From the frying pan

We sincerely hope that the situation in Iraq will not develop into one where Catholics and other Christians pass from the frying pan into the fire. Quite naturally we hope that this will not be the experience of any religious or ethnic group in Iraq; but the purpose of this piece is to look at one particular aspect of the situation in Iraq - that of religious tolerance and freedom.

In the past weeks and months a number of Iraqi Catholic bishops have expressed their concern and fear that religious freedom will be de facto restricted in Iraq.

Their fears have now been given a more internationally recognised voice through Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster.

The British cardinal has warned his government of "devastating consequences" if Iraq is allowed to become an Islamic state. He wrote to British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on behalf of Iraq's Christian leaders and urged him "to influence the parties to the constitution to enshrine specific guarantees which establish the equality of non-Muslims."

Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor's letter follows the partial agreement on a draft constitution reached between most of the leaders of different sectors of Iraq's society.

In it he told Mr Straw that it was vital that a clause interpreted as the assertion of the Shariah, or Islamic law, as the main source of law in the draft Iraqi constitution be removed or non-Muslims and women could face losing some of their basic rights as citizens. Initial agreement on the constitution, which is due to be ratified on October 15 after a public referendum, was held up last month partly because politicians could not agree on the role of Islam. But Article 29 (a) in the current draft states that "no law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam."

Catholics and other Christians who form a small minority of Iraqis view this article as a potential opening for the imposition of the Shariah or Islamic law. Under Shariah, non-Muslims are given dhimmi status, under which they might have to pay special taxes. They might not be able to give evidence against Muslims in court, and their rights to buy and hold property - including churches, schools and hospitals - would be restricted. They also could be excluded from the highest offices in the government, judiciary and the military. Women of all beliefs would come under pressure to wear the veil, or hijab.

Although some Iraqi leaders have said that this would not be the case, many consider this clause in the Constitution as a "real threat" to religious freedom and fear an exodus of Christians from Iraq if the country falls under Islamic rule. Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor has now publicly added his fears to those of many others.

We understand that Iraq is a sovereign country, and it is up to Iraqis how they vote and draft their constitution. But we also understand that freedom with its many ramifications and different aspects is one and indivisible. The negation of an aspect of freedom - in this case the freedom of religion - is the negation of all freedom. Besides, in a certain sense, the negation of freedom to one people in one country affects the freedom of all in every country.

A spirit of solidarity should impel all to defend the freedom of others. Can any Church leader in Malta make presentations to the Maltese government similar to those presentations make by Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor to the British government?