Importancia de Enfermería en el fomento de la lactancia materna

The first finding derived from the data analysis procedure suggests that the participants perceive the overarching role of the government to be inherently to safeguard human rights and promote their best interests through its ministries.

161

A significant aspect of the literature on human rights within the Gulf States identifies the inherent values contained within the Islamic faith to have directly formed or influenced the peoples understanding of human rights in that region. The study participants gave further credence to this notion as they were unequivocal in their views that human rights formed an axiomatic norm ordained by God Almighty. The participants supported this assertion by initiating their understanding of human rights with references to the Islamic scriptures and tradition. They contended that Islam was revealed in order to eradicate the abuse of human rights in the region at that time. So historically the region had already undergone a significant revolution based upon the safeguarding of human values, whereby human rights are equated with the Quranic values of dignity, identity and the freedom to express, speak, move and associate with whomsoever one chooses. However, as per the literature all the participants understood that the freedom of an individual is curtailed by the prevailing norms and standards of the broader society in which the individual resides. Accordingly, an individual is free to act as they please within their own private domains, providing this does not entail any criminal acts or activity such as gambling, murder, prostitution etc. but they must act in accordance to the prevailing social norms in the public domain. Sheikh Abdul, a senior government representative identifies the UAE government to be a custodian of the Islamic faith, thus its entire purpose is to propagate the Islamic doctrines (ideology) through its institutions and ministries. He perceives the broad role and purpose of the government to be realising the Islamic faith articles and societal functions through the various apparatus of the government. Professor Rashid, as a scholar and academic supports this assertion and also identifies the government’s purpose to be upholding the Islamic values. He argues that the government and specifically its leaders are the vicegerents of Allah and thus have the authority for self- governance and self-regulation. This does not imply that they are unaccountable or independent from the will of Allah, rather they are duty bound to protect and ensure the growth and development of their societies. Hassan, as a jurist, argues in the same vein and perceives the

162

entire legal structure to be formulated on the Islamic Sharia, which the government must ensure is not only enforced but made relevant to the contextual situation of the people’s reality and circumstances at the current time. Jamsheed, a foreign white-collar worker from Pakistan, provides a somewhat surprising addition to those perceiving the government’s role to be innately responsible for the preservation of Islamic values and human rights by default. He refuses to critique the government and cites the role of the UAE government to exemplary in the balance it has maintained. Although he argues that the government may have a specific understanding of Islam, which is not shared by a majority of the immigrant population, it nevertheless ensures that the nation functions efficiently and effectively by preserving law, order and security of the people. In comparison to his native Islamic Republic of Pakistan, he argues that the UAE government is clearly a defender of Islamic values and norms, whilst his own nation created upon the name of Islam is clearly in violation of the Islamic values. He reveals that the Pakistani people do not believe their government to be credible or representative of the Islamic tradition, which is contrary to the perspectives provided by the UAE populace. Sophia speaking from the perspectives of an activist and representative of an International Non- Governmental Organisation, although highly critical of the government, also recognises the influence of the Islamic faith in determining the role of the government. She contends that despite the broadly accepted narrative of separating religion from state, the UAE and Gulf region maintains this relationship and views it as a divine relationship. Although she argues that this is a problem as it effectively allows the government to become the judge and jury on religion, curtailing any alternative opinions and arguments. However, she acknowledges that the government is and has always been viewed by the natives of the region to be responsible for maintaining the socially accepted Islamic norms and customs. Although Dr Noor is an alleged victim of human rights violation by the UAE government, he also identifies the UAE government to be an instrument for promoting the Islamic ideology. He is highly critical of this however, and perceives the government to have usurped the functionality and purpose of

163

religion to provide legitimacy and justification to suit its own needs. He argues that that no government can justify its role and status to be divinely ordained as this will inevitably create a dictatorship and authoritarian style of governance. Nonetheless, he accepts with great trepidation that in the UAE, the government is perceived to be the upholders of Islam and thus by definition human rights.

The review of literature alongside the data derived from the study participants further revealed that the native and immigrant population perceived the national federal government to comprehend and be representative of the native culture, heritage and tradition. Although dissenting voices amongst the participants can be discerned (Dr Noor, Sophia) they nevertheless accept that the governmental structure is an extension of the tribal heritage and culture of the region. As we have seen, many researchers argue that the United Arab Emirates has experienced an exemplary level of continuity, with no significant reformations in the political structure or institutions since its inception. Although critics (e.g. Amnesty International) have used this fact to highlight the undemocratic and autocratic nature of governance, it has according to the study participants articulated a fundamental reason for the political stability and social harmony experienced by the UAE. Sheikh Abdul, Professor Rashid, Hassan and Jamsheed cite the initial rule of the late Sheikh Zayed, the ruler of Abu Dhabi and president of the UAE since its inception in 1971 (up until his death in 2004) and now Sheikh Nahyan (2004-present) as the primary example of the prevailing tribal structure that dominates UAE society. Sheikh Abdul relates this tribal structure directly to the concept of community and family. This implies that every Emirati individual is part of a local family, this is his or her own emirate, which is subsequently linked to other families or emirates through inter family relationships and treaties. The welfare of the national family has become the collective responsibility of the seven rulers comprising the Supreme Council. Hassan observes that the government officials and the leaders in particular of each Emirate and the nation itself are engaging directly with their public through the hosting of regular Majlis. Whilst the leaders

164

enjoying the collective support of their tribes then act through the Shura process to make collective decisions on the local and national levels. Professor Rashid identifies the UAE’s approach to social politics to be an equivalent to Western style democracy and cites it to be appropriate for the context and cultural heritage of the region. He summarises the current situation in the UAE as a continuation of the heritage of the people, which entails the intimate relationship between the rulers and their people and he argues that the government is a representative of the families, whereby the interests of the people is vested in the rulers and the rulers in the people. The members of the public are loyal and place their trust in the government to deliver on their demands. Professor Rashid further contends that the Emirati citizens feel more secure and are more informed as to the workings of their government. This is because the public will have some direct connection to the government due to family relationships or personal dealings. This he argues is not the case within the Western democratic nations, as they are too bureaucratic and the people are alienated from the system and thus are treated as mere objects that work to contribute to the economy and cast votes. Jamsheed supports the previous argument by further providing evidence for the flaws in the modern democratic nations. He states that his native nation, despite being a democracy, is corrupt and the rulers, usually from one or two particular regions, frequently engage in rampant nepotism and steal the country’s resources for personal gain. Jamsheed is however enamoured with the federal structure and functioning of the UAE government. He identifies it to have a legacy and heritage, which has given it a pedigree to take the responsibility to organise and manage a new nation to prosperity. This he observes is due to the government being formed of tribal families that have the interests of the people at heart because they are from them. However, some (as exemplified by the comments provided by Dr Noor and Sophia) argue that the tribal nature of the national and local governments justifies the accusations levied against the UAE, that it is an overtly autocratic and undemocratic political structure that has effectively enslaved its populace. Dr Noor and Sophia agree with both the literature and the other study participants regarding the

165

notion that the organisation of the modern UAE is influenced by its traditional tribal heritage. However, they note that the seven rulers of the Supreme Council are the only people authorised to communicate decisions with regards to the federation. Sophia believes this highlights the fundamental problem, whereby the Supreme Council is an effective court of kings, who has an audience with their subjects within a Majlis setting to provide them with material comforts. She recognises this practice to have effectively paralysed the Emirati citizens as the nanny state fulfils their daily needs. News of any wrongdoings or inhuman treatment by the government, especially against foreign workers, is suppressed and the Emirati citizens, being unaware and unconcerned, fail to bring the government to account. Dr Noor again furthers the point that the tribal heritage and customs of the region have naturally created a situation whereby the government is accepted to be the guardian and confidante of the native population. However, Dr Noor argues that any individual seeking to speak to authority and challenge the exiting order is made an example of, thus ensuring that all dissent is effectively eradicated. Dr Noor accepts that whilst an NHRI is required, it will be a government-controlled institution as the government is in effect the only institution that is able to monitor and regulate itself. Although he concedes that this is highly improbable he observes that with the establishment of an NHRI, it will represent for him a symbolic rather than actual change.