E/CN.4/1991/56 page 92 It should be stressed that these incidents were mainly the result of tension funnelled by the inflammatory statements of Mr. Ahmed Sadik and other leading figures of the minority. (...) B. On the allegations that the Muslim minority is being denied the right to freely elect its religious leaders and repair any religious site without the authorization of the Greek authorities, we would like to inform as follows; The election of the Mufti in Greece before the compulsory exchange of populations as a result of the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), was regulated by Law 2345/20, which was enacted in implementation of the Treaty of Athens of 1913. Following the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne, the above law fell into disuse, as it covered Muslim populations exchanged by virtue of the aforesaid Treaty. As a result, the legal status of the Muslim minority in Greece is henceforth governed by the provisions of the Treaty of Lausanne and subsequent laws in enactment thereof. In all countries where Islam constitutes the predominant religion, heads of Muslim clergy are appointed and not elected. In Turkey, for example, the Mufti is appointed in and discharged from his duties by the Administration. In Tunis, the election is left with the absolute discretional power of the President of the Republic. In Morocco, he is appointed and discharged by the Ministry of Religious Affairs. In Egypt, he is appointed by Presidential decree. In Jordan, he is appointed by decision of the Prime Minister on the basis of a proposal by the Ministry of Wakfs and Islamic Affairs. Greece constitutes an exception in point on the matter. An enlarged committee of muslim clergy is convened and proposes to the Minister of Education and Religious Affairs a list of qualified persons, eligible to the post. The Mufti is subsequently appointed by decision of the Minister, chosen from the list on the basis of personal qualifications of each candidate. This practice is incessantly followed since 1920. Moreover, the designation of the Mufti through election would meet with a serious obstacle: as it is known, Greece is the unique western country to accept the exercise of jurisdiction by a head of Muslim clergy. Indeed, the Mufti disposes of judicial jurisdiction which is extended to issues of family and inheritance law. Consequently, the candidate to the post should be a personality fah'joying increased prestige, familiar with Islamic legislation and, of course, holder of a university degree, thus ensuring his scientific proficiency. An eventual appointment through popular election would inevitably involve subjective and mainly political criteria and considerations related to the so called "clientele". These criteria would put the Mufti at the mercy of various interests. •7 It is therefore clear that appointment through election would jeopardize implementation of the constitutional requirement of assigning judges by law