Parliament commences preliminary debate on amendment to Immigration Act

The parliament has commenced preliminary debate on an amendment presented by the government to the Immigration Act.

The amendment was presented to the parliament by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairperson and MP ‘Reeco’ Moosa Manik on behalf of the government, with the intention of easing the process for investors and foreign businessmen to settle down in the Maldives.

If the amendment is passed, residential visas will be issued for persons mentioned in article 6[a] of the Immigration Act: a foreigner married to a Maldivian, or a former spouse of a Maldivian citizen who is assigned the guardianship of their child by a court of law.

A foreigner who has invested in a business which is declared by the Economic Ministry as a large investment will also be allowed a residential visa according to the new amendment presented, or foreigners who have invested in a government project to enhance the economy of the country.

Speaking in parliament’s sitting today Peoples Alliance (PA) MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abubakur expressed concern that the bill would allow Israeli nationals to live in the Maldives, and that it was a threat to the sovereignty of the country.

Jamal said that the bill needs to clearly define how the Economic Ministry will determine the distinction between large businesses and investments, and how many persons can have residential visas.

He also alleged that the amendment was drafted with the intention of letting specific foreigners in the Maldives have residential visas, and said he would not support the amendment.

Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP and Parliamentary Group leader Riyaz Rasheed also alleged that the government was attempting to deploy Israelis to the Maldives and “make them wear white jubba [Arab garment] and promote their religion in this country.”

He also claimed that the government was intending to issue the residential visas to foreigners brought to the country by Indian infrastructure giant GMR, which is managing and upgrading the country’s main airport.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Bill doubling city councillors rejected after presidential veto

An amendment to the Decentralisation Act proposed by opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Hassan Latheef and subsequently vetoed by President Mohamed Nasheed was invalidated at parliament yesterday.

The amendment would have doubled the number of city councillors in Male’ City and Addu City.

A motion proposed by DRP MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom to override the veto and pass the bill again did not receive the required 39 votes.

Article 91(b) of the constitution states that “any bill returned to the People’s Majlis for reconsideration shall be assented to by the President and published in the government gazette if the bill, after reconsideration, is passed without any amendments, by a majority of the total membership of the People’s Majlis.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Opposition behind assault on MP Nazim Rashad, MDP claims

The ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has strongly condemned the “uncivilised and brutal assault” on Thulhaadhoo MP Nazim Rashad last night, accusing opposition parties of planning and carrying out the attack.

A press release by the party today states that “the party believes the attack on Nazim was a planned, cruel and cowardly act.”

“In the view of the party, these cowardly acts planned by opposition parties are purposely carried out to obstruct the valuable efforts of the sincere MPs of the MDP parliamentary group and intimidate them,” it reads.

It adds that such incidents would not discourage or hamper “the hard work of MDP members to establish and consolidate democracy in the Maldives.”

The press statement concludes by calling on all political parties to choose peaceful dialogue to resolve political differences.

Local daily Haveeru meanwhile reports that the former Independent MP was assaulted around 11:30pm when he came out of the Thandhoor Cafe’ in Buruzumagu.

According to an eyewitness, a person riding a GN motorcycle struck Nazim on the face “about three times and yelled at him before getting away.”

The eyewitness told Haveeru that the attacker accused Nazim, a former Islam teacher, of expelling him from Majeedhiya School.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: India and Pakistan, a tale of two destinies

On the stroke of midnight, 64 years ago, a bold, unprecedented and brash idea made a momentous tryst with destiny.

It was at this late hour that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru announced to a world that “India will awake to life and freedom”.

Just the previous day, on August 14, 1947 – an Urdu poet’s utopian vision also came to fruition with the creation of Pakistan, a Muslim state carved out of British India.

It marked the beginning of an epic, intense rivalry, one that lasts to this day.

This week, on the 64th anniversary of their births, the two rival nations of the subcontinent present a marvelous study in contrast.

Shaky Foundations

By 1949, both countries had lost their founding fathers– Jinnah succumbed to a long illness, while Gandhi fell to the bullets of a Hindu fanatic.

It is an understatement to say, looking back, that the idea of India had seemed impossible back then. Following a bloody, violent partition, the largest mass migrations in modern history had left eight million refugees to be resettled and provided for.

Hundreds of Independent Princely states that formed British India had to be coaxed or coerced into joining the new dominion, and become part of this impossible nation that defied all reason.

Once this was achieved, there remained the gargantuan task of taking a long colonised nation of hundreds of millions of illiterate, poor, hungry and dogmatic people, and lead them into a new, prosperous future.

The new state of Pakistan seemed to have it a bit easier – with a state that was established and identified by such homogeneity as one dominant religion and one official language, whereas India was a boiling pot of cultures, races, religions, terrain and geography, all tied together with an untested, unknown thread of nationhood.

Even before it could adopt a constitution, the Indian state was already under attack from extremists on both the left and the right – the former rejecting the perceived Western Imperialism backing the new nation, and the latter, Hindu fanatics railing against the secular state announced by Nehru.

Both these forces continue to be active in India today – the Maoists continue to wage war against the Indian state, and the Hindu fanatics continue to demand a Hindu state.

The tribal invasion of Kashmir in 1947 further threatened the stability of the situation, sparking the first war between the two infant republics, and creating the knotty Kashmir tangle that remains unresolved to this day.

Yet, despite the ever present tactics of violence – none of these forces have been successful at destroying the fabric of India’s unity, which has endured marvelously throughout the decades.

The two wings of Pakistan, however, could not survive the pressures of civil war – and culminated in the formation of independent Bangladesh in 1971, with Indian assistance.

Dance of Destiny

It was perhaps destiny that India achieved its freedom in an age that saw towering personalities like Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Vallabhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru.

The modernist Nehru left no doubts about his vision for India – an overwhelmingly religious country that would not be bound by any single defined religion or culture or language.

To quote from his landmark midnight speech, “All of us, to whatever religion we may belong, are equally the children of India with equal rights, privileges and obligations. We cannot encourage communalism or narrow-mindedness, for no nation can be great whose people are narrow in thought or in action.”

The equally modernist Mohamed Ali Jinah, also outlined his vision for Pakistan in his famous August 11 speech to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly, a day now marked in Pakistan as ‘Minority day’: “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State.”

The first constitution of Pakistan declaring it an Islamic republic in 1956 proved to be the first blow to this magnanimous vision of the much-revered Jinnah.

Within two years of its adoption, Pakistan saw its first coup d’etat, and this set the tone for Pakistan’s perpetual lost decades, which would be littered with failed democracies and military coups.

The fate of Pakistan was sealed with rise of the religious fundamentalist General Zia-ul-Haq, whose regime oversaw the tampering of the Pakistan Penal code, and introduction of Hudood ordinances to ‘Islamise’ Pakistan, the outlawing of Ahmadi minorities in direct contravention of the founder’s dreams, and the strengthening of the military’s ability to forever intervene in politics.

The destiny of Pakistan would remain forever mired in the three A’s – Allah, America and the Army.

Pakistan, it would turn out, would not see a single decade of political stability or a single successful democratic government in the years to come.

In stark contrast, India has seen 14 successful general elections, despite a burgeoning billion-plus population – a large portion of which started out largely illiterate, poor and malnourished.

Despite the large, creaky bureaucracy and widespread allegations of corruption, the Indian state continues to function and pull millions out of poverty, achieving self-sufficiency in food production, and making education a fundamental, legally enforceable right.

Where a disproportionately large proportion of Pakistan’s budget is drained annually on its all-powerful armed forces, the Indian military remains firmly under civilian control, and the various state powers remain separate and balanced.

Only recently, the Indian Supreme Court announced that the sky is the limit to its powers, when it comes to upholding the rule of law.

Apart from the brief period of emergency rule imposed by Indira Gandhi in the mid-70s, the Indian media has remained largely unshackled, free and active critics of government policy. The intellectual scene in India remains vibrant, with Indian artists and writers increasingly commanding global attention.

In the meantime, the Pakistani government’s dangerous experiments with cultivating religious fundamentalists has come back to haunt it. Hardly a week goes by without the news of sectarian violence or an explosion in a mosque; a bomb attack during this week’s Independence Day celebrations killed dozens.

Pakistani links have been established to abhorrent acts like the Mumbai terror attacks, while ‘banned’ militant organizations like Lashkar-e-taiba continue to function openly, under adopted names. Today, the Taliban created by the Pakistani intelligence is killing hundreds of Pakistani soldiers every year.

Pakistani society has radicalised to the point where lawyers and citizens do not hesitate to congregate in public and shower flowers on a murderer, who assassinated a top politician earlier this year for daring to fight for minority rights. The power-crazed Mullah has been empowered to dictate public morality, leading to often violent clashes between traditional social norms, and rising fundamentalist views.

Most damagingly, the Pakistani civilian government and military both suffer from a massive trust deficit in the international arena, compounded further by the recent discovery of Bin Laden hiding in a house, barely a mile from the country’s top military academy.

Today

As it stands today, Pakistan, despite its promising headstart – is being increasingly dismissed by the international community as a failed state. The only continued interest in Pakistan stems from a serious global concern about the country’s nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands – a concern that does not seem to arise for its stable, democratic nuclear-armed neighbor, India.

Over time, India’s tremendous diversity – that had once threatened its very existence – has ended up becoming its greatest strength. Despite its various criticisms, and defying terrible odds, India has become a model of a functioning, pluralistic and inclusive democracy – a nation where 150 million Muslims enjoy greater social freedoms and opportunity towards prosperity than the utopia of Pakistan, that appears to have failed Pakistani Muslims.

In a little over five decades, India has grown from a wild-eyed-dream to become the third largest economy in the world in terms of purchasing power – with a booming middle class, and entrepreneurs and researchers and scientists making giant strides in crucial fields like IT and biotechnology.

The poverty and famine stricken India has been replaced by a confident, surefooted nation – one that seeks to assert itself as a global power, seeking a permanent position in the Security Council, while also being lauded globally on the success of its multicultural democracy.

Pakistan’s experiments with military regimes and religious fundamentalism have left it a broken, crushed dream that the staunchest of optimists have written off, while India’s commitment to a liberal democracy has made it a resilient, vibrant power with a success story that will be hailed for generations to come.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Weekly state expenditure to be made public

The government will publicise details of weekly state expenditure starting from next month, President Mohamed Nasheed announced Monday night at the launching of the government’s “Fiscal and Economic Reform Programme.”

In his speech at the ceremony, President Nasheed stressed that “every single coin we get is the property of the Maldivian people and wealth created by Maldivian businessmen.”

“Along with a tax system, what we need the most is a transparent mechanism for expenditures,” he said. “For that mechanism to be perfect is essential for us to successfully implement the [taxation] system.”

At Monday night’s ceremony, captains of the tourism industry unreservedly endorsed the economic reform agenda, consisting of 18 pieces of legislation to introduce direct taxation, excise import duties, encourage private ownership of land and facilitate ease of doing business.

President Nasheed went on to say that details of government revenue and expenses should be clear to the public through independent institutions, such as the Auditor General, the Anti-Corruption Commission and parliament.

“It might be difficult for this government to instill this habit among us,” he continued. “However, it is absolutely necessary for governments to come and future generations. No ruler should consider anymore that assets of the Maldivian state belongs to him.”

On how proceeds from the new taxes are to be utilised, Nasheed reiterated the core pledges of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), which include providing affordable housing, lowering cost of living, establishing transport networks, ensuring universal health insurance and combating drug abuse and trafficking.

President Nasheed observed that taxation was introduced in other countries after “serious unrest, conflict between the public and businessmen and with some countries plunging into civil war.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Tourism magnates endorse proposed economic reforms

Prominent businessmen and magnates of the tourism industry endorsed the government’s economic reform agenda and introduction of direct taxation last night.

Speaking at a launching ceremony for the “Fiscal and Economic Reform Programme,” Mohamed Umar Manik, chairman of the Maldives Association of the Tourism Industry (MATI), observed that a sustainable source of government revenue was necessary for providing public goods and services.

“Today we have democracy in our country, but democracy can only be strengthened if we are able to deliver,” said the Chairman of Universal Enterprises. “To do this, our government must have sources of income. A detailed reform agenda has been proposed for this. In my view, it is an ideal reform programme.”

Manik congratulated President Mohamed Nasheed and “those who framed the reform agenda.”

Following consultation with the government over the proposed taxes, MATI said in a statement earlier this week that the absence of a taxation system in the country “similar to tax regimes successfully implemented in other countries” was a serious impediment to development and economic growth.

Old ways of thinking

Waheed DeenPreceding the MATI chairman, Mohamed Waheed Deen, philanthropist and owner of Bandos Island Resort, argued in an impassioned speech that a taxation system was essential for democracy to deliver rising standards of living.

“This should have been done and finished 30, 40 or 50 years ago,” he said. “I sincerely thank our young President for beginning this effort today.”

A taxation system had to be introduced “because we are using the people’s property,” Deen contended.

“How can I say that I own Bandos?” he said. “It is not mine. It belongs to the Maldivian people.”

Taxation was the means for a more equitable distribution of wealth, Deen said: “Who wouldn’t want to send their child abroad for higher education? But can we facilitate it for them today?”

The government’s economic reform programme was necessary because “we do not want to keep the gap between rich and poor in this country anymore,” Deen asserted.

“What is the main reason a country becomes impoverished?” he asked. “I believe that one of the main reasons is refusal to tell the people the truth by many successive governments, many kings, until we have come to this point.”

In the Maldives’ long history, Deen continued, the public were indoctrinated to not criticise the government and given to understand that “only a particular group, from a particular family, could rule.”

Deen speculated that “the biggest challenge” the government’s economic reform agenda would face will be “changing people’s mentality.”

“This is the biggest problem facing our country today: [one side says] ‘everything is going right’ [while the other says] ‘nothing is going right,’” he explained. “So we have to educate our people, especially the councils.”

Deen also cautioned against unprincipled opposition to the government: “We could stay angry, hateful and disapproving and say ‘go on, run the government’ but sadly – remember this well – any harm this government suffers, the people will suffer many times over.”

Waheed Deen began his remarks by quoting the Quran 3:26: “O Allah. Lord of Power (And Rule), Thou giveth power to whom Thou please, and Thou strip off power from whom Thou please: Thou endow with honour whom Thou please, and Thou bringeth low whom Thou please: In Thy hand is all good. Verily, over all things Thou hast power.”

“Fruits of freedom”

MATI Secretary-General ‘Sim’ Ibrahim Mohamed meanwhile concurred that Maldivians could onlySim Ibrahim “taste the fruits of political freedom” by liberalising and modernising the economy.

Following graduation from the ranks of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), said Sim, the country could no longer rely on loans and foreign aid.

“In a fundamental sense, taxes are what the people give to the government they elected to manage their affairs,” he said.

Contrary to popular opinion, Sim continued, MATI had been advocating a taxation system as the organisation believed a sound fiscal policy was essential for “day-to-day planning of business matters as well as national affairs.”

In addition to fiscal responsibility, he added, new legislation and strengthening of the judicial system was also needed to foster investor confidence while stalled development of new resorts should be restarted to spur employment and private sector growth.

Sim concluded his remarks by appealing to “everyone who has to pay taxes, please pay taxes.”

“Bold initiative”

Sunland Travels Director Hussein HilmyIn his speech, Sunland Travels Director Hussain Hilmy reiterated that the Maldives’ “economic policy and legal framework needs to undergo modernisation and reform.”

“We in the business community welcome the bold initiative being undertaken by your administration to carry out a programme of comprehensive economic and fiscal reform,” Hilmy said.

He added that businesses were “delighted” with the government’s policy of a “shift away from import duties as a major source of government revenue.”

Hilmy observed that for successful tax administration, “transparency, accountability, predictability and effective combating of corruption” were necessary “preconditions.”

While the local tourism industry “has been the main engine of growth in the Maldivian economy for the last 40 years or so,” Hilmy warned that “tourism as we all know is an extremely volatile industry subject to sudden shocks and highly sensitive to fluctuations in global economic conditions.”

He suggested that a successful tax system should therefore “ensure the competitiveness of Maldivian tourism in the global market place.”

“We in the tourism industry also welcome your efforts to reduce public expenditure and wastage and create a more efficient and lean government,” he continued. “I can assure that lest there be any doubt that there is full confidence on the part of the tourism industry in the proposed reform programme and we have every confidence that this programme will be able to deliver the kind of success that we all wish and the kind of prosperity that we all are looking for.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

UN Committee grills Maldives delegation on human rights commitment

A delegation from the Maldives headed by Attorney General Abdulla Muiz has reported to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which will release its findings in early September.

According to a UN report summarising the meeting, the delegation was questioned on “restrictions on the practice of religion, the rights of migrant workers, human trafficking, the lack of anti-discrimination laws in the country, the role of the Human Rights Commission and the requirement that all members be Muslim, citizenship laws and the stipulation that non-Muslims could not become citizens nor could they openly practice their religion, the discrepancy in secondary school enrolment rates between boys and girls, and the interaction between English common law and Islam in the legal system of the Maldives.”

The committee noted that the government’s historical position had “been to deny the existence of racial discrimination in the country as the Maldives has a small homogeneous population, of the same origin, pursuing the same religion, and speaking the same language.”

However it had acknowledged that a substantial increase in migrant workers “requires legislative attention”, the UN committee noted.

“In the absence of prejudices leading to racial discrimination in the Maldives, the government did not take specific steps in terms of education and teaching, and culture and information, to address racial discrimination. However, the report says in the Maldives the teaching of Islam promotes understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and all groups,” the committee noted.

The report was presented to the committee by Muiz, who emphasised the “enormous progress” the country had made in recent years towards guaranteeing “fundamental freedoms and individual liberties”.

He did, however, acknowledge the “enormous challenges” the Maldives faced in ensuring that those rights now protected by law were actually enjoyed in practice. In particular, the Maldives delegation identified these as including “fragile democratic fabric, infant democratic institutions, religious fundamentalism, heavy drug abuse, the vulnerability of the country to environmental threats and most recently, human trafficking.”

Furthermore, the delegation claimed, the country’s Human Rights Commission “was one of the most active national institutions in Asia” and “fully compliant with the Paris Principles”, apart from the requirement that all members of the Commission be Muslim.

“Maldivian law did not provide for freedom of religion, although in practice foreigners were allowed to practice religions other than Islam in private,” the delegation informed the committee.

Nonetheless, the Maldives was “a culturally diverse society” that protected its vulnerable migrant labour population by imposing duties on employers, “including responsibility for the employee during their stay and other requirements”, despite the absence of health and safety laws.

“The right to association and the right to strike were now guaranteed under the Maldives’ Constitution,” the delegation informed the committee.

It noted that while the Maldives did not have any laws prohibiting trafficking in persons “and no official studies or reports had been conducted”, the government had a “strong policy to prevent the country from becoming a safe haven for traffickers.”

“Muiz asked the Committee to bear in mind that the democratic and legal framework of the Maldives was a work-in-progress,” the committee noted.

Delegation confronted

In contrast to the Maldives’ position that racial discrimination did not exist, the committee observed that cases of hostility and ill-treatment of the country’s increasingly large number of migrant workers – half the country’s total workforce – had been reported.

“The Maldives should consider acceding to conventions concerned with the rights of non-citizens and amend relevant regulations to allow non-Muslims to acquire Maldivian citizenship,” the committee suggested, and noted that there was “still no anti-discrimination legislation” active in the Maldives.

“It is necessary for the State party to enact legislation on prohibition of incitement to national, racial or religious hatred,” the committee stated.

The committee observed that there was a lack of demographic information on the Maldives, given the extensive size of its foreign labour force, and that “it would be useful to investigate whether there are tensions between Maldivian citizens and foreign workers.”

“Restrictions on the rights of migrants and other foreigners to prohibit the practice of religions other than Islam, except in private, were of concern as well. Was any one Maldivian citizen married to an individual practicing a different religion?” one committee member asked.

Delegation defends

In response to the committee’s questioning, the Maldives delegation contended that the Maldives had “capacity constraints” and “relied on the support of international organisations”, in which case the committee noted “a report longer than three pages would have been appreciated.”

Regarding the committee’s questioning on freedom of religion, the delegation noted that the Maldives maintained a reservation to article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on freedom of religion “and there were currently no plans to withdraw that reservation.

“This was a reflection of the deep societal belief that the Maldives always had been and wished to remain a 100 percent Muslim nation,” the delegation informed the committee, adding that “Muslims and non-Muslims lived harmoniously in the Maldives.”

“It was not true that under the new Constitution existing citizens could be arbitrarily deprived of their nationality if they were to stop practicing Islam. The Constitution was very clear on this point: no citizen could be deprived of his or her nationality under any circumstance. The Muslim-only clause under the citizenship article of the Constitution only applied to non-Maldivians wishing to become naturalised,” the committee reported.

The delegation acknowledged “increased reports of mistreatment of migrant workers by their employers”, but noted that the Maldives placed high importance on acceding to the eight core Conventions of the International Labor Organisation (ILO).

It also argued that “some of the rights and privileges enjoyed by foreign workers were even better that those enjoyed by Maldivians themselves”, such as those mandating the provision of food and accommodation for foreign workers.

“Foreign workers were not discriminated against in any way in the Maldives,” the delegation informed the committee.

In his concluding remarks, Muiz observed that the exercise of appearing before the committee “was tougher than even appearing before the parliament of the Maldives.”

Read the full summary

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil court orders police to pay MP Yameen Rf 244,000

The civil court has ordered police to pay Rf 244,000 (US$$15,823) in compensation to the former President’s half-brother and People’s Alliance (PA) leader Abdulla Yameen for unlawful detention on the Presidential Retreat of Aarah.

Yameen was arrested in June last year on charges of bribery and treason, alongside Jumhooree Party (JP) leader and ‘Burma’ Gasim Ibrahim.

However the Criminal Court at first refused to extend their detention beyond three days’ house arrest, claiming that there were no reasonable grounds to hold the MPs.

Yameen was subsequently taken into protective custody by the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) and held on the Presidential Retreat for 13 days.

The MNDF at the time claimed that Yameen had sought their protection after violent clashes between MDP supporters, police and another group outside his house on the evening of July 14. However Yameen claimed he refused the offer of protection and requested that security forces control the crowd outside his residence.

In August last year the Civil Court ruled that the government’s detention of Yameen was unconstitutional and declared that the MNDF had violated articles 41, 19, 21, 26, 30, 37, 45 and 46 of the constitution.

Explaining the decision to award Yameen compensation, Judge Aisha Shujoon said that the Supreme Court had at the time of Yameen’s detention determined that the arrest was unlawful.

Police had claimed that the case could not be filed against the police because the High Court had subsequently extended Yameen’s detention.

However, Judge Shujoon said that despite this ruling the Supreme Court had ruled that there were no judicial grounds to believe that Yameen was arrested in accordance with the law, and that therefore it was to be believed that the arrest was unlawful from the time he was arrested.

The Civil Court judge then ruled that Yameen’s detention from 29 June to 11 July was unlawful, and that Yameen had the right to be compensated for the 13 days and 20 minutes he was unlawfully held in detention.

Judge Shujoon said that considering respect for human dignity, detaining someone unlawfully could not be considered a minor offence.

She awarded Yameen Rf 1500 (US$972) for aggravated damage, Rf 41,600 (US$2697) for exemplary damages, and Rf 20,915.70 (US$1356) to reimburse Yameen for upgrading the security of his house.

The court also ordered police to pay the money within 30 days.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Mohamed Musthafa recently submitted a resolution to parliament calling for an investigation into allegations that Yameen as former head of the State Trading Organisation (STO) had been complicit in trading subsidised oil to the Burmese military junta on the black market.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Jumhoory Party MP Muthalib resigns from party

MP Ibrahim Muthalib has resigned from the opposition-aligned Jumhoory Party (JP) led by MP ‘Burma’ Gasim Ibrahim claiming that his dreams of making JP the country’s third most active party had been “shattered due to lack of cooperation.”

“Nine months ago I joined the Jumhoory Party with the hope of making it the third most active party in the Maldives, because I felt that the Maldives was in need of a third party,’’ MP Muthalib today told Minivan News. “Currently only the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) are really heard, and no one says a word against them.’’

He said he was not originally invited to join the JP by Gasim, but joined the party on his own wish.

‘’I have worked nine months to accomplish this but it does not seem to be happening, so I thought it would be best to resign,’’ he said. ‘’The decisions we make are not implemented in the party and the JP really needs more time to stand on its own feet and walk.’’

Muthalib said he had not yet decided to join any other party for the moment.

‘’I resigned because I did not want to remain depressed with these thoughts. For now I just want to relax and remain independent for the time being,’’ he said, adding that he still believed that the Maldives was in need of an active third party other than the DRP or MDP.

Muthalib was elected to the parliament as an independent MP.

”I have officially informed the Elections Commission (EC) and the Speaker of the parliament about my resignation,” he said.

However, newspaper Haveeru quoted Muthalib as saying that his resignation came following Gasim’s vote in favor of the appointment of Dr Ibrahim Didi for Fisheries Minister and and Thalhath Ibrahim for Defense Minister.

Following Muthalib’s resignation, only two MPs of the Jumhoory Party will be left in parliament, Gasim and MP Ahmed Moosa.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)