Should international law permit Mecca to deny entry to someone without a trial?

[Boojatta]

It seems absurd to say that someone cannot enter Mecca unless the person is a Muslim and isn't a Muslim unless the person made an effort to enter Mecca. Does one have to prove that one was denied entry in order to prove that one is a Muslim? How can one prove that one was denied entry if there is no official court order forbidding entry?

[MrModerate]

1. I was ready to answer your question . . .

Mecca being in Saudi Arabia, they get to decide who visits and who doesn't. Pretty open and shut there.

Then I read the rest of the post and I realized I didn't know WTF you were getting at.

WTF were you getting at?

[Boojatta]

3. I omitted a number of possibilities.

For example, you can give a lump sum of money to charity. Then you can also sign up to have your income effectively reduced by voluntarily accepting an obligation to periodically pay money to various charitable, political, or other causes. Then you can claim to be a Muslim even though you never request official permission to enter Mecca because you cannot afford to make the trip.

[John Gauger]

2. The city is a soverieign entity.

They can keep out whomever they please. It is their right, regardless of how bigoted their decisions are.

[Boojatta]

4. The question wasn't "Does international law..." The question was: "Should..."

[John Gauger]

5. no...

what's the compelling interest to the international community in instituting such a law?

[Boojatta]

9. What's the total number of Muslims in the world?

Isn't Saudi Arabia ruled by a monarchy? Does the genetic stock pass on some special capability and intention that ensures that no future Saudi Arabian policy on admission to Mecca will be bad? For example, does the Saudi royal DNA ensure both capability and intention to avoid provoking a conflict between Sunnis and Shias that will make the current hostilities in Iraq seem like a playground fistfight between a couple of Swiss high school students?

[John Gauger]

11. I don't see what any of that has to do with international law.

In order to make a law, the governing body making that law must show a compelling interest in regulating the aspect of society under its jurisdiction that the law will affect. Until the international community can show that they have a compelling state interest in forcing free and unrestrained access into Mecca, they should not pass that law.

I have no idea what any of that other stuff has to do with international law. The number of Muslims in the world is hovering around a billion and growing. Saudi Arabia is a totalitarian, quasi-Fascist dictatorship (monarchy, to use the quaint term) that indeed bestows office on a hereditary basis. The Saudi royals have no predisposition to preventing war between Sunnis and Shiites, and in fact are extremely xenophobic and have been known to fund efforts to eradicate the "Shia dogs" as they call them. But what does that have to do with letting non-Muslims into Mecca? What are you asking?

[Boojatta]

12. "forcing free and unrestrained access into Mecca"

I apologize for the confusion. The Original Post was a bit misleading. I meant that initial denial of entry by law enforcement would give the person denied entry legal grounds to initiate a trial. Anyone who paid the court fees would be given a trial to officially determine whether or not the person should be allowed to enter Mecca.

[Occam Bandage]

6. To answer the subject line: No. International law has not advanced to the point where

it could cohesively and fairly dictate the border-control policies of sovereign entities.

To answer the text following: Islam does not require someone to have already made the Hajj in order to consider that person a Muslim. All that is required is a recitation of the shahadah in front of two witnesses (who can be any two Muslims). It is strongly encouraged that a convert take a Muslim name; this is virtually required to gain entry into Mecca or Medina, should you ever wish to undertake the pilgrimages.

[Boojatta]

7. Are there official criteria for determining whether or not a name

is "a Muslim name"?

[Occam Bandage]

8. While I'm not an expert, I believe

that the answer is mostly yes, with a sprinkle of no. There are several scriptural/hadith/sharia references as to how to name yourself as a Muslim. To the best of my knowledge, it has to be in Arabic, and it can:

1. Be a name indicating service to God,
2. Be a name of a prophet, messenger, or other holy figure,
3. Be a name indicating a positive, Muslim nature.

Also, it can't be one of the Names of God, nor disrespectful, nor referencing something unholy or undesirable, and I'm sure there's more.

That said, I don't think there's an enormous flowchart somewhere dedicated to determining whether a name is Muslim or not. I'm pretty sure there's gray area, as there usually is any time a religious rule is drawn from multiple sources. But I'm not a Muslim, so anything I say is second-hand at best.

[Boojatta]

10. Thank you.

Your explicit disclaimer sounds very reasonable to me. I appreciate the effort that you put in to provide that information and the interests that allowed you to retain it.