From the news desk

MJC nominations process yields little results

Share this article

The Muslim Judicial Council (MJC) has expressed its disappointment with the outcome of the nominations process for its Independent Advisory Panel, calling it a “lacklustre and unsatisfactory response”. Following a timeframe of 10 months, only one nomination was submitted to the MJC for consideration. The MJC leadership and members of the nomination committee on Thursday revealed the findings of the process. The only nomination was a self-nomination directly by an individual in the subject matter area of education, skills development, training and youth.

“Therefore, the results of the nominations process makes it impossible for the Nominations Committee to propose and recommend a suitable and capable pool of subject experts in each of the targeted subject matter areas to constitute an Independent Advisory Panel to the MJC,” said MJC president Maulana Igsaan Hendricks.

On 11 November 2014, the MJC announced the formation of an independent Nominations Committee to conduct a transparent, impartial and thorough process for the nomination, identification, screening, evaluation and recommendation to the MJC of an independent advisory panel of suitable and capable non-religious subject matter experts.

Feasibility of an Independent Advisory Panel

“The concept and practice of drawing on non-religious expertise, experience and skills is not a foreign and new concept to the MJC. This is reflected in the fact that the idea of an Independent Advisory Panel to the MJC was first explored and mooted to and by the MJC more than a decade,” said Hendricks.

“Secondly, the executive leadership of the MJC both collectively and individually, have and continue to engage in various forms of interaction with subject matter experts and practitioners through various formal institutional and individual informal measures. However, the outcome of the nomination process does not diminish the imperative identified by the MJC to institute such a panel.”

The MJC leadership believes the establishment of an independent advisory panel, remains highly relevant and necessary, building on the existing foundations for similar capacity already at the disposal of the ulema body.

In this regard, the Nominations Committee within the scope of its mandate and terms of
reference also conducted a basic assessment of the status quo of prevailing non-religious
expertise already at the disposal, as it relates to:
• The MJC’s Constitutional provisions for associate membership;
• Regularised engagement, educational and information forums;
• Informal personal networks; and
• Inter-organisational relations.

Factors impacting on the nominations process
The MJC said more work needs to be done by the ulema organisation to cultivate trust and an understanding of its mandate, needs and requirements to effectively serve the community and well-being, of which the panel is only but one component. Others as identified by the Nominations Committee and contained in the Committee final report, includes the public resolution, clarification and closure of previous processes undertaken by the MJC, in respect of which there are lingering legacy issues, unresolved commitments and unmet expectations by community stakeholders. They include for example, the public disclosure and findings of the report of the MJC Halaal Review Panel.

“It must be noted that, whilst the mandate and terms of reference of the Nominations Committee did not extend to these issues and was strictly confined to the nominations process as has been extensively documented and publicly clarified, the Nominations Committee was burdened with continued misperceptions generated by inaccurate media coverage from certain quarters within the local community media fraternity conflating the mandate of the Nominations Committee, the purpose of the nominations process and the objectives of the Independent Advisory Panel.”

The extent to which the continued prevalence of these dynamics detracted from the ability of the Nominations Committee and the nominations process to achieve its desired outcomes and objectives, cannot be discounted and ignored to the extent that it discredited and cast dispersions on the work of the Nominations Committee and the nominations process.

The Convenor of the Nominations Committee Abdul Waheed Patel briefed the leadership of the MJC regarding the outcomes, findings and recommendations contained in the report upon the conclusion of the Nominations process and the way forward.

Recommendations
1. The MJC continues to embark on establishing the Independent Advisory Panel of non-religious subject matter experts in key thematic areas.
2. The MJC reviews, considers and decides on what the objectives and purpose of such panel members should be
3.Should the MJC accept the recommendation above, the options available to the MJC to pursue the appointment an Independent Advisory Panel are:
a. Re-establishing a Nominations Process, either with or without the mediation and facilitation of a Nominations Committee or similar intermediary mechanism.
b. Identifying, approach and securing suitable, qualified and appropriate subject matter experts to constitute an Independent Advisory Panel or similar institutional
structure, either with or without the mediation and facilitation of a Nominations Committee or similar mechanism.
In respect of both 2(a) and (b) above, the absence of a mechanism similar to the Nominations Committee will require the MJC to have within its internal capacity
person/s suitable, appropriate, available and accessible for the purposes of undertaking such an endeavour.
4. Should the MJC decide to continue to pursue the establishment of an Independent Advisory Panel without the mediation and facilitation of a Nominations Committee or similar mechanism, that public support would have to be mobilised and garnered for the purposes of the MJC to identify, approach and secure suitable, qualified and
appropriate subject matter experts.
5. Both options and their implications require mutual recognition and acceptance by both the MJC and the local community (including media), of the prevailing
prerogatives and sensitivities of importance to both parties. For the local community, it must be understood that as much as the
MJC is a body serving a broader public interest, it has a legitimate authority over the management of its internal affairs in serving this public interest, provided that these
are line with Islamic doctrine and South African law.

As a body of clergy whose Islamic qualifications are recognised and accepted in accordance with the Constitutional provisions for membership of the MJC, the
leadership of the MJC also assume the clerical positions they occupy in the organisation on the basis of public and community acceptance, trust and good faith.

The establishment of an Independent Advisory Panel or similar structure by the MJC within this context, therefore cannot be deterred from and stagnated due to underlying preoccupations of the manner and legitimacy with which such selections and appointments are made. The MJC must continue to take all reasonable and possible measures to communicate and build public and community awareness, acceptance and support for their decisions and processes adopted in this regard.

6. The MJC considers exploring and evaluates the feasibility and benefits of establishing an Independent Advisory Panel or similar structure / capacity of suitable
individuals, in conjunction with other options for drawing on non-Islamic professional expertise. This includes the options for strategic partnership and collaboration with specialised institutional partners specialising in particular subject areas.

This process, if decided upon and deemed desirable and favourable to the MJC, will require in-depth research, analysis and collaboration/partnership, facilitation and
formation, in order to ensure the pursuit and structuring of mutually beneficial relations. This includes, existing inter-organisational and fraternal relations already well
established and entrenched, which present the possibility for further up scaling and mainstreaming.

7. The MJC must undertake a comprehensive and in-depth audit, analysis and review of its existing associate membership, in order to:
a) Determine the depth and diversity of their skills, expertise and experience beyond religious and theological affairs and how the MJC is currently drawing on and tapping into this as a resource and the impact and the benefit that this is yielding.
b) Determine how the policy and provisions on associate membership can be strengthened and advanced.
c) Determine how the application for associate membership should be administered, including when applications for associate membership can be made and how these are assessed, including admission and selection criteria and processes.
d) It should then be determined how best, if at all, to draw on the skills, expertise and experience of associate members in an advisory capacity, either as fulltime members of an Independent Advisory Panel as alternative, part-time, occasional and supplementary members of an Advisory Panel.
There exists no or at worse very limited and minimal room for any potential conflict of interest, as the existing policy and provisions on associate were and are designed to accommodate the mutual benefit of members of the public and community who are typically not part of the religious clergy.
8. That the recommendations in above are pursued expeditiously and with immediate effect, following the consideration of the final report of the Nominations Committee
and decision related thereto by the MJC, in order to maintain the momentum and impetus generated by the work of the Nominations Committee and process initiated
to date.
9. The organisational and institutional model for where and how an Independent Advisor Panel or similar structure / capacity for access to non-religious subject matter
expertise – including all of the variations and derivatives of such as acceptable model, should interface with the management, leadership and governance structures
of the MJC needs to be more clearly defined as the subject of further work. This is necessary for ensuring clarity on the part of both the MJC and the participating nonreligious subject matter experts in respect of:
a) Lines of authority
b) Separation of powers
c) Accountability
d) Duties and responsibility
e) Conflict management
f) Mediation
g) Dispute resolution
10. Any and all such decisions pertaining to any or all of the above, are publicly communicated, detailed and explained, through a comprehensive media, public
relations, community and stakeholder engagement and communications campaign. Furthermore, The work undertaken by the Nominations Committee represents the first official and formal attempt of its kind by the MJC, to appoint an Independent Advisory Panel through an open, transparent, independent and impartially administered approach.

The unsatisfactory results of the nominations process, does not detract from the continued imperative, impact and benefit for the MJC to establish an Independent Advisory Panel. Nor should it detract from the impetus required and momentum generated from the levels of awareness and outreach associated with the recently concluded nominations process.

The MJC remains in need of access to a formalised structure through which to draw on an appointed pool of expertise, specialisation and skills within designated subject matters areas that are central to the current and future success, impact and functioning of the MJC on and within South African society, its well-being, advancement and development.

“In fact, what is required is a sustained and renewed impetus to the idea and concept of an Independent Advisory Panel, including through learning from the lessons and processes conducted by the Nominations Committee as contained in the findings of the final report and combined with the experience accrued from its existing activities and initiatives as outlined in this regard,” read a statement from the Nominations Committee.

“The low and unsatisfactory level of response to the call for nominations requires careful and serious introspection and discussion by the MJC, in the event that the MJC wishes to continue to advance towards the realisation of an Independent Advisory Panel. On the basis of these findings and recommendations, beyond the immediate mandate for the identification of an Independent Advisory Panel and within the context of the unsatisfactory outcomes of the nominations process, the final report of the Nominations Committee aims to provide a blueprint and roadmap for establishing an effective independent advisory panel and or similar institutional capacity within the MJC or at its disposal for the purposes of drawing on non-religious subject matter experts within key thematic areas pivotal to the advancement of the MJC’s core mandate and its impact on the well-being of the Muslim community and society at large.”

The Nominations Committee has therefore recommended and encouraged that the MJC regards and considers the outcomes of the nominations process not as the end of an unsuccessful process, but rather the continuation of a process that has already commenced with and which requires further attention, determination, focus and resolve in order to achieve success.

The leadership of the MJC welcomed the conclusion of the Nominations Process.

“We appreciate the work and commitment of the Nominations Committee in undertaking and implementing the necessary supporting procedures for the establishment of the Independent Advisory Panel. Accordingly, the MJC has formally received and accepted the official report of the Nominations Committee regarding the Nominations process to establish the Independent Advisory Panel for the MJC.”

The MJC said it would therefore also further review and consider the report in greater detail and will publicly communicate any decisions it undertakes on the basis of the outcomes, findings and recommendations of the report.

“However, the MJC hereby remains committed to this process in terms of its identified objectives for establishing the Independent Advisory Panel for the MJC. The conclusion of the Nominations process is but one phase of this journey, which takes us a step closer to achieving our desired outcome. We will therefore rigourously pursue this as a key imperative for organisational development and advancement,” said Hendricks.  VOC


Share this article

1 comment

  1. very nice but very nice blah blah blah too, maybe its got a lot to do with the mjc's bland and sometimes inadequate leadership and policies……and inadequate and sometimes ill-advised actions etc

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

WhatsApp WhatsApp us
Wait a sec, saving restore vars.