Kazakhstan should live according to Sharia law, according to Nurtas Adambai, a prominent Kazakh actor and director. How does the republic assess this statement?
Daughter-in-law Sabina, the character of the comedy “Kelinka Sabina” [daughter-in-law Sabina as translated from Kazakh], has brought fame to actor and director Nurtas Adambai (he played Sabina) not only in Kazakhstan, but also abroad. However, Adambai has replaced the kerchief of daughter-in-law Sabina with the Islamic headwear. He wears it in front of his audience on Instagram, YouTube, and Facebook, which amounts to over 1 million 200 thousand followers. Adambai tells them about Islam by promoting the religious way of thinking and living via social media.
Being a public person, Adambai is quite influential. Thus, he asked the President of Kazakhstan via his Instagram account in 2022 to ban the Buzz Lightyear film from screening. Nurtas Adambai was outraged by the scene where two women were kissing. The ministry of culture of Kazakhstan banned the film from screening.
Recently, Nurtas Adambai said to Forbes.kz that Kazakhstan should live according to Sharia law. According to him, having all Kazakhstanis accept Islam would set the country free from corruption, and would also help to counter domestic violence. “Just imagine if everyone accepts Islam and lives according to Islamic laws, the country would change! There would be no child molesters, or corruptionists because people would be aware of punishment for their sins,” he supported his attitude.
The reporter of CABAR.asia asked the opinion of politicians, political analysts, religion experts and other experts about the attitude.
“I consider such statements destructive and unacceptable,” said Zauresh Battalova, public figure, ex-senator. “All reasoning that Kazakhstan should live according to Sharia law contradict the basic law of our country, the Constitution. It is totally unacceptable to bring the initiatives of particular representatives of religious movements into legislation.”
Human rights activist Anara Ibraeva emphasised that Adambai’s proposal contradicts the Constitution: it would need to be amended once the showman’s logic is followed.
“Here the point is not about the advantage of Islam over other religions or insult of religious feelings, but rather about how the actor sees the amendment to the basic law of the country, with violence or not?” Ibraeva said.
Political analyst Talgat Kaliev said that the idea of Sharia law in Kazakhstan is utopian. Kazakhstanis used to live according to the Soviet principles for decades, and there was the institution of biy (closer in meaning to the concept of the “institution of elders”) in the pre-colonial period, which used to have its own logic, which had nothing to do with the Sharia law.
Although Nurtas Adambai is not a political leader now, he has all chances to succeed in political sphere. Talgat Kaliev emphasised this aspect. However, he is confident that politics must be separated from religion because once religion becomes involved in politics, it stops being the instrument of faith, but becomes the element of the political game and manipulation.
“Establishment of religion-based political parties in Kazakhstan is prohibited, and no Islamic party may be established in the republic as it won’t be legally registered,” Kaliev said.
Rustam Batrov, research officer of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan, author of the book about the Muslim theologian “Abu Hanifa: Life and Legacy”, believes that the Kazakhstan-based actor comes from the best intentions when he urges his fellow countrymen to follow the laws of Islam.
“He wants to enhance traditional morality in the society this way. The degree of consistency of the latter with the spirit of our time is a topic for discussion,” Rustam Batrov said.
He sees another problem: some hotheads may take Adambai’s words literally. Batrov cited the traditional Hanafi (one of the legal schools in Sunni Islam – Editor’s note) work ‘The Mukhtasar al-Quduri’, which proclaims that Muslims have “a religious duty (wajib) to fight against the disbelievers, even if they do not attack us.”
“But ‘al-Hidayah’ by Al-Marghinani is a more authoritative Hanafi work that allows having sex with girls who have not reached puberty and who, according to this classical Muslim author, may be forced to marry even without their consent. The sharia law, including Hanafi, requires to put renegades to death (read: dissidents), i.e. it does not recognise a person’s right to freedom of conscience. Does Adambai call for such kind of Islamic laws? Or does he deny the traditional Hanafi school and offer another interpretation of Islam?” Batrov said.
He believes that such topics should be covered in public space with caution. “Good-looking slogans without deep understanding of the subject matter may have an opposite effect and let the devil, frightful and dangerous, out of the bottle,” Batrov said.
Yulia Denisenko, theologian and expert in countering extremism and terrorism, stands for preservation of the secular law. Moreover, according to her, introduction of the Sharia law in post-Soviet countries is too early, at least, and would lead to a religious war, at most.
“What sharia can we talk about if people are not aware of basic things about Islam? When I ask a question to many people about the madhhab (the Islamic school of law – Editor’s note) they follow, they don’t know what madhhab is,” she said.
Based on the theologian’s observations, people often mix Islam with occult practices. For example, they consider it normal to place a wolf paw (a pagan amulet) next to a surah of the Quran.
“Why do I say so? There’s no way for the sharia if there’s no viable ideology. And the Islamic culture does not really have it. Many contemporary Muslims confuse spirituality with the sharia law. The purpose of the sharia law is to encourage spiritual models, but it does not mean that Islam is limited to that. It means spiritual experience, not compliance with strict rules,” Denisenko said.
She reminded that the Prophet Muhammad in one of his hadiths said that Islam is a religion of the middle path. Therefore, the theologian asked us not to fall into the extremes.
“We have two extremes: some say that faith is within one’s soul, others say that sharia law must be strictly followed, yet they are not aware of all of its laws. And as long as we don’t have the balance, how can we speak about the sharia-based state? A secular state is an instrument that protects the Muslims from themselves, from the warped view of religion. We should understand the purpose of these laws and how they can be applied in today’s world,” Denisenko said.
Kazakhstan-based lawyer Asel Tokaeva agreed with her. She emphasised that living according to sharia law means disempowerment of women and violation of human rights in general.
“Societal development and democracy will be out of question then,” the lawyer said. “I don’t understand people who are under some influence. I am convinced that their opinions must not be taken seriously by the state and the society.”
Madi Raimov, author of the novel “Molitva” [from Russian – Prayer], referring us back to the 2016 terroristic attack in Aktobe (Kazakhstan), commented on the situation, “Before making such statements, we should understand that 35 per cent of our population are not Muslims, and it should be taken into account. The most perfect state is a secular one, where people have a right to choose their religion.”
When preparing this material, the reporter of CABAR.asia found out that some experts feared to discuss the situation. One expert refused to give comments regarding the sharia because he was representative of the Slavs.
Another expert reminded that the sharia law is rather severe. For example, if a girl marries an adherent of a different faith, she would be put to death; if a Muslim converts from Islam, he would be put to death. The same applies to representatives of sexual minorities: if the sharia law is passed, they would be put to death. Those who refuse to pray salah would be imprisoned for long term until they change their mind.
However, the expert retracted his comment later and said that radical prohibited organisations were willing to kill experts. Therefore, it becomes more difficult to discuss religious matters.
Main photo: Nurtas Adambai, taken from his personal account on Instagram.