Discussion

The UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme supports engagement with religious and traditional leaders. According to the evaluation of Phase III (2018–21), the programme had engaged religious leaders to speak publicly about the practice and delink it from religion (UNFPA-UNICEF 2021:56). NGOs such as Tostan and Care International take a similar approach, working with Islamic religious leaders to promote the theology of bodily integrity, as mentioned in Islam (Muteshi and Sass 2005:19). The African Union’s Saleema Initiative, a regional initiative to amplify the work of African Union member states toward ending FGM/C (see Alassad, Chapter 7), works with religious and traditional leaders to ‘drive country-level action through existing interventions and programmes’ (African Union 2022:12). Religious and traditional leaders are widely acknowledged as key stakeholders, and their roles in changing social norms are recognised. Based on Matanda et al.:

As outlined above, there is growing global recognition among NGOs, academics, religious leaders from various religions, and within communities where FGM/C is practised of the correlation between religious beliefs and the prevalence of FGM/C and, as a result, an increased interest in working with religious leaders as a means to shift behaviours toward abandonment.

When discussing engaging with religious leaders, we must clearly define what this refers to. In each religious tradition there is a hierarchy of leadership, and the term ‘religious leader’ can refer to ‘imams, pastors, priests, sheikhs, and other religious authorities. Religious leaders are individuals who are recognised by their faith community, playing authoritative and influential leadership roles within faith institutions to guide, inspire, or lead others (of faith)’ (le Roux, Bartelink and Palm 2017:12). NGO discourse has unhelpfully lumped all ‘religious leaders’ together without sufficient understanding of the power dynamics, influence, and authority that each leader has in different spheres. Many NGOs engage with religious scholars at the intellectual level. These scholars may influence local communities, but in many spaces, they are detached from the realities of community life and have little influence on the decision-making process within households.

In a religiously-oriented approach in Wajir, Kenya (Abdi and Askew 2009), FRONTIERS2 FRONTIERS was a USAID-funded programme implemented in Kenya by the Population Council with the Somali ethnic community. led a process of engagement with religious scholars to delink Islam from FGM/C. The project engaged Somali Muslim scholars who had completed either a diploma or degree in Islamic studies and who could speak Arabic fluently. Non-Somali scholars were engaged in facilitating dialogue, and Islamic Shariah formed the basis for discussions. Regional scholars were selected from four districts in the (then) North Eastern Province of Kenya (Garissa, Wajir, Mandera, and Ijara) and from Moyale, Marsabit, Isiolo, and Tana River, all areas where FGM/C is highly prevalent. Scholars from Saudi Arabia and Sudan were invited to speak at a regional symposium following regional dialogues. The project was successful in laying out a theological argument to delink FGM/C from Islam. The study report found that religious scholars ‘can play a critical and influential role in community education and encouragement of FGM/C abandonment. However, these scholars are members of their community and most still support all the cultural reasons for the practice’ (Abdi and Askew 2009:27). Religious leaders are custodians of culture in many places, but are also influenced by the cultural and social norms that exist within communities.

In their 2014 study, Østebø and Østebø explored the challenges of NGOs working with religious leaders in Ethiopia. A Christian NGO facilitated dialogue with Muslim leaders in the lowland districts of south-eastern Ethiopia. Islamic ulama (scholars) were invited together with traditional leaders to a two-day workshop on harmful traditional practices. Ulama from the highland zonal capital of Robe were invited to facilitate. In the workshop, religious leaders were portrayed as a ‘vehicle for development’ ((Østebø and Østebø 2014:3). The authors state that: ‘Although we acknowledge the transformative potential of religious leadership, we here challenge the tendency to portray the involvement of religious leaders as a magic bullet in development interventions in general and in anti-FGM campaigns in particular’ (ibid.).

Østebø and Østebø utilise a lens of power developed by Foucault, in which he states: ‘power is, rather, a mode of action upon the actions of others, which only exists when it is exercised’ (Foucault 1982:779). This lens acknowledges the importance of the dynamic and relational aspects of power, especially in contexts characterised by authoritative structures. In many spaces, there is a contradiction between the attempt to engage in participatory dialogue with the involvement of religious leaders who exert authority and the traditional dominance model. Religious leaders are often brought into dialogue because of their influence and assumed power over communities, yet in a participatory manner, which can, in some cases, create clashes.

Østebø and Østebø state that:

In this study, the lowland ulama were critical of the fact that the NGO had brought in the highland ulama in the first place, saying ‘the project should have involved us before calling the sheikhs from ol irra [the highlands]’ (ibid.:16). In addition, political allegiances created further distrust of the highland ulama as they were seen as being aligned with the ruling government party and pushing a political agenda. The dialogues ultimately failed because of the misunderstanding of power dynamics, utilisation of a power over model rather than a truly participatory model, and a non-dialogical approach in which a particular position (zero tolerance) was promoted rather than discussed (ibid.:9).