of the “real New Zealand”, a land of compassion and love.

#TheyAreUs

One speaker described the “nameless” terrorist, a white Australian who killed 50 Muslim worshippers at Friday prayers on March 15 and will appear in the High Court on April 5, as a “cockroach” who had failed to divide New Zealanders.

Speakers included Ibrar Sheikh, secretary of the Federation of Islamic Associations of NZ, Ian Rintoul from Refugee Action Coalition Sydney, Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson, Mike Treen from Global Peace and Justice Aotearoa, and Māori activist Joe Trinder, co-founder of the organisers, Love Aotearoa Hate Racism (LAHR).

“LAHR believes that, while the shooting at the mosques was the deed of one gunman, the attack is the tragic consequence of Aotearoa’s failure to address racism within its midst,” said Joe Carolan, co-founder of LAHR.

“In contrast to the picture of ‘a peaceful, harmonious, tolerant’ society painted over the past week, Aotearoa for too long has seen the scapegoating of migrants and refugees, with mainstream politicians blaming immigration for our housing and economic crisis.

-Partners-

“This has given confidence to fascist elements here and overseas, culminating in last week’s tragic and harrowing outcome.”

LAHR is a coalition of unions, community, and migrant groups, which was formed last July in response to attempts by the far right to peddle Islamophobic, anti-migrant, anti-refugee politics in New Zealand.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Summer Joyan’s open letter to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern:

Dear Prime Minister Ardern,

I am a 13-year-old Muslim girl from Australia and I would like to publicly share my appreciation with you. I belong to the generation that was born after 11 September 2001. I have never really contemplated how dark the anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant language is that permeates Australian society, because it is all I have ever known. I guess I’ve become used to hearing political leaders use that same language.

But then, after seeing the way you have responded to the terrorist attack in Christchurch, I realised that I now know what the role of a leader truly is. So I want to thank you on behalf of the Muslim community in this country for all that you’ve done since Friday. The way you have expressed support and genuine empathy for the Muslim community, and your care for the people of New Zealand as a whole, have been magnificent to see. And I wanted you to know how much it means to me.

#TheyAreUs

Today I watched a video of you talking to the students at Cashmere High School regarding the terrorist attack. You showed such strength and kindness, and it made me wish I could experience the same thing in Australia. In my high school, not a single teacher or figure of authority even mentioned the attacks. They didn’t acknowledge that a white supremacist murdered 50 innocent Muslim men, women and children in a usually peaceful place of worship. They didn’t offer support or reach out to the Muslim girls in my school or even provide counselling services for grief and support.

Today’s “Unbreakable” New Zealand Herald front page. Image: PMC

In a country that is so similar to New Zealand, and yet also so different, can you imagine the comfort that my Muslim friends and I felt, knowing there was one leader in a neighbouring country that was on our side? My friends and I are Muslim; we were all born in Australian and it is the only place we have ever known. But this has been the first time we have ever felt like we were part of the fabric of a community, and it breaks my heart that this feeling of belonging has come at the cost of 50 lives. If only more politicians had the courage to stand up to injustices and knew when to stop playing political games with the lives of people who depend on them.

Your leadership has brought the world together. By supporting the New Zealand community, no matter what their religion, you have shown what a great leader you are ― not just in the good times, but when the times are as dark as can be. I cannot imagine any other political leader doing what you have done. I think that you deserve the Nobel Peace Prize! Many world leaders could learn a lot from the way you have held your nation together and comforted those who are grieving.

-Partners-

I’m sure you will remain Prime Minister of New Zealand for a long time. But if not, do you think maybe you could move to Australia and become our Prime Minister? That would be a dream come true.

Thank you again for all that you have done.

From an Australian-Muslim girl who now knows what real leadership looks like,

Summer Joyan

The solidarity vigil crowd at Auckland’s Domain last night. Image: David Robie/PMC A policeman at the solidarity vigil in Auckland’s Domain last night. Image: David Robie/PMC

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

by Dr Bryce Edwards

Jacinda Ardern has led the way in how she’s responded to the Christchurch terrorist atrocity. The prime minister has emphasised the need to come together and to not allow the actions of a terrorist to divide New Zealand any further. She has laid the blame for Friday’s massacre firmly at the feet of the perpetrator, rejecting the idea that his beliefs are representative of New Zealanders (while at the same time signalling to people in this country that as a society we must question and challenge attitudes and structures that contribute to intolerance and hatred).

Ardern has won praise from across the political spectrum for her measured, compassionate approach. Others have not been so conciliatory, and the search for answers as to why the attack took place will be a difficult process, with many causes being singled out for blame.

My column on Tuesday dealt with the question of whether our political leaders have, in some part, played a role in increasing hate or intolerance – see: Politicians’ words under scrutiny after Christchurch terror attacks. Similarly, Hamish Rutherford addressed this issue in his article, Mainstream political policy may offer a home for racist views. And in Parliament yesterday Green MP Golriz Ghahraman challenged her fellow parliamentarians over having “fanned the flames of division” in the past.

There is a danger in going too carelessly down this path, however. In fact, caution is advisable. If the blame-game becomes too toxic then, not only will it become counterproductive to the search for answers, but it will poison New Zealand politics and society (something the terrorist seemed very keen to do). Knee-jerk levelling of blame has the potential to be divisive, precisely at a time when unity and harmony is required (and mostly being achieved).

In two now notorious examples of finger-pointing internationally, Australian senator Fraser Anning blamed the terrorist attacks on Muslims themselves, while in the US Chelsea Clinton copped the blame due to a recent statement she made opposing antisemitism.

At home, targets for blame have ranged from politicians, intelligence services, rightwing and leftwing commentators (everyone from Mike Hosking to Chris Trotter), free-speech advocates, firearm sellers, social media and the prejudice of the New Zealand public, but rarely is evidence offered to support the contention of culpability for this atrocity.

Debates over all of these issues, and many more, need to be had. We need answers for why this attack took place. And we must address the fact that racism and religious intolerance is a daily reality in New Zealand.

But caution is also needed. It’s worth taking heed of the warning issued by Kenan Malik, one of Britain’s leading leftwing public intellectuals, who wrote immediately in the wake of the Christchurch attacks that “the dead deserve better” than a rush into “name-calling and invective” – see his short Guardian column, Do not let raw anger cloud our judgment after Christchurch.

Malik argues that debate and examination is absolutely necessary: “The issues raised by the barbarous terror are many and urgent – the rise of the far right and how to combat it; how mainstream commentators talk of Muslims and immigration and whiteness; the boundaries of free speech; the regulation of social media. And so on. I will no doubt have my say on these issues in the coming days.”

However, this does not seem to be occurring in a healthy, productive manner: “What has been depressing, though, has been the way that much of the discussion has degenerated into name-calling and invective. The dead of Christchurch have seemingly become a stage on which every contemporary debate from Brexit to the politics of identity is played out. The rawness of anger inevitably clouds judgment.”

He concludes by saying, “To say that the dead deserve better is to say that we should be better in the way we engage with the living, with each other. And we should.”

Another British commentator, Maajid Nawaz, who is a Muslim and a former parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrats, writes in even stronger terms that “Radical Islamists and radical leftists have seized on the Christchurch tragedy to push their own hateful agendas” – see his column from The Times newspaper: The New Zealand mosque massacre blame game is out of control.

Nawaz argues that this type of politicisation risks falling into the “trap” that the terrorist set to create division, chaos, and to pit the political left against the political right. He also fears the blame-game will lead to a shutting down of debate.

Nawaz is worth reading at length: “In my youth, as an angry 15-year-old Muslim witnessing the Bosnia genocide, I once succumbed to this temptation and promoted extreme Islamism myself for a few years. I know what giving in to hate feels like, and I know the lasting damage it can cause. But that is exactly the reaction that extremists want, and exactly why it must be resisted with all our might. So it is with no surprise that I noticed, a mere day after 50 of my fellow Muslims were so publicly and tragically killed, while the blood was still wet and the bodies remained unburied, that the ideologues had circled like vultures. Opportunistic Islamist and far-left extremists began calling for a purge of people whose politics they disagree with, and started publishing McCarthyite lists of personae non grata to target.”

In another column, Nawaz argues, “Now is not the time to settle political scores. Now is the time to reflect, reach out and respond with mercy from a position of moral authority” – see: New Zealand shootings: Muslims are fearful and hurting but we must not give in to hate.

Also in Britain, Claire Fox has written that “One of the most distasteful aspects of this was the casual way that within hours of the outrage, various conservative commentators were being openly named as indirectly responsible for the New Zealand massacre” – see her column in The Telegraph: Why I am so disturbed by how the Christchurch massacre is being used for political point-scoring (paywalled).

Fox says that there’s nothing wrong with debate and analysis, but this should not be motivated by pre-existing political agendas: “Don’t get me wrong: I don’t expect a moratorium on politics as we mourn. I am political and appreciate that we want to make sense of what seems such a senseless act, especially as the killer himself framed his actions in a rambling ‘political manifesto’. But a rush to use the event to push one’s own political agenda surely displays bad faith.”

After condemning the “white supremacism” behind the terrorism as well as “scaremongering about refugees” and other xenophobic ills, Fox implores that our responses don’t just lead to the suppression of debate and ideas: “I also hate the tendency to use a massacre to slander opponents or demand particular opinions are censored. Whatever comes from the New Zealand atrocity, we should be better than that. After all, the underlying message of the terrorist was that he intended to fracture political debate and divide opinion to cause a toxic virus of hostility. Let’s make sure he doesn’t succeed.”

Similar points are made by Brendan O’Neill at the Spiked-Online website. He himself points the finger at various political commentators and activists: “The blame game they’ve been playing in the aftermath of the racist mass murder in New Zealand has been ghoulish and deeply disturbing. The bodies of the 50 murdered Muslims were barely cold before various observers, activists and leftists were naming and shaming those people who they think ‘laid the ground’ for this atrocity. And it apparently includes everyone from alt-right agitators to any mainstream newspaper columnist who has raised so much as a peep of criticism about radical Islam” – see: New Zealand’s ghoulish opportunists.

Writing for The Australian, columnist Janet Albrechtsen suggested that Fraser Anning was far from the only political actor exploiting the tragedy for their own “narrow-minded, illiberal political agendas” – see: Be wary of blame and let’s not shut down debate (paywalled).

Albrechtsen argued that rightwing voices were being unfairly targeted, and political freedoms threatened: “Those playing blame games with politics are trying to paint as mainstream what happens on the fringes of politics. That attempt to tar the centre-Right with the lunacy of the far-Right is wicked, politically driven and wrong in fact. Working in reverse, the blame-gamers are also trying to present entirely legitimate debates about immigration, integration, the self-evident clash of cultures and the rise of political Islam as fringe discussions that must be shut down. The day after terrorist attacks in Christchurch, an editor at The Saturday Paper called for laws to ‘penalise media outlets, and figures that consistently promote fear and hatred’ and ‘robust laws against the spread of hate speech’.”

Here in New Zealand, Herald columnist Jon Stokes also observes that in the wake of the terrorist atrocity, “There is a move to shut down the voices and ideas of others, to try to homogenise ideas and perspectives” – see: Ideas should be challenged not shut down.

Stokes argues against suppressing too much of the information about the terrorist event and even the terrorist himself, and he also says that we need wider and healthier political debate in general: “The evil unleashed on Friday, March 15 showed me that those silenced or suppressed voices will always find a home, and an outlet to ensure they are heard. The way forward is light, not darkness, it is away with anonymity and facelessness. It is a time of ownership of our ideas and views, and embracing tolerance and understanding.”

Writing today, Karl du Fresne finds it difficult to reconcile two very different narratives that have emerged about New Zealand and the terrorist attacks. On the one hand “New Zealand reacted with a genuine and overwhelming outpouring of shock, grief and anguish”, but according to an “alternative narrative, we are a hateful nation of racists, white supremacists and Islamophobes” – see: Some would paint us as a nation of hateful racists – that’s not the real NZ.

Certainly, there are politicians and activists elsewhere who will attempt to paint a picture of hate in New Zealand for their own ends – something we are seeing in Turkey at the moment.

In this regard, it’s worth reading the views of Massey University’s Rouben Azizian, who is a professor in the Centre of Defence and Security Study: “It is very dangerous when they use this rhetoric of us against them and them against us. They have to be very careful because they can indeed incite the feelings of a clash of civilisations, when this is a clash involving one idiot, a crazy, brainwashed person against innocent Muslim people” – see Rob Mitchell’s Christchurch shooting: Erdogan comments endanger bond built on blood and battle.

Finally, there’s a case to be made that finger-pointing is almost entirely redundant given that there was a sole terrorist involved, and he was “not one of us”, echoing Jacinda Ardern’s “This is not us” refrain. The case is put by Chris Trotter, who says “What happened at the Linwood and Al Noor mosques was horrific, but it wasn’t our doing. As we begin the long journey towards recovery, it is vitally important that we keep that fact squarely before us. New Zealand is a good place. New Zealanders are good people. We are not responsible for Brenton Tarrant’s dreadful crime. This is not us” – see: What Happened Here?

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Paying tribute to the victims of the Christchurch terror attacks in Parliament today, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern declared the accused gunman would remain “nameless”.

She vowed that would not name the Australian man and told others in New Zealand to do the same.

READ MORE: RNZ’s tribute to the lost – ‘They are us’

“He may have sought notoriety, but we in New Zealand will give him nothing, not even his name,” she said.

“He is a terrorist. He is a criminal. He is an extremist. But he will, when I speak, be nameless.”

While saying that while a quiet Friday afternoon had become “our darkest of days”, immediate measures had been put in place to ensure the safety of New Zealand’s Muslim community and everyone following Friday’s massacre of 50 people praying at two mosques in Christchurch.

She also pledged justice for the families.

The man is due to reappear in the High Court in Christchurch on April 5 charged with one count of murder, but expected to face other charges.

Her full statement to Parliament on the Christchurch terror attack:

Mr Speaker,

Al salam Alaikum

Peace be upon you. And peace be upon all of us.

Mr Speaker the 15th of March will now forever be a day etched in our collective memories. On a quiet Friday afternoon a man stormed into a place of peaceful worship and took away the lives of 50 people.

That quiet Friday afternoon has become our darkest of days.

But for the families, it was more than that. It was the day that the simple act of prayer – of practising their Muslim faith and religion – led to the loss of their loved ones lives.

Those loved ones, were brothers, daughters, fathers and children.

They were New Zealanders. They are us.

And because they are us, we, as a nation, we mourn them.

We feel a huge duty of care to them. And Mr Speaker, we have so much we feel the need to say and to do.

One of the roles I never anticipated having, and hoped never to have, is to voice the grief of a nation.

At this time, it has been second only to securing the care of those affected, and the safety of everyone.

And in this role, I wanted to speak directly to the families. We cannot know your grief, but we can walk with you at every stage. We can. And we will, surround you with aroha, manaakitanga and all that makes us, us. Our hearts are heavy but our spirit is strong.

Mr Speaker, 6 minutes after a 111 call was placed alerting the police to the shootings at Al-Noor mosque, police were on the scene.

The arrest itself was nothing short of an act of bravery. Two country police officers rammed the vehicle from which the offender was still shooting. They pulled open his car door, when there were explosives inside, and pulled him out.

I know we all wish to acknowledge that their acts put the safety of New Zealanders above their own, and we thank them.

But they were not the only ones who showed extraordinary courage.

Naeem Rashid, originally from Pakistan, died after rushing at the terrorist and trying to wrestle the gun from him. He lost his life trying to save those who were worshipping alongside him.

Abdul Aziz, originally from Afghanistan, confronted and faced down the armed terrorist after grabbing the nearest thing to hand – a simple eftpos machine. He risked his life and no doubt saved many with his selfless bravery.

There will be countless stories, some of which we may never know, but to each, we acknowledge you in this place, in this House.

For many of us the first sign of the scale of this terrorist attack was the images of ambulance staff transporting victims to Christchurch hospital.

To the first responders, the ambulance staff and the health professionals who have assisted – and who continue to assist those who have been injured.

Please accept the heartfelt thanks of us all. I saw first-hand your care and your professionalism in the face of extraordinary challenges. We are proud of your work, and incredibly grateful for it.

Mr Speaker, if you’ll allow, I’d like to talk about some of the immediate measures currently in place especially to ensure the safety of our Muslim community, and more broadly the safety of everyone.

As a nation, we do remain on high alert. While there isn’t a specific threat at present, we are maintaining vigilance.

Unfortunately, we have seen in countries that know the horrors of terrorism more than us, there is a pattern of increased tension and actions over the weeks that follow that means we do need to ensure that vigilance is maintained.

There is an additional and ongoing security presence in Christchurch, and as the police have indicated, there will continue to be a police presence at mosques around the country while their doors are open. When they are closed, police will be in the vicinity.

There is a huge focus on ensuring the needs of families are met. That has to be our priority. A community welfare centre has been set up near the hospital in Christchurch to make sure people know how to access support.

Visas for family members overseas are being prioritised so that they can attend funerals. Funeral costs are covered, and we have moved quickly to ensure that this includes repatriation costs for any family members who would like to move their loved ones away from New Zealand.

We are working to provide mental health and social support. The 1737 number yesterday received roughly 600 texts or phonecalls. They are on average lasting around 40 minutes, and I encourage anyone in need to reach out and use these services. They are there for you.

Our language service has also provided support from more than 5000 contacts, ensuring whether you are ACC or MSD, you are able to pass on the support that is needed, in the language that is needed. To all those working within this service, we say thank you.

Our security and intelligence services are receiving a range of additional information. As has been the case in the past, these are being taken extremely seriously, and they are being followed up.

I know though Mr Speaker, that there have rightly been questions around how this could have happened here. In a place that prides itself on being open, peaceful, diverse.

And there is anger that it has happened here.

There are many questions that need to be answered, and the assurance that I give you is that they will be.

Yesterday Cabinet agreed that an inquiry, one that looks into the events that led up to the attack on 15 March, will occur. We will examine what we did know, could have known, or should have known. We cannot allow this to happen again.

Part of ensuring the safety of New Zealanders must include a frank examination of our gun laws.

As I have already said Mr Speaker, our gun laws will change. Cabinet met yesterday and made in-principle decisions, 72 hours after the attack.

Before we meet again next Monday, these decisions will be announced.

Mr Speaker, there is one person at the centre of this act of terror against our Muslim community in New Zealand.

A 28-year-old man – an Australian citizen – has been charged with one count of murder. Other charges will follow. He will face the full force of the law in New Zealand. The families of the fallen will have justice.

He sought many things from his act of terror, but one was notoriety.

And that is why you will never hear me mention his name.

He is a terrorist. He is a criminal. He is an extremist.

But he will, when I speak, be nameless.

And to others I implore you: speak the names of those who were lost, rather than name of the man who took them.

He may have sought notoriety, but we in New Zealand will give him nothing. Not even his name.

Mr Speaker, we will also look at the role social media played and what steps we can take, including on the international stage, and in unison with our partners.

There is no question that ideas and language of division and hate have existed for decades, but their form of distribution, the tools of organisation, they are new.

We cannot simply sit back and accept that these platforms just exist and that what is said on them is not the responsibility of the place where they are published. They are the publisher. Not just the postman. There cannot be a case of all profit no responsibility. This of course doesn’t take away the responsibility we too must show as a nation, to confront racism, violence and extremism. I don’t have all of the answers now, but we must collectively find them. And we must act.

Mr Speaker, we are deeply grateful for all messages of sympathy, support and solidarity that we are receiving from our friends all around the world. And we are grateful to the global Muslim community who have stood with us, and we stand with them.

Mr Speaker, I acknowledge that we too also stand with Christchurch, in a devastating blow that this has been to their recovery. I acknowledge every member of this House that has stood alongside their Muslim community but especially those in Canterbury as we acknowledge this double grief

As I conclude I acknowledge there are many stories that will have struck all of us since the 15th of March.

One I wish to mention, is that of Hati Mohemmed Daoud Nabi.

He was the 71-year-old man who opened the door at the Al-Noor mosque and uttered the words ‘Hello brother, welcome’. His final words.

Of course he had no idea of the hate that sat behind the door, but his welcome tells us so much – that he was a member of a faith that welcomed all its members, that showed openness, and care.

I have said many times Mr Speaker, we are a nation of 200 ethnicities, 160 languages. We open our doors to others and say welcome. And the only thing that must change after the events of Friday, is that this same door must close on all of those who espouse hate and fear.

Yes the person who committed these acts was not from here. He was not raised here. He did not find his ideology here, but that is not to say that those very same views do not live here.

I know that as a nation, we wish to provide every comfort we can to our Muslim community in this darkest of times. And we are. The mountain of flowers around the country that lie at the doors of mosques, the spontaneous song outside the gates. These are ways of expressing an outpouring of love and empathy. But we wish to do more.

We wish for every member of our communities to also feel safe.

Safety means being free from the fear of violence.

But it also means being free from the fear of those sentiments of racism and hate, that create a place where violence can flourish.

And every single one of us has the power to change that.

Mr Speaker on Friday it will be a week since the attack.

Members of the Muslim community will gather for worship on that day.

Let us acknowledge their grief as they do.

Let’s support them as they gather again for worship.

We are one, they are us.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was written for, and first published by, German magazine Cicero.de (ref. Attentat in Christchurch – Willkommen in der Hölle). Thanks also to Prof David Robie, Pacific Media Centre AsiaPacificReport.nz for providing the featured image for this article.

OUT OF THE BLUE:

It was 1:39pm, Friday March 15. As was usual for a Friday hundreds of people had turned up to pray at the Al Noor Mosque in Riccarton, Christchurch. All was peaceful, women, children, men, people of all ages young and old, both Sunni and Shia, were in contemplative repose free of worry. It was a mild, late summer, 20 degrees celsius day. Earlier, the touring Bangladesh Cricket Team had briefly visited the mosque, but left early to attend a press conference. By 1:39pm, they had returned and were outside exiting a bus, intending to continue with their prayers inside the mosque.

At 1:40pm, ahead of the team, a man entered the mosque walking quickly up the front steps. He was carrying an assault rifle and dressed in combat uniform. He immediately began shooting people who were kneeling in prayer. The shots rang out and the Bangladesh team members realising they were witnesses to an attack, retreated, and fled on foot to nearby Hagley Park.

Back inside the Al Noor Mosque scores of worshipers were being gunned down, some killed instantly, others bleeding to death. The victims included little Mucaad Ibrahim who was three years of age.

Mucaad was known by his loved ones as a wise “old soul” and possessed an “intelligence beyond his years”.

Eye witnesses said that once the killer began shooting people, little Mucaad became separated from his family. In the chaos, his family could not find him. The next day Police confirmed he too had been shot dead by the killer.

The murders continued at the Al Noor Mosque until the killer’s firearms ran out of bullets. Then, he simply walked out of the mosque, got in his car, and drove six kilometres to the Linwood Mosque. There too were people who had gathered for their regular Friday afternoon prayers.

Mr Aziz picked up an EFTPOS (electronic funds transaction) machine from a table inside the mosque. He ran outside. He saw a man he describes as looking like a soldier. He said to the man: “Who are you”. Mr Aziz then saw three people lying on the ground dead from shotgun blasts. He realised the man was the killer. He approached the attacker, threw the EFTPOS machine hitting the killer, who in turn took from his vehicle a second firearm (a military style semi-automatic assault rifle) and fired four to five shots at Abdul Aziz, missing him. Then, in an attempt to lure the killer away from other people, Mr Aziz shouted at the killer from behind a car: “Come, I’m here. Come I’m here!”

Mr Aziz said he didn’t want the killer to go inside the mosque and kill more people. But the killer remained focussed. He walked directly to the entrance, once inside the mosque he continued his killing spree. Survivors speak of the killer wearing “army clothes”, dressed in “SWAT combat clothing”, helmeted, wearing a vest and a balaclava.

Inside the Linwood Mosque, another witness, Shoaib Gani, was kneeling in prayer. He heard a noise like fireworks but he and others weren’t too concerned and continued with their prayers. Then, as he and his fellow worshipers were kneeling speaking verses from the Koran, the man next to him fell forward with blood pouring from his head. He had been shot and killed instantly, Mr Gani said. Then others too began falling to the floor dead.

Mr Gani crawled under a table. He saw the killer and his firearm. “Written on the rifle were the words, ‘Welcome to hell’,” he said.

Victims, who were wounded and bleeding, were pleading with Mr Gani to help them. But he was frozen to a spot under a table knowing that the killer was walking around the mosque killing as many people as he could. Mr Gani believed he too would also soon be dead, so he reached for his cellphone, he called his parent’s back home in India. But no one answered. He tried to call his father’s number, but the phone kept ringing. He saw people around him bleeding to death. Others with fatal head-wounds “their brains were hanging out. I just couldn’t do anything. I didn’t know what to do.” Mr Gani phoned 111 (the New Zealand emergency number) and told the authorities people were dead and injured: “The lady on the phone asked me to stay on the line as long as I could.”

Outside, Abdul Aziz picked up one of the killer’s discarded shotguns. Inside the mosque, the killer’s assault rifle ran out of bullets. The killer then “dropped his firearm” and ran back to his vehicle. He got in the driver’s seat. Mr Aziz then ran toward the car. He threw a discarded shotgun at the killer’s vehicle: “I threw it like an arrow. It shattered his window.” Mr Aziz thinks the killer thought someone had shot at him with a loaded gun. The killer turned. He swore at Mr Aziz. When the window burst it covered the inside of the car with glass. Mr Aziz said the killer “then took off” driving in his car. He then turn right away from the mosque driving through a red traffic light and out into Christchurch suburban streets.

Some minutes later, Police and ambulance officers arrived at Linwood Mosque. Anti-Terrorist armed Police entered the mosque. Inside, Mr Gani said the survivors were ordered to put their hands up above their heads. The mass murder scene was covered in blood. The Police then secured the area. Some victims survived because they were under the bodies of the dead. Police told survivors to gather near a grassed area outside. There, people began weeping for their husbands, wives, parents, children, friends.

THE ARREST:

Seventeen minutes later, two Police officers identified the killer, apparently driving his car. They drove the police car into the killer’s vehicle, ramming it against a curb. Immediately, they disarmed the killer, cuffed him, noticed home made bombs in the vehicle – IEDs (improvised explosive devices). They arrested the man and secured the scene.

The rest of Christchurch was in lock-down, children were kept safe inside their classrooms, hospitals began to prepare for casualties, the city’s streets became eerily quiet, people were locked in to libraries, shops, their homes. Police and armed forces helicopters networked the skies. No one knew if the terrorist attacks were committed by a group of people or a lone gunman.

But back inside and entrances to the two mosques, 50 people were dead – one of the dead was discovered the next day by Police, the body was laying beneath others who had been killed. Scores of others were in hospital fighting for their lives, at least another ten were in a critical condition in intensive care. Pathologists from all over New Zealand and Australia were heading to Christchurch to help with documenting the method of murder of the dead.

Within hours of the killings, Australian media named the alleged killer as an Australian born citizen named Brenton Tarrant, 28 years of age. On Saturday morning The Australian newspaper’s front page read “Australia’s evil export”.

Other media in New Zealand followed with details of the man’s background. Brenton Harrison Tarrant appeared in court the next day charged with one single count of murder. Other charges will follow. His duty lawyer did not seek name suppression nor bail, the lawyer told the judge: “I’m simply seeking remand and a high court next-available-hearing date.” Tarrant stood cuffed, smiling at those in the courtroom, at one point signaling with his fingers a ‘white supremacist’ sign. He will next appear in the Christchurch High Court on April 5.

THE AFTERMATH:

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern later told media: “It was absolutely his [the offender’s) intention to continue with his attack.” PM Ardern said: “Police are working to build a picture of this tragic event. A complex and comprehensive investigation is (now) underway.” To balance the requirement of investigation with the customs of Muslim burials, PM Ardern said liaison officers are with the victims’ loved ones to help “in a way that is consistent with Muslim faith while taking into account these unprecedented circumstances and the obligations to the coroner.”

PM Ardern said, survivors of the massacre had indicated that this attack was not “of the New Zealand that they know”.

One day later, Survivor Shoaib Gani (mentioned above) told media he still could not sleep or eat. The sounds and sights were still vivid in his head: “I still can feel myself lying on the floor waiting for the bullets to hit me.” He said, he will travel back to India to visit family, but he will return to Christchurch: “It’s just a few people, you know. You can’t blame the whole of New Zealand for this… It’s a good country, people are peaceful. Everybody has helped me here. One right wing (person) doesn’t mean everyone is bad. So I can come back here and live and hope nothing like this happens in the future.”

In the hours after the attacks, all around New Zealand, in the cities and in small country areas, Police were stationed and were ready in case others were involved and were preparing further crimes.

Beside the Police officers, people, of all races and religions, began laying flowers at the steps to their local mosques. Messages included read: “Salam Alaikum, Peace be unto you”, and, Aroha nui”, “Peace and love”, “You are one of us”. The outpouring of grief swept the South Pacific nation, and as this piece was written, a mood of support, comfort, reassurance and solidarity with those of Muslim faith was in evidence.

In Australia, Sydney’s landmark Opera House was like a beacon in the night; coloured blue, red, and white – the colours of the New Zealand flag embossed with the silver fern (Ponga) an emblem of Aotearoa New Zealand. Australia’s peoples, like in New Zealand, began laying flowers at the steps of its mosques in a gesture of inclusiveness.

In the aftermath, New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has committed to ongoing financial assistance to dependents of those who have died or are injured, and assistance, she said, will be ongoing.

Questions are being leveled as to how a person with hate can enter, live, and purchase weapons in New Zealand while expressing hate toward other cultures and harbouring an intent to kill others.

PM Ardern said: “The guns used in this case appear to have been modified. That is a challenge Police have been facing, and that is a challenge that we will look to address in changing our laws… We need to include the fact that modification of guns which can lead them to become essentially the kinds of weapons we have seen used in this terrorist act.”

When asked how she was coping personally with the tragedy, she said: “I am feeling the exact same emotions that every New Zealander is facing. Yes, I have the additional responsibility and weight of expressing the grief of all New Zealanders and I certainly feel that.”

That responsibility includes ensuring New Zealand’s Police, the nation’s intelligence and security services and “the process around watch-lists, including whether or not our border protections are currently in a status that they should be, and, including our gun laws.”

THE BACKSTORY:

Indeed, New Zealand is part of the so-called ‘Five Eyes’ intelligence network that includes the USA, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Global surveillance is coordinated and prioritised among the Five Eyes member states. While significant resource, technology and sophistication is committed to the Five Eyes intelligence agencies, New Zealanders fear that those who find themselves as targets, or within the scope of intelligence officers, are predominantly of the Muslim faith.

In contrast, the accused killer who allegedly committed the horrific Christchurch mosque attacks, has been active both on social media and the dark web expressing, with an intensifying degree, his ideology of hate and intolerance. It does appear of the highest public interest, certainly from an open source intelligence point of view, to ask questions of why New Zealand’s (and indeed the Five Eyes intelligence network’s) surveillance experts did not detect the expressed evil that had radicalised the heart and mind of the perpetrator of this massacre.

It is also fact, that New Zealand is a comparatively safe and peaceful nation. But within its midst are people and groups fermenting on racially-based hate ideas. Whether it be in isolation or among organised groupings, the threat of racially driven terror crimes exists.

The alleged killer, Brenton Tarrant, has lived among those of New Zealand’s southern city Dunedin for at least two years. It appears he was radicalised around 2010 after his father died and he toured Europe. He wrote about becoming “increasingly disgusted” at immigrant communities. In early 2018, Tarrant joined a Dunedin gun club and began practicing his shooting skills and allegedly planned his attacks.

Regarding Christchurch, while it has a history of overt white racist gangs, at this juncture, it does not appear they were directly involved in this series of crimes.

But this leads to many unanswered questions, including:

• Was the killer a lone mass murderer, a sleeper in a cell of one?
• Were those with whom he communicated and engaged with on the web in extreme white racist ideologies aware of his plans?
• Was Christchurch chosen by the killer for logistical reasons?
• Was it because the city is easier to drive around than Dunedin, Wellington or Auckland?
• Was it because Christchurch has at least two mosques within easy driving distance?
• Were the Bangladesh Cricket team in his scope of attacks?
• Was the killer attempting to incite a violent response from Christchurch’s burgeoning Muslim community, or, expecting a response from the Alt-Right, from white racist groups such as the Right Wing Resistance (RWR), the Fourth Reich, and Christchurch’s skinhead community?

THE FUTURE:

Survivors of Friday 15th’s terrorist attack say they have complained of an increase in racism and expressed hate in recent times. They say, their concerns have not been taken seriously. These are the concerns that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has committed to listen to, has committed to represent, and, as the prime advocate for her country’s peoples, to act on to ensure cracks in New Zealand’s border, security and intelligence apparatus are corrected.

And, what of New Zealand’s social culture? How will it be affected? That will be determined by the actions of each individual person, each community, town and city and how as a nation New Zealand redefines “The Kiwi Way”.

Members of New Zealand’s media will also need to act responsibly. It is fair to say some have a reputation for argument that verges on alt-right intolerance, for example, on Twitter only two days after the mass murders, a prominent radio journalist, who is employed by one of New Zealand’s largest networks, tweeted: “28 years on an [sic] we still haven’t stopped madmen getting guns. #ChChMosque… [Replying to @Politikwebsite] And the neo nationalist right are the result of the virtue signaling exclusionary left.”

Perhaps such examples are out of step with New Zealand’s population. But such attitudes do create a dialogue of justification for those who harbour intolerance. However, if the outpouring of love and compassion continues to bind rather than divide, then perhaps New Zealand has received, as they say, ‘a wake-up call’, where racial intolerance and extreme ideologies have no place among peoples of all kinds, Maori and Pakeha, of all religions, political persuasions and creeds.

One thing is certain; to stamp out the evil of hate extremism, New Zealanders will pay a price that will be charged against the Kiwi lifestyle. Personal liberties of freedom, of expression and privacy will certainly be eroded further as this nation of the South Pacific grapples with how to keep its peoples safe. The means of how to achieve relative safety will be hotly debated, but it is a necessary juncture in this nation’s history, a moment when we all must confront and challenge ourselves so that people of innocence, people like little three year old Mucaad Ibrahim, can go about their days in trust, in peace, in joyful purpose and achieve their deserved potential. Anything less is a second killing for the victims of Friday 15, New Zealand’s darkest hour.

OPINION: By Sasya Wreksono in Auckland

In the 20 years I’ve lived in New Zealand since I was little, I’ve never felt unsafe or been discriminated against for being an immigrant or for my beliefs as a Muslim. I’ve always felt grateful for being able to live in a country where people are generally kind, warm and understanding.

Going on road trips with my family around the country, if we couldn’t pray at a mosque we would pray where we could – at train stations, in fields, on the side of the road. While working on set or on location I would pray out in the open.

No one would ever bat an eye.

READ MORE: ‘Everyone was in chaos’ – mother, daughter fled from mosque

Sasya Wreksono … “we can ensure something like this never happens again.” Image: FB

But just because I’ve never personally experienced discrimination here, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. As much as I love New Zealand and as amazing as it is, it’s far from perfect – because nothing is.

This is a country that was built on colonialism, that disregards its native Te Reo Māori language as inferior and that scorns immigrants for rising house prices and decreasing job opportunities.

-Partners-

This little country of ours is known around the world for being a clean, green, warm and welcoming safe haven. While I myself have never experienced otherwise, perhaps underneath the surface there’s always been a fragment of darkness that’s now manifested in the ugliest way imaginable – a piece we clearly now need to acknowledge and change.

Thank you to my fellow Kiwis for their outpouring of support for the Muslim community, especially for those directly affected. We mourn, but we should also reflect and figure out how we can ensure something like this never happens again.

What happened on Friday was appallingly, disgustingly atrocious. While we undoubtedly need to hold alt-right politicians and commentators around the west accountable for pushing the rhetoric of white supremacy and Islamophobia, in turn cultivating bigotry and hatred, we can still do something here at home.

Celebrate our similarities
We need to acknowledge our history and celebrate our similarities, not our differences.

Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji-un. May Allah SWT grant Jannat ul-Firdaus for our Muslim brothers and sisters who lost their lives, and inshaAllah their loved ones are granted love, warmth and sabr [“perseverance”].

Sasya Wreksono is a New Zealand filmmaker from an Indonesian family who migrated many years ago to this country to make Auckland their home. She is a screen production graduate from Auckland University of Technology. This commentary was originally published on her Facebook account and has been republished by the Pacific Media Centre with her permission.

Young women at Auckland’s vigil yesterday for the Christchurch mosque massacre victims. Image: Del Abcede/PMC The faces of some of the 50 victims of the Christchurch mosque massacre. Full RNZ report here. Image: PMC screenshot

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Benny Mawel in Jayapura

A radical Muslim cleric faces being kicked out of Papua after more than 2000 Christians in Indonesia’s Christian-majority eastern province demanded his expulsion.

Members of the minority Muslim community have also called for Ja’far Umar Thalib, a cleric who gained notoriety in a deadly conflict between Christians and Muslims in Ambon, in the Maluku Islands, almost 20 years ago to be kicked out.

The cleric recruited a “jihadist army” in the unrest that claimed the lives of about 5000 people between 2000 and 2003.

The demand to expel him from Papua was made during a protest outside the Papua governor’s office in the provincial capital Jayapura on Monday. Protesters said that if the governor did not expel Thalib they would do it themselves.

They accused the cleric of violence against Christians since he arrived in the area in 2015, with the latest case occurring on February 27 when he and some followers attacked a Christian man in his home for playing music next to a mosque.

The mob also attacked and injured the man’s 14-year-old son.

-Partners-

Protest organiser, Rev John Barangsano of the Evangelical Christian Church of Papua, said the local government should return Thalib to Java.

“We are all here to drive him away peacefully,” Barangsano said.

‘Harmony damaged’
“His presence has damaged interreligious harmony in Papua, and if no action is taken he will turn this place into a land of conflict,” said Rev Dorman Wandikbo, president of the Evangelical Church in Indonesia.

“He should not be here,” he said, adding that Thalib’s influence was spreading in Papua. “We don’t want him to create another conflict like the one that devastated Ambon.”

Theo van der Broek, a Dutch-born Catholic leader, said Thalib and his group pose a serious threat to the people of Papua.

“Papuans want peace, not fighting. So, before any conflict escalates, the government must seriously respond to this appeal,” he said.

Victor Tibul, chairman of the Papuan Christian Students Movement, said Thalib has the potential to transform Papua from a “land of the Gospel” into a headquarters for terrorist groups.

‘No battleground’
“No one should be allowed to turn it into a battleground,” he said.

Several local Muslim leaders were in full agreement.

Taha Alhamid, a Papuan Muslim leader who was also present at the rally, said his community also believed that Talib should be returned to his home town.

“We want the police to immediately remove him from Papua,” he said.

Provincial secretary Herry Dosinaen agreed with the protesters that Thalib had outstayed his welcome.

“The government is ready to take action,” he said.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Battle-scarred they might be, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front have faced their toughest campaign yet.

Armed with nothing but a first-time vote, young troops from the Bangsamoro Islamic Armed Forces prayed they would win the decades-old struggle for autonomy and independence through yesterday’s ballot.

More than 150,000 former combatants of the MILF are among the 2.8 million people who have registered to vote in the plebiscite, where the ratification of the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL) and the creation of a new, expanded Bangsamoro region will be decided.

WATCH: Sofia Tomacruz’s video reports and live updates from Rappler

New role? MILF chairman Murad Ibrahim (left) will likely become the Bangsamoro region’s chief minister if the organic law is ratified in yesterday’s referendum. Image: Malacañang file

MILF leader Al Hajj Murad Ibrahim cast his vote for the first time in the historic referendum seeking to ratify the law that will give more autonomy to the Philippines’ Muslim minority.

The Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL) is seen as the solution to the decades of separatist conflict in Mindanao, a region plagued by poverty and violent extremism, reports Arab News. More than 120,000 people have died in the conflict.

“This is my first time to vote,” said Murad. “During the height of the war, we never thought that this would happen. But after the progress of the peace process, we see that there is light at the end of the tunnel.”

It took the leader of the MILF, formerly the biggest Muslim group in the country, only a few minutes to case his “yes” vote.

First time vote
“I am happy that at least for the first time, I have exercised my right of suffrage,” he later said, adding that his participation in the voting signals the commencement of their transition from a revolutionary into the democratic process.

Like Murad, thousands of MILF fighters, along with their families, also trooped to polling centers yesterday to take part in the voting process, many of them for the first time.

“We are hoping that with this development, we can finally achieve the aspiration of our people for peace, progress and a good life in this part of the country and in the entire country,” Murad said.

Murad said that after the plebiscite, “hopefully the Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA), the transitional government, will be immediately established and we will start to organise our government structure and after the BTA, a regular government in 2022.”

Murad said that once the BOL is implemented, their priorities would be education, medical services, social services,and infrastructure, adding that education was their top priority.

“For more than 50 years of war, many of our people have not obtained education. We cannot really progress if our people are not educated,” he said.

Murad said that as long as the vote is conducted in a fair manner with no manipulation, intimidation or cheating, they are “determined to accept whatever is the result.”

Chief minister
A chief minister will head the BTA and this position will likely go to Murad.

Before he talked peace with the government, Murad was a fearsome MILF commander.

Murad’s decades of rebellion began in 1972 when he joined the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) led by former University of the Philippines professor Nur Misuari.

A group within the MILF disagreed with Nur over a peace deal with the government and broke away in 1981. This group became the MILF.

Murad became the head of MILF’s army, the Bangsamoro Islamic Armed Forces (BIAF). He commanded at least 12,000 men.

When MILF’s then-leader Hashim Salamat died in 2003, Murad took the reins.

After years of fighting government forces, the MILF began peace talks with the Arroyo and then the Aquino administration.

Signing witnessed
In 2012, Murad witnessed the signing of the Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro, which laid the groundwork for the BOL.

The Philippines is a predominantly Catholic country but Mindanao has a significant Muslim population.

Many regard the region as their ancestral homeland, dating back to the 13th Century when Arab traders first arrived, and over the decades various rebel groups sprang up demanding the right to self-rule.

Mindanao has seen a huge amount of violence in recent years – mainly between the army, Muslim separatists and other rebels.

The violence has left Mindanao one of the poorest regions in the Philippines.

The entire region of Mindanao is still under martial law, which was implemented in 2017 after clashes between the army and militants linked to IS.The Philippines is a predominantly Catholic country but Mindanao has a significant Muslim population.

Ancestral homeland
Many regard the region as their ancestral homeland, dating back to the 13th Century when Arab traders first arrived, and over the decades various rebel groups sprang up demanding the right to self-rule.

Mindanao has seen a huge amount of violence in recent years – mainly between the army, Muslim separatists and other rebels.

The violence has left Mindanao one of the poorest regions in the Philippines.

The entire region of Mindanao is still under martial law, which was implemented in 2017 after clashes between the army and militants linked to IS.

If a majrity of the millions of voters from Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur, Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, and Cotabato City voted “yes” include their areas in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), a second voting day will take place on February 6.

This time, in Lanao del Norte – except Iligan City – and 7 towns in North Cotabato.

If a majority of voters in all areas agree to their inclusion, the new BARMM will be comprised of the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, Basilan, Cotabato City, 6 towns in Lanao del Norte, and 67 barangays in North Cotabato.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz