The People Declare China Guilty of Genocide

On account of the evidence of torture, systematic suppression of births with intent to destroy a community, and crimes against humanity beyond reasonable doubt, the People’s Tribunal has concluded that the Chinese government is committing genocide against Uyghurs.
Many Uyghur activists and members of the public gathered at Church House Westminster on 9 December to hear the verdict by the Uyghur tribunal. “The allegations are of the gravest human rights violations and international crimes,” said Sir Geoffrey Nice, the tribunal’s chair.

The tribunal called out the haunting evidence of a million Uyghurs being subject to detention by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) without any remotely sufficient reason. Evidence confirmed that detainees were subject to inhumane cell conditions; up to 50 people would sometimes be locked in a 22 square metre cell – making it impossible to lie on concrete – while only being given a communal bucket for a toilet. Some of the torture methods included the pulling off of finger nails, beating with sticks, being restrained in tiger chairs – where feet and hands were locked in position for days, and being put in containers filled with cold water up to the neck. Men and women were subjected to extreme sexual violence, including gang rape, forced penetration with electric shock rods, and iron bars. These are just some of the cruel violations that have taken place and continue to take place in China’s detention camps.

Further methods of control were evidenced by mass disappearances of Uyghur members, Han men forced into Uyghur homes, mass securitisation, neighbours spying on neighbours, intense monitoring of ‘separatist’ behaviour, and the involuntary removal of thousands of children from their families in order to send them to Han state-run boarding schools.

Sir Geoffrey Nice pointed to the lack of evidence of mass killings, as well as Uyghurs being allowed to return to society for short or long periods of time. For this reason, comparisons to the Holocaust were described as “well-intentioned but unhelpful”. Whilst the common understanding of genocide assumes mass killings, this is not the only indicator considered by scholars. It also constitutes the systematic suppression of births, as well as the utter destruction and eradication of a people’s lineage, culture, religion, thought, beliefs, and values, as evidenced by the ‘re-education’ camps and ‘anti-terror’ methods used by the PRC.

The PRC’s intent to biologically destroy the Uyghurs by preventing births met the legal elements of genocide. Surmounting evidence pertaining to the forced sterilisation of Uyghur women was found after considering the frequent insertion of IUD devices, which are only removable by surgical means. In addition, further findings were presented, such as forced abortions at early and late stages of pregnancy, involuntary removal of wombs, as well as the killing of babies at birth.

“The tribunal is satisfied that President Xi Jinping and other very senior officials in the PRC and CCP bear primary responsibility” for acts that occurred in East Turkistan. Let there be no mistake: the PRC’s treatment of Uyghurs links back to their agenda to destroy and eradicate Uyghur religion and culture through the use of ‘anti-terror’, ‘anti-extremism ’, and ‘separatist’ rhetoric. The Chinese state has already destroyed 16,000 mosques and has even torn down cemeteries to build ‘cafes’. In addition, “displays of religious adherence” like attending a mosque, wearing a hijab, having a beard, and not drinking alcohol or eating pork have been proscribed by the state.

Former Guantanamo prisoner and prominent War on Terror critic Moazzam Begg questioned the tribunal about the evidence suggesting the PRC’s exploitation of the War on Terror narrative through the enactment of ‘anti-terror’ policies. “To what extent do you think it has exploited that language and has been able to get away with the targeting of Muslims in East Turkistan as ‘extremists’ and ‘terrorists’?” A member of the tribunal agreed that China was able to “sweep their Uyghur problem under the global war on terrorism. They actually persuaded the US to join in on the categorisation of a Uyghur group outside Xinjiang as a terrorist group. The application of that lasted up until 2018”.

After a year and a half of compiling detailed forms of evidence and finally coming to the necessary outcome of genocide, the public are probably thinking, “What now?” Politicians who were present at the press conference after the tribunal called on the UK government to use the readily available evidence and publicly recognise that a genocide is taking place. This is something they have never succeeded to do while a genocide was ongoing. They also request the UK government to place sanctions on Chinese imports and declare a full diplomatic boycott.

There is no doubt that this tribunal is a significant step in the right direction towards putting pressure on China to end their crimes against the Uyghurs. Alḥamdulillāh, the tribunal did what governments had no courage to do. Sir Geoffrey Nice alludes that both the US and the UK acknowledged China’s crimes, but have done nothing about it.

It would be naïve to place full hopes on those who only seek to further their socio-political agenda. The essence of the problem must be addressed, which is China’s state run policies to suppress and eradicate Muslims and other minorities in East Turkistan, where individuals are tortured and persecuted for their religion. Unless this is done, we cannot expect their actions to sincerely have the Uyghur people’s interests at heart. We wait for the UK to make an open statement about the genocide and actually make references to the list of crimes against humanity taking place. We hope this sends a message to much of the international community who have shown complicity in the heinous crimes against Uyghur Muslims, and urge them once again to take action.

May Allah hasten the Ummah to success and bestow justice upon the Uyghurs and thousands of others around the world being persecuted for their dīn. And last but not least, may He aid us in standing firm with our brothers and sisters.


The Stupidity of ‘Rewriting’ the Quran

Authorities in China want to ‘rewrite the Qur’ān’ to fit socialist ‘values’.[1] In other news, the Egyptian coup regime that has executed thousands of pro-democracy activists wants to create a ‘renewed Islamic discourse’ to address ‘extremism’.[2] Hindu extremist groups in India, whose supporters are typically seen glued to bats and Molotov grenades, want to ban the Qur’ān.[3] And the list goes on.

The irony of some of the most extreme and callous people today to try to ‘ban’ or ‘reform’ what predates their long-expired ancestry is only one side of the story. Some in the capitalist west have even gloated at the news. For many, it is not about China rewriting the Qur’ān as much as just having it deformed into anything else. Few in the West openly support changing the words. But calls to somehow change its traditional interpretation to make it more congruent with state power or today’s modern philosophies are becoming all too common.

‘Rewriting the Qur’ān’ to what exactly?  

The Chinese authorities want to ‘reform’ the Qur’ān to suit their ‘socialist values’. Do they mean Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, or a social hierarchy built on the mythical dragon and worm? What exactly does this mean? Will their injunctions and ‘verses’ sanction the Communist Party’s ideologies? Mass detention centres for the cultural genocide of millions of Uyghur Muslims, including banning beards, name-changing, force-feeding, digital surveillance, forced consumption of pork and alcohol, forced marriages, and separating parents from their children?[4]

Perhaps for others, Qur’ānic ‘reform’ was not supposed to take this disproportionate twist. It is simply to align it with the modern political sensibilities of the hyper-liberalised world; what’s the fuss?

Well, here lies a bigger dilemma. The whole point of ‘liberalism’ is derestriction and hectic individualism. ‘Free thinking’ is, after all, a reaction to form and imposition, hence its countless manifestations – maybe as many as its thinkers. ‘Lack of form’ cannot beget form, let alone to ‘reform’. It is trivial. Reform would need to follow someone’s choices and inclinations, but whose choices? If it is those of the committees commissioned to make the changes, their choices would exclude millions of others of human ‘deities’, privileged with their own free thinking.

This is an idiosyncratic rewrite, modernised to fit the current day philosophies. But why must we agree with that, however it is defined, if it can ever be defined? Will it lean towards anarcho-capitalism, classical liberalism, liberal feminism, modern, syncretic, or traditionalist liberalism? Or communism, Marxism, Leninism, or further developments into socialism? But which application: the Cuban, Russian, Swedish, or Chinese? A basic reading into the endless and divergent array of political and economic philosophies produces one conclusion: those wanting to rewrite the Qur’ān are either patently stupid – thinking the only manifestation of thought is their secular thought – or personally dislike Islām’s ideology about as much as its adherents personally dislike theirs.

Outside the realm of Islām (or monotheistic religion altogether), society’s secularists have dealt countless blows to one another over the ages imposing their own secular ideology. Theirs is best suited to govern the world and is the polar opposite to their other secular opponents. If the Qur’ān is ‘reformed’ to suit one ideology, it becomes irrelevant for another. If it is ‘banned’ altogether, would that even help the secular world to settle on the best system without theorising across the ‘right’ and ‘left’ political spectrum?

The world wars in the 20th century and the deaths of around 100 million people is testament to inordinate levels of disharmony in secular political thought. Isn’t trying to synchronise the Qur’ān with either of the ideologies that spurred that magnitude of ‘intolerance’ exactly what would make it intolerant?

In fact, it follows that no two irreligious ideologies have ever agreed on their single main contention with the Qur’ān. This is the clearest proof of the objectivity of the Qur’ān and the subjectivity of its detractors! In other words, if you think the Qur’ān clearly needs changing, first work out what is clearly right, convince us it is clearly right, before telling us what is clearly wrong! In fact, some anti-religious thought, such as Dawkins, holds that it only takes overcoming a taboo for anything to be right, even eating dead human flesh.[5]

The Qur’ān asserts, proves, and challenges others to disprove that it is the unequivocal truth from the Divine, whilst the counter theories of individual secularist (or atheist) thinkers are, at best, different to one another. And two counter ideologies cannot simultaneously be the best:

What you are promised is certainly true. The Judgement will certainly take place! By Heaven with its oscillating orbits. You certainly have differing beliefs. Averted from it is he who is averted.[6]

Separating the ‘Sheikhs’ from the ‘Shakes’

The Qur’ān will simply not be changed. Neither its word, not its intended interpretation. Besides Allāh’s promised divine protection, history testifies to this reality. The Mongols, for instance, wreaked havoc in the Muslim world. Their assault sought nothing less than the total extermination of Islām, and maybe even the world. They were the largest contiguous empire the world has ever seen. They invaded some 16% of the earth, massacred inordinate numbers, and decimated a vast amount of literature. The Muslims’ epochal battle of Ain Jalut was the first time the Mongol advance was permanently halted, and the Muslim Mamluks salvaged the Western world from the Mongolians’ attempt at world domination. But the point is that if Genghis Khan failed to eradicate Islām or the Qur’ān, then Xi Jinping definitely will fail in the same venture.

As nervous as it makes some, there are in fact countless benefits from the attacks against the Qur’ān. For conciseness, let us just take one example. The nature of the Qur’ān is such that the more you study it, the more it convinces and overwhelms. This is ironic because so far as its social code is concerned, the typical criticisms are around its penal code, rights afforded to men and women, and the institution and regulation of Jihad under its state. Out of the entire Qur’ān, these issues end up being studied the most by Muslims on the receiving end of criticism which, in turn, presents to them the compelling acumen behind that jurisdiction. In other words, Muslims have become experts and are particularly equipped to deal with issues at least one strand of secularist thought has raised as contentious.

Recently, I was moved by a verse about legal retribution for a murderer after reading into its Tafsīr. This is partly thanks to the Islamophobic narrative that cannot get enough of repeating the same criticisms and hearing the same answers. The criticism has to do with the Qur’ān endorsing capital punishment for the killer as retribution. In such circumstances, the authority to punish lies squarely with the victim’s family. During the verse’s discourse, however, Allāh emphatically appeals to Ukhuwwah (brotherhood) to encourage amnesty:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِصَاصُ فِي الْقَتْلَى ۖ الْحُرُّ بِالْحُرِّ وَالْعَبْدُ بِالْعَبْدِ وَالْأُنثَىٰ بِالْأُنثَىٰ ۚ فَمَنْ عُفِيَ لَهُ مِنْ أَخِيهِ شَيْءٌ فَاتِّبَاعٌ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَأَدَاءٌ إِلَيْهِ بِإِحْسَانٍ

You who have Īmān! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the case of people killed: free man for free man, slave for slave, female for female. But if someone is absolved by his brother (pardoned from retaliation), blood-money should be claimed with correctness and paid with good will.[7]

In the most heart-rending reminder of Allāh’s mercy, seamlessly weaved into a ‘legal verse’, the murderer of your relative is referred to, not as a ‘murderer’, assailant or enemy, but your sibling. If one were to open the Magna Carta, or any social or legal code in the world, would it, in elucidating punishment, momentarily move off the technical and legal discourse to touchingly appeal to the status of the killer as a sibling? Does the narrative of your human rights even give way to amnesty for the sake of indispensable reward in another world?

Yes, attacks against the Qur’ān have shaken some of the doubtful ‘shakes’ among us off the fence. ‘Shakes’, however, should never think that their doubts will take them into a universe of philosophical certainties. The difference is that Islām would have provided confident answers, had they asked, whilst the alternative secularist plethoric ocean of questions the shaker ends up in wouldn’t. After all, a philosophy that cannot answer the question of why we exist will clearly fail to provide a convincing narrative on how we should exist!

But more importantly, these attacks have also created ‘Sheikhs’ who are not sitting on the fence. A new breed and calibre of certain Muslims (with yaqīn, intellectual certainty), which is refreshing. If it were not for the unrelenting attack on Islām they would have remained ordinary, like a drop in the ocean. Maybe they would not have studied the Qur’ān’s nuances, subtleties, and profound sciences, nor would they have grasped some of its endless beauty nor shared them with others. And if certainty is pervading our hearts concerning the ‘contentious’ verses in particular, how then of the others?

Let us thank Allāh for the contentment and delight of Islām, and ask Him to guide humanity to His Light.

Walhamdu lillāhi rabbil ‘ālamīn.





[6] Al-Qur’ān 59:5-9

[7] Al-Qur’ān 2:178

China’s Concentration Camps: Uyghur Muslims

 Data leak sheds light on how China ‘brainwashes’ Uyghur Muslims

Leaked documents from China’s Communist Party expose the brainwashing taking place inside high-security internment camps for Muslims in the country’s tightly controlled Xinjiang region.

The so-called China Cables were obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), a US-based donor-funded reporting outlet, and shared with 17 media partners for publication on Sunday.

The documents lift the lid on conditions for about a million members of the Muslim Uyghur community in the far western region who are thought to be detained without trial and forced to undergo indoctrination.

China’s government has repeatedly said the camps offer voluntary education and training to help stamp out so-called “Islamic extremism”. Beijing’s envoy to the UK told the BBC, one of the ICIJ’s media partners, that the documents were fake news.

The files “include a classified list of guidelines” approved by top Chinese officials for running camps and a “massive data collection and analysis system that uses artificial intelligence” to help round up suspect Xinjiang residents, said ICIJ reporter Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian.

“The system is able to amass vast amounts of intimate personal data through warrantless manual searches, facial recognition cameras, and other means to identify candidates for detention, flagging for investigation hundreds of thousands merely for using certain popular mobile phone apps,” wrote Allen-Ebrahimian.

“The documents detail explicit directives to arrest Uyghurs with foreign citizenship and to track Xinjiang Uyghurs living abroad, some of whom have been deported back to China by authoritarian governments.”

Earlier this month, another trove of Chinese government documents leaked to the New York Times daily revealed details about Beijing’s fears over religious extremism and its wholesale crackdown on Uyghurs.

This latest revelation is not new and forms part of a wide scale systemic repression and persecution of Uyghur Muslims. Several human rights organisations and experts have raised concerns surrounding the Chinese government’s actions against the minority community.

According to UN experts and activists, China is holding over one million people, particularly Uyghur Muslims, in detention centres. However, China describes these camps as “re-education camps” aiming to “stamp out ‘extremism’ and give [Uyghur Muslims] new skills.”

The Uyghur Muslims that are not detained and thrown into concentration camps and are instead faced with scrutiny from the security forces. This includes but is not limited to armed checkpoints, ID cards and facial recognition cameras.

China is said to have also deployed over a million spies to closely monitor the activity of Uyghur Muslims. According to a Communist party officer, the spies visit Uyghur households and during their visits they work, eat, and frequently share a bed with their “hosts”.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the officer who oversees between 70 to 80 Uyghur families, Yengisar county said, “They stay with their paired relatives day and night”.

He added that “normally one or two people sleep in one bed, and if the weather is cold, three people sleep together”.

China’s ‘Xinjiang’ region is home to some 10 million Uyghurs. The Turkic Muslim group, which accounts for roughly 45% of ‘Xinjiang’s’ total population, has long accused the Chinese authorities of political, economic, and cultural discrimination.

Over the last two years, China has subjected the region to increasingly draconian restrictions, including banning men from growing beards and women from wearing veils. The country has also introduced, what many observers see as, the world’s most extensive electronic surveillance program, according to reports in The Wall Street Journal.

Meanwhile, as least one million people – roughly 7% of Xinjiang’s Muslim population – have been incarcerated in an ever-expanding network of “political re-education” camps, according to both US and UN officials.

May Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) free all of our brothers and sisters from oppression, forgive our shortcomings and give us the tawfīq to get to work. Āmīn.

Read Also:

China’s Concentration Camps: What Can We Do?



[1] AA



Muslims studying at universities in China are worse than swines. Before taking umbrage at this most appropriate designation for such scum, reflect on the following statement of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam):
“He who imparts knowledge (of the Deen) to an unfit person is like one who garlands khanaazeer (swines) with diamonds, pearls and gold.”

Students who do not naturally and Islamically qualify for higher Islamic Knowledge have been likened to ‘swines’ in the Hadith. Thus, innumerable students who are pursuing even the Knowledge of Qur’aan and Hadith at even the Deeni Madaaris come within the purview of this Hadith in which they are depicted as khanaazeer. On the basis of this Hadith and on other Shar’i factors, those Muslims who are pursuing secular knowledge at Chinese universities are worse than khanaazeer. They cannot honestly and justifiably plead ignorance of the atrocities which the communist authorities of China are committing against the Uighur Muslims as well as other Muslim minorities. Some of these evils and atrocities are mentioned in these pages. How is it possible for Muslims to pursue secular education at the universities of the swine-eaters? Only those who are worse than swines are capable of displaying total insensivity and lack of Islamic brotherhood as demanded by Imaan. The Muslim students themselves lack the freedom to practice publicly even the lukewarm, diluted type of Islam which is the trademark of secular students who pursue education at these educational brothels. They are not free to perform Salaat in Jamaat openly. Their adherence to Islam is extremely slack and low key. Despite such indignities and swinery of the Chinese authorities, these students spinelessly accept the humiliation and ignore the suppression of their Uighur Muslim brethren. If they do have valid Imaan, they will not seek admission in Chinese universities. In fact, according to the Shariah it is haraam to pursue university education at any university any where in the world. A number of articles has been published on this topic. Imaan demands that Muslim students abandon the universities of the Swines and return to their respective countries.

al-haq bulletin 60


Spear-headed by Canada, 15 non-Muslim, European countries, have sent a letter of protest to the Chinese authorities, protesting against the gross human rights violations, oppression, suppression and brutality against the Uighur and Kazak Muslims in China.
Lamentably, but not surprisingly, not a single government/ruler from any Muslim country has hitherto raised even a feint cry of protest despite the brutality of the swine-eaters. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“The Muslimoon are like one man. If the eye pains, the entire body is affected, and if the head pains, the entire body is affected.”
This pain no longer forms part of the character of Muslims of this era. Muslims are more concerned with their lust for monetary gain which they believe is largely being attended to by China, hence they dare breathe not a word of protest wHEhen their brothers, sisters, mothers and children are brutally repressed and persecuted by the atheist Chinese khinzeer devourers.
Their Imaani feelings and conscience are not even slightly disturbed nor do they have any feelings of shame for the lead to protest taken by 15 kuffaar nations. The murtadd governments and heads of state of the so-called ‘Muslim’ countries are the scum of hypocrites. They come within the purview of Rasulullah’s description of the Ummah of later times in close proximity of Qiyaamah.

Nabi-e-Kareem (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said about the rotten condition of the Ummah:
“You will be ghutha (rubbish/trash) like the flotsam of floodwaters. Allah will most certainly eliminate from the hearts of your enemies fear for you, and He will most certainly instil wahan in your hearts.” When the Sahaabah asked for the meaning of wahan, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Love for the dunya and dislike for Maut.”
These twin evils have destroyed the Muslim Nation of the world, The Ummah has become a nation of munaafiqeen and zanaadiqah, spinelessly and most contemptibly licking the boots of the enemies of Islam. In so doing, they (i.e. Muslims) have become the worst enemies of Islam.
Despite the known enmity which the European nations have for Islam and Muslims, they are at least displaying high moral conduct by their public stance for the sake of the oppressed Muslims in China. Even the U.S. has threatened sanctions against China for its repression and brutality whilst Muslims have adopted a devilish silence which condones the evil and savagery of China. It must be acknowledged that for this era, Allah Ta’ala has ordained the European nations to be the bosses of the world while all others (Arabs, Africans and Asians) are the serfs to serve their bosses. This is an undeniable reality. All of these serfs are the most contemptible bootlickers and poodles of the West.
When Allah Ta’ala ordains a nation to be rulers even if they are kuffaar, He instils in them self-respect, dignity, lofty attributes and beneficial systems of life by means of which they are able to exercise control and dominance over the miserable serfs and spineless underlings whose only concerns are gluttony, fulfilment of carnal lusts, and an insatiable greed for money and luxury. It is with the tool and trap of hubbud dunya (worldly love) with which the West is succeeding to maintain its grip on the brains and the territories of the Ummah.


“The letter carries the names of 15 Western ambassadors, including the Canadian, British, French, Swiss, European Union, German, Dutch and Australian envoys. The other countries’ ambassadors names in the letter are Ireland, Sweden, Belgium, Norway, Estonia, Finland and Denmark. Four diplomats familiar with the letter and its contents said Canada had taken the lead in its drafting.”