Hawzah News Agency- Ahead of the Muharram mourning season, multiple warnings were issued by the government as part of its war against the Shia community, focusing specifically on Hussaini mourning ceremonies during the month of Muharram. The tool readily available to execute the regime’s demands was the "Jafari Endowments," which, as expected, showed no reaction to halt the relentless onslaught against the Shia identity in the country, targeting all its rituals, institutions, scholars, and eulogists.
Despite all the threats, intimidation, and arrests, the mourning season was a success—a success owed, of course, to the efforts of the people themselves. But the story did not end there; the government and its security apparatus continued their logic of besieging the rituals, once again demanding that the processions not deviate from "obedience" and adhere to imposed regulations, such as holding mourning ceremonies inside Husseiniyas and refraining from using external loudspeakers.
What happened next? The processions (mourning houses) took a remarkable stance against this blatant interference in Hussaini religious ceremonies; they protested the official bodies' decision to ban mourning processions on the martyrdom anniversary of Imam Zain al-Abideen (PBUH) and the silencing of external loudspeakers during sermons and mourning sessions.
In protest against the government's decision to ban the movement of mourning processions in the streets, a large number of Husseiniyas decided to cancel the customary segment of the mourning ceremonies. This is a clear step aimed at stifling the ceremonies and imposing complete control by restricting mourning to the inside of buildings and halls. This stance can only be seen as a loud and public outcry against the regime's interference in Shia affairs and Hussaini rituals, after the interventions have reached an unbearable level.
Subsequently, media networks circulated images of long mourning processions breaking the prohibition barrier across Bahrain; processions in which residents of villages and cities participated, moving along their usual routes to directly challenge the illogical security decisions.
The official interventions continue without pause; sometimes through the Jafari Endowments, and at other times through meetings held by various branches and apparatuses of the Interior Ministry, including a meeting by the Governor of the Northern Region with heads of Husseiniyas to emphasize what they call "adherence to the regulations for holding religious rituals."
Why does all this happen? The government treats Hussaini rituals not as a religious right guaranteed by international laws and conventions, but as a security file managed through instructions and summons. There is no religious season or occasion pertaining to Shias in which ministries and official bodies do not transform into operations rooms to manage the minutest details of activities—from the routes of processions and the volume of loudspeakers to mourning timings, participants, and the designation of permitted activities. This reality makes talk of "sectarian discrimination" based on recurring, objective facts.
It is also illogical to view these measures in isolation from the overall condition of Shias in Bahrain. The pressure on rituals coincides with the targeting of clerics and the continuation of restrictions on religious and social activities. When these realities are put together, they paint a picture of a unified policy built upon "subjugating Shia religious affairs under permanent surveillance." Every religious occasion requires permits, regulations, and warnings—a scene incompatible with the regime's official discourse, which constantly claims religious tolerance, coexistence, and respect for pluralism.
Therefore, the message sent by the Husseiniyas through their protest or by canceling part of the mourning ceremonies goes beyond the rejection of a specific decision; this message reflects a state of revulsion accumulated over years of continuous interference. For the followers of this faith, Hussaini rituals are not a seasonal occasion whose details can be negotiated annually; they are part of their religious, cultural, and historical identity. Whenever the regime insists on dealing with these rituals through a logic of domination and guardianship rather than respecting rights, it only deepens the feeling of discrimination and targeting among a wide segment of citizens, transforming the crisis from an administrative decision into a problem in the realm of "trust, justice, and equal citizenship."
Your Comment