Hawzah News Agency- Abbas al-Murshid, writing in a piece published by Mirat al-Bahrain, noted that exactly 70 years ago, Bahrain experienced one of the most severe political repression campaigns in its contemporary history — scenes reminiscent of today's arrests and trials of clerics and religious scholars, albeit with different political motives and contexts.
The 1956 Crackdown
At dawn on a November 1956 day, British police forces moved toward the homes of leaders of the National Union Committee, arresting the most prominent figures of a reform movement that had managed to unite Bahrainis around a national project to confront British colonialism and reform the governing system. Broad security charges of plotting against the government, creating unrest, and threatening national security were quickly leveled to pave the way for a special trial.
British documents, however, reveal more than the charges themselves: plans to exile the committee's leaders and impose punishments were underway even before the court convened, examined evidence, or issued rulings. On December 18, 1956, official measures to transfer detainees to Saint Helena began, and the following day, legislation facilitating the transfer was issued. The court convened only on December 22–23, 1956 — before Abdulrahman al-Bakir, Abdulaziz al-Shamlan, and Abdulali al-Alaiwat were sent into exile on December 28.
The ruling power had determined the fate of the movement's most prominent leaders before the trial ended, while the judiciary was left to handle charges whose most important punitive consequences had already been politically decided.
The Role of Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Kamal al-Din
The historical comparison takes on deeper meaning when examining the figure of Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Kamal al-Din, one of the most prominent leaders of the National Union Committee and the representative of religious authority in the movement. He was not merely a cleric supporting reform demands — he played a role in linking national activities with the religious authority in Najaf.
Archival documents related to the committee show correspondence and religious inquiries directed to the authority of Sheikh Ali Kashif al-Ghita, indicating that Sayyed Ali referred questions about the movement's activities to him and advanced his political activities based on jurisprudential responses.
Seventy years ago, religious authority was present in Bahrain's national activities through Sheikh Ali Kashif al-Ghita, and one of the reform movement's leaders referred public matters to the jurist and acted on his recommendations — a program historically linked to the concept of jurisprudential guardianship and representation.
Targeted Exile
Sayyed Ali Kamal al-Din was not among the five leaders tried in December 1956, but this did not shield him from targeted measures against the committee's leadership. In the daily reports of British adviser Charles Belgrave on January 16, 1957, it is mentioned that Belgrave asked Sayyed Ali Kamal al-Din al-Ghurayfi to leave Bahrain for Iraq and stay abroad for an unspecified period. Thus, exile measures against the national movement extended to a cleric who represented religious authority in the movement, without him being a defendant in the special trial.
From Political Reformists to Religious Reformists
Al-Murshid noted that the ruling power then faced political opponents seeking administrative reform, judicial reform, expanded popular participation, and confrontation with British influence. Today, however, prosecutions target clerics, educators, and professors whose social standing is tied to religious teaching, guidance, and moral education — individuals such as Sheikh Muhammad Sanqour, Sheikh Mahmoud al-Aali, Sheikh Ali al-Sadadi, and others.
While the National Union's leaders focused on political reform, these scholars carry — in an essential part of their role — a project for reforming individuals and society and strengthening the values of dignity, honor, and moral responsibility.
Shifting Foreign Alliances
The contradiction deepens when examining foreign alliances in both periods. In the 1950s, the ruling power operated under British protection, and colonial institutions directly participated in planning the exile of the national movement's leaders. Today, Bahrain operates within a different framework of security and political alliances, foremost among them normalization with Israel and links to regional military arrangements amid the war with Iran.
What may unite today's detained scholars and jurists is their religious and national positions opposing these options. They belong to jurisprudential traditions that reject normalization with Israel and consider all forms of engagement with it forbidden. They emphasize a sovereign perspective explaining the necessity of keeping Bahrain away from participation in a war against Iran. Moreover, they carry an educational and moral project that strengthens the values of dignity and honor and insists on preserving the independence of the religious and moral community against what they see as projects to weaken identity and values.
Are Religious and National Positions a Crime?
Al-Murshid stressed that if these positions prove to be a common feature of all detained figures, this presents a political interpretation necessitating examination of the motives behind security prosecutions. Opposing normalization with Israel, standing against involvement in regional wars, and defending religious and moral identity are not crimes in themselves.
He raised the question of whether the Interior Minister's repeated discourse on "Velayat-e Faqih" is based on specific criminal acts or serves a political function — transferring disagreement with these positions from the religious and national realm to the security realm.
A Historical Question
Seventy years ago, the ruling power faced a national movement that had united Bahrainis against British influence, with a religious figure among its leaders who relied on religious authority in his reform activities. Today, the authorities are trying scholars and jurists whose religious and national positions may conflict with the ruling establishment's regional options, while the concept of "Velayat-e Faqih" features prominently in the charges and security discourse.
The nature of targeted forces has shifted from "political reformists" to "religious and moral reformists," and foreign alliances have transformed from British colonialism to normalization with Israel and contemporary security arrangements. Yet both experiences pose a historical question for Bahrain that has not diminished in importance: To what extent can the judiciary protect its independence when trials intertwine with the power struggle against influential social, political, and religious centers?
Al-Murshid concluded: The contradiction is that Sayyed Ali Kamal al-Din, who in 1956 embodied the presence of jurisprudential authority in the national movement, went into exile under British influence — while today, 70 years later, the concept of "Velayat-e Faqih" has become a prominent label in the security discourse accompanying the trial of religious scholars.
Your Comment