Law on Freedom of Religion or Religious Beliefs and Legal Status of Religious Communities is not perfect, as it is not the Bible or the Quran. It’s law written by people, and as such, is subject to critics and amendments. Agreement is possible if all parties are willing to reach an agreement, said reis of the Islamic community in Montenegro, Mr Rifat Fejzić.
He points out that Islamic community has objections to the Law but are aware that it can also ne amended and improved.
“I believe there’s compromise for everything in life. I call on peaceful solution of all problems. Dialogue, in the first place”, the reis points out.
The Law on Freedom of Religion has encompassed all the differences in Montenegro.
Mr Fejzić firmly believes that the Islamic community will find solution to disputable provisions of the law, on the grounds of the agreement it signed with the Government.
The Law in unacceptable to the Serbian Orthodox Church only. Its expert team has started negotiations with Government delegates with the aim of coming to a solution acceptable for all parties.
Mr Fejzić believes some agreement will be reached.
“Basic agreements address specificity of every religious community and through them, every religious community can identify and directly impact its interests. Earlier law was adopted in 1977. It was the oldest law in Montenegro. It was quite expected the country will start adoption procedure of the new law”, Mr Fejzić explains.
Islamic community is independent and its jurisdiction and activities coincide with Montenegrin borders.
“We are not national community, but rather religious. And we have got several nations. We’ve never fallen into a trap of becoming some national Islamic community. All religions surpass nations”, Mr Fejzić points out.
Commenting on the provisions of the Law referring to property, reis confirms that everybody was focused on the property issues during the talks. He doesn’t see anything wrong with cultural heritage being in the ownership of the state.
“Cultural heritage is state-owned in every country. That’s beyond dispute. We should rather focus on the solutions related to the implementation of the law. Its more logical to address some issues related to services in religious facilities. I don’t want any disturbances with using mosques”, Mr Fejzić says.
If every religious community brought up the question of ownership, then some other countries might claim their right on specific religious facilities, Mr Fejzić warns.
“Asking who built what and when… I am afraid leads to serious problems. Borders changed throughout history, and so did state orders. Does that mean that somebody from Turkey could come and request ownership over some old mosques, built 300 or 400 years ago claiming they are Turkish? Therefore, agreement is a way to go”, Mr Fejzić says.
He categorically says that Islamic community doesn’t want to arbiter and propose solutions in the orthodox corps. However, when state affair is in question, their community is ready to give clear view.
During the discussion on the law in the Parliament, members of pro-Serbian political parties called on the representatives of national minorities not to meddle in the orthodox thing.
“We don’t want to cause problems in the country where we live. But we were direct victims in some situations”, Mr Fejzić says.
Some messages really hurt
Mr Rifat Fejzić refused to comment on the protest processions because he believes everybody has right to express dissatisfaction.
“Nobody can say there’s no democracy in Montenegro. As you can see, people are allowed to move freely and protest. Although, it’s not very pleasing to see some symbols drawn just to offend members of Islamic religion. Our past in this region is not very glorious. And I think the country should have reacted more fiercely because we need to maintain peace no matter what”, Mr Fejzić says.
He visited Pljevlja recently where on 26 January crosses with four letters S appeared in front of Muslim houses.
“Some wounds are still open. I saw some people are worried and afraid. But I believe in the power of the state and its ability to defend its citizens”, Mr Fejzić points out.
