Hiwa Jamil Mohammed – Activist
In all major Abrahamic faiths, the story of Adam and Eve’s expulsion from paradise serves as a foundational lesson about transgression and consequence. Contrary to depictions of overt violence or rebellion, their fall from grace stemmed from a singular act: reaching for what had been clearly forbidden. The divine command was not ambiguous—of all the blessings granted, one tree was off-limits. It is this breach, the act of taking what one has no right to, that triggered their exile from a state of divine contentment to a life of toil and consequence on Earth.
This narrative is not only a religious parable—it is a philosophical reflection on human behavior. Across scripture, the principle is echoed repeatedly: crossing moral boundaries—particularly through the unauthorized seizure of shared or sacred resources—leads to inevitable downfall. Whether in the Torah, the Bible, or the Qur’an, divine warnings are consistently directed toward those who violate justice, exploit power, or claim ownership over what rightfully belongs to others. The Qur’anic verse, “As for the unjust, they shall be firewood for Hell” (72:15), is one of many such declarations.
This core concept is not limited to religious discourse. Political theorists, economists, and secular philosophers have echoed similar warnings. Karl Marx, for instance, argued that the accumulation of wealth is often rooted in the systemic appropriation of others’ labor and rights. From this perspective, unjust enrichment is not merely immoral—it is foundationally unsustainable.
When we apply these principles to the reality of governance in the Middle East—especially in the Kurdistan Region—we encounter a troubling pattern. Political and economic elites have consistently operated outside ethical and legal boundaries. Under both religious and secular pretenses, they have monopolized power, claimed ownership over public wealth, and undermined any framework of collective accountability.
Despite invoking the language of faith or justice, their actions stand in direct contradiction to both. If they genuinely adhered to religious doctrine, they would honor the limits prescribed by divine law. If they believed in secular justice, they would recognize that no legitimate political order can be built on systemic exploitation. Instead, what we witness is the steady expansion of private control over public goods, legitimized by hollow rhetoric and protected by coercive force.
The consequences are not abstract. The people of Kurdistan today live under the weight of daily injustices—economic uncertainty, political exclusion, and social disintegration. But perhaps most damaging of all is the erosion of trust, the normalization of impunity, and the psychological fatigue that accompanies prolonged exposure to systemic inequity. This is not merely mismanagement; it is a sustained transgression of the moral contract that binds rulers to the ruled.
If left unchallenged, this pattern will not only perpetuate inequality—it will deepen instability, both political and societal. Ethical governance is not a matter of religious or ideological preference—it is a requirement for peace and legitimacy. And without a return to those foundational principles—be they divine or democratic—the future will remain captive to a past defined by unchecked power and ignored boundaries.
