Category: Politics

The Adhaalath party has accused the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) of opposing the Islamic ministry’s plans to establish a religious TV channel using Zakat funds for political reasons.

A strongly-worded press release issued on Sunday states that the Adhaalath Party welcomes religious scholars from political parties criticising policies to hold the government accountable.

“But the Adhaalath party will speak out against anyone who seeks to use religion as a weapon to conceal personal motives,” it reads.

It adds that the DRP press release was intended to deceive people and undermine Maldivians’ faith in Islam.

A press release by the DRP last week stated that, according to the Qur’an, the Zakat fund can only be spent on eight categories of people, including the destitute, the poor and needy, those who collect alms, those in debt, wayfarers, converts, to liberate slaves and to promote Allah’s cause.

While the DRP statement interpreted the last category as funds for supporting holy wars or jihad, the Islamic ministry has said it extends to the propagation of Islam.

Establishing a television channel, building mosques, paving roads or arranging funerals for the poor from Zakat funds was prohibited in Islam, it continued, calling on the government to halt its plans to use the funds to build prayer rooms in schools and set up a television channel.

Last month, Islamic Affairs Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari said promoting the cause of Allah or Fi Sabeelillah did not only refer to jihad.

Bari said Rf2 million (US$156,000) was spent to establish an Islamic TV channel from the Zakat fund under the principle of Fi Sabeelillah.

“We did not say we are spending the Zakat fund allocated for poor and needy,” he said. “We decided to spend funds allocated for Fi Sabeelillah. We made the decision based on Fatwas issued by Islamic scholars.”

The Adhaalath Party press release refers to the Fiqh Sunnah of Sheikh Sayyid Sabiq, which states that Zakat funds can be used to pave roads, provide food and water and medical treatment for pilgrims.

Quoting the Fiqh Sunnah, it adds that the funds could be used to build military hospitals and finance social projects.

Further, Fi Sabeelillah includes training religious scholars to preach Islam and find converts in the manner of Christian missionaries as well as build religious learning centres.

The al-Azhar University in Egypt spends Zakat funds on pocket money for its students, the press release continues, adding that the DRP leader and his colleagues would have received this money when they were studying in Egypt.

“Therefore, if they are saying that Islam does not allow using these funds for a noble purpose, they are talking about some other religion,” it reads.

In the past, Zakat and welfare funds were misappropriated to spend on relatives and associates of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, the Adhaalath party press release alleges.

It goes on to urge members of DRP to repent and “confess to their crimes before the people”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

The government has submitted a bill to increase departure tax and generate revenue for improvements to border control and aviation safety.

Mahmoud Razee, minister of civil aviation and communication, said the departure tax would be increased from US$14 to US$18.50.

The government has also submitted a civil aviation authority bill to parliament which will allow the establishment of a body to oversee aviation-related activities such as safety.

Razee said the establishment of an independent institution had been recommended by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

The ICAO is a UN agency that regulates international air navigation to ensure safe growth of the industry. The council recommends practices concerning air navigation, infrastructure, flight inspection and facilitation of border-crossing procedures.

Razee said he did not think the increase would deter holidaymakers as the tax was still low compared to other countries in South Asia which charged tourists an average of US$20.

Speaking to an international group of journalists last month, President Mohamed Nasheed announced the government’s decision to introduce a US$3 a day green tax on all tourists.

He said the revenue generated would go towards making the Maldives carbon neutral within a decade and a sovereign fund to relocate the population if rising sea levels swamp the island nation.

But, Tourism Minister Dr Ahmed Sawad said it was more likely the government would take a percentage from other taxes such as the departure tax for deposit in a green fund.

“We have been talking about a lot of taxes and have created debate in the public domain,” said Sawad. “What I believe is going to happen in the near future is we will streamline all of these ideas into a single tax.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Mohamed Nasheed was presented with a ‘Not Stupid’ award yesterday for his efforts to tackle climate change at the global premiere of the Age of Stupid.

The Age of Stupid was premiered yesterday in a solar-powered tent in New York and was attended by A-list celebrities and world leaders alike.

The president has fast become the moral voice of climate change after announcing his plan to make the Maldives the first carbon neutral country in the world earlier this year.

The film is a docudrama starring Oscar-nominated Pete Posthethwaite as an old man living in 2055 in a world ravaged by climate change. In the film, Posthethwaite looks back on archival footage from 2008 asking the all-important question: why didn’t we stop climate change when we had the chance?

The premiere was held a day before the climate change forum at the 64th UN General Assembly where world leaders hope to begin negotiations leading up to talks in Copenhagen, Denmark, this December.

Positive thinking

Hours after the premiere, leaders from small island states gathered to demand the world step up to the challenge of climate change and global temperatures be sharply reduced from targets recently set by industrialised countries.

At the high-level summit of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), the president’s call for the declaration to be couched in positive rather than negative language was unanimously passed.

Nasheed said while the climate change debate had so far centred on a ‘prohibition list’ a ‘positive list’ of actions would be equally effective. “If we go to Copenhagen with this line of thinking, we can’t achieve anything.”

He added countries should focus on investing in green technologies rather than solely on cutting carbon emissions and urged small island states to speak with a ‘singular voice’ at Copenhagen.

The declaration calls for a cap in temperatures of 1.5 degrees as well as financing to help islands adapt to global warming.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change forecasts temperature rises of between 1.1 and 6.4 degrees celsius within the next century.

Climate change is already delivering damage not of our making,” the Maldives president, Mohamed Nasheed, told leaders, according to the British newspaper The Guardian.

“Should we, leaders of the most vulnerable and exposed countries, be asking our people to sign on to significantly greater degrees of misery and livelihood insecurity, essentially becoming climate change guinea pigs?”

Tillman Thomas, the president of Grenada in the Caribbean, told Reuters failure to act at Copenhagen would amount to ‘benign genocide’.

Small island states are among the countries most vulnerable to sea level rises and flooding from melting ice caps, as well as among the least responsible.

Against all odds

In another event, Nasheed addressed a rally of hundreds of labour, environmental, student and community activists calling for action on climate change yesterday. The rally was organised to kick-off World Climate Week.

In his speech, Nasheed highlighted the importance of grassroots movements to pressure leaders to take action on climate change.

“I’m not saying this because I have read this from a book, but I’m saying this because I’m living it. We have changed a thirty-year dictatorship against all odds,â” he said.

The president said good governance was essential to climate change as corrupt governments would not bring positive outcomes.

Nasheed said he believed humankind was not ‘stupid’ enough to ignore climate change and destroy the earth for future generations.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

After hearing numerous criticisms over the past few months about Dhuvaafaru, I went to the inauguration ceremony on Monday, pen in hand, prepared to bombard the pages of my pad with corrosive words about what a disaster the project had been.

As the seaplane circled above the island, the rows of utilitarian houses did nothing to dispel my scepticism, so far away were they from my vision of a home.

How wrong I was.

The inauguration of Dhuvaafaru was unexpectedly touching and my cynicism soon gave way to an enduring optimism. From the play that re-enacted their tsunami experience to the banquet islanders had prepared, the spirit of warmth and gratitude that filled the air was one of real sincerity.

Wearing an International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) hat, islanders bounded up to me to shake my hand and thank me for their new home. Having played no part in the reconstruction efforts of the IFRC I felt like a fraud…a proud fraud.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

An opposition party leader was taken into police custody for questioning today after failing to respond to a summons from a controversial presidential commission investigating corruption.

People’s Alliance leader Abdulla Yamin was questioned by police for more than three hours over why he ignored the summons.

Addressing press this evening, Yamin said he did not exercise his right to remain silent: “I said I am not a criminal, I came here to give information, I do not want to remain silent.”

The six-member commission was launched by the President Mohamed Nasheed in May to investigate a series of damning audit reports revealing widespread corruption under the former government, including a report on the State Trading Organisation (STO) when Yamin was chairman of the board.

Members of the opposition have denounced the commission’s activities as a “witch-hunt”.

Legal concerns

Yamin told press he first received a letter from the commission on Thursday calling him in for questioning.

After failing to respond, police sent him a summons yesterday. He said he met with police officers at 2am today at the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party headquarters and discussed his legal concerns about the commission.

The PA leader said he told police the letter from the commission did not explain why they wished to question him as required by the law.

“I hoped genuinely that they would call me and give me the details. If they did, I could have gone,” he said.

He added his lawyer, Azima Shukoor, advised that he was under no legal obligation to comply with the summons. “I told police, the presidential commission hasn’t made any announcement that says if they summon someone that person is legally bound to obey,” he said.

STO audit report

Abdulla Haseen, a member of the commission, confirmed to Minivan News today that Yamin had been summoned for questioning over the 2008 STO audit report.

The 17-page report, covering 2006 and 2007, alleged widespread corruption. In the report, the auditor general wrote that STO’s main business transactions were made with a company affiliated to the management instead of through a transparent bidding process.

In another revelation, the report noted that US$5.5 million was pocketed by a family member of the ex-managing director of the company.

Further, the company made a loss of millions of dollars after selling off a luxury resort and a tea plantation for significantly less than its retail value.

The report also revealed the names of companies awarded interest-free credit and loans as well as a bogus purchase of US$467,000 worth of construction materials.

“He [Yamin] has a moral obligation to clear his name and his refusal to do so, raises serious questions about his decency and honour,” President’s Office Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair told Minivan News today.

Implicated

At the press conference, Yamin said he was summoned for questioning again today, but for a police, rather than a presidential commission investigation.

He said he obliged and gave a detailed statement on his reason for disobeying the summons from the commission.

On the STO audit report, Yamin said while he welcomed the commission’s investigation into his involvement as both the chairman of the company and a government minister at the time, a due process had to be followed.

“[If summoned about STO] I’d say we’d have to look through the company’s files. I’d say we’d have to get the managing director and question him,” he said.

“I am not someone who has the company’s archive at home. I am not someone who recollects everything that happened at the board.”

He added as chairman, he was not involved in the day-to-day running of the company.

Haseen, however, alleged that the commission’s investigations implicated Yamin in corrupt practices.

Responsibility

Yamin has now filed a case with civil court over whether the commission was empowered to issue a writ.

The commission has been criticised for its controversial mandate, which includes the right to interrogate any person, instruct police to confiscate a suspect’s passport, freeze relevant bank accounts and demand documents from any government ministry or institution.

Last month, PA Deputy Leader Ahmed Nazim’s office was raided by police and a court warrant was issued to prevent MP Ahmed “Redwave” Saleem from leaving the country.

While inquiry commissions could be set up, said Yamin, corruption cases came under the remit of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

Haseen said Yamin’s decision to file a case at court was unsurprising.

“We will defend the commission. Even if Mr Yamin is challenging publicly against the commission we will do our investigation according to our agenda which is very clear: our responsibility is to investigate the corruption cases and follow up on the audit reports,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

At the DRP press conference last night, a Minivan News journalist asked whether the DRP believed the former government was completely free of corruption. Ibrahim “Mavota” Shareef did not deny the existence of corruption but instead, swiftly shifted the focus onto the presidential commission.

“I’m not saying that,” said Shareef in answer to the question. “If there is any corruption whatsoever, this government can investigate through proper channels and through legal means.”

But shifting the focus was not a shrewd piece of political manoeuvring by Shareef. In fact, no manoeuvring was required because the government has handed the opposition all the ammunition it could possibly need on a silver platter.

The creation of a presidential commission with controversial powers has unsurprisingly made more than a few people question the government’s intentions.

Instead of its six members appearing as the caped conquerors of corruption as perhaps they imagined, the government has succeeded in giving opposition members the opportunity to play the victim in a radical role reversal. A journalist last night even light-heartedly suggested DRP and PA consider contacting the Maldivian Detainee Network as MDP activists had done under the previous government.

By creating the commission without any apparent legal consultation, on what appears to be a presidential whim, the government has further opened the door for the opposition to appropriate the language of democracy and invoke democratic ideals to elicit sympathy for their “plight”.

A DRP statement distributed at the press conference wrote that a reversal of the democratisation process was taking place as President Nasheed resorted to “unconstitutional and heavy-handed tactics to cling on to power and crush the popular opposition”. Worryingly, their words carry an inkling of truth.

The government has averted the spotlight from the previous regime’s misdeeds and onto its own. It has succeeded in obfuscating its indisputably lofty objective – reparations for embezzlement of state funds – by choosing a not so lofty manner in which to attain its goal.

But, the presidential commission is symptomatic of a far greater MDP malady – a utilitarian attitude towards members of the opposition, which allows party members to rationalise wrongdoing for the greater good: to recompense both for past injustices and to pave way for a democratic future.

Unfairly transferring an island chief before the parliamentary elections as a campaign strategy is justified in the MDP mind, if the island chief is notoriously corrupt.

But undemocratic means cannot serve democratic ends, just as antagonism will not lead to peace. Perhaps it is time to ask why the government does not have faith in the existing independent institutions, such as the police and the Anti-Corruption Commission, and how these institutions can be strengthened.

If the government wishes to settle past injustices unilaterally, a strategy in line with more conventional methods of transitional justice should to be devised so that democracy is not derailed before it is even allowed to take root.

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

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Tensions are fraught in the capital Male’ as voters head to the polling booths to cast their ballots today in the country’s first ever multi-party parliamentary election.

Campaigning ended yesterday at 6pm, but before the deadline, cavalcades of pick-up trucks and motorbikes used the remaining hours to whiz around the congested concrete capital, garlanded in party colours and blaring out Hindi music for their candidate of choice.

Rallies over the past month have become progressively more heated, as the two titans of Maldivian politics, the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and the main opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), go head to head, each vying to win a majority in an election that will determine the legislative landscape of the next five years.

The outcome will create the country’s first democratically-elected and proportionally representative parliament, responsible for plugging the numerous gaps in the country’s legislation, and serving as a check and balance on the government.

Parliamentary majority

President Mohamed Nasheed’s fighting talk was more spirited than ever in his final campaign speech on Thursday night when he spoke with confidence of his party’s ability to win a landslide majority.

“When the results are announced, it will become clear we have won 50 seats,” he said. “We will have to use the power of those 50 seats humbly. We must make use of these seats for the benefit of the people.”

Nasheed said he voted for the first time last year when he ran for presidency; in previous years, he had been arrested ahead of any elections.

“As it turns out,” quipped the 41-year-old, “the only time I was allowed to vote, I won.”

Members of the MDP, which heads the coalition government, fear an opposition majority consisting of DRP and their allies, the People’s Alliance, could result in their political ambitions being blocked at every turn.

Moreover, whispers of an opposition majority passing a vote of no-confidence against the president have been rife.

Showdown

The election is the second showdown between the heads of both parties in less than a year. In October 2008, the country held its first-ever democratic presidential election, which saw Nasheed, backed by a coalition, snatch victory from the 30-year ruler, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Although Gayoom was defeated in the second round of the election, he won the first round with 40.3 per cent of the vote against Nasheed’s 24.9 per cent. The former president continues to have a strong support base.

Speaking to Minivan News today, Mohamed Nasheed, parliamentary candidate and former information minister, said the elections were more of a battle between two personalities rather than “two competing ideologies”.

Although still a member of DRP, Nasheed echoed the belief held by many that neither party should win a majority in parliament.

“There’s a genuine palpable reason if you give the majority to MDP that you will be giving them too much power and compromise the scope of parliamentary independence,” he said.

“In the same way, there is a palpable risk that if DRP wins a majority they may make government difficult and even at some point try and bring it down.”

Corruption allegations

Looming over the historic elections are widespread allegations of bribery and the abuse of power by political appointees. Reports of foul play from NGOs and the country’s various independent institutions have mounted over the past month.

The Elections Commission (EC) has received close to 800 complaints, out of which, 65 were related to allegations of bribery and intimidation.

The Human Rights Commission Maldives and Attorney General Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed have echoed similar concerns.

In Male’ today, most of the voters who spoke to Minivan News said they too had heard rumours of bribery.

49-year-old Adheel Jaleel, who was up early to vote for his party, said that while he had heard rumours, nobody had “been caught red-handed.”

At Arabiyya School, where voting was in full swing by midday, Elections Monitor Mohamed Ibrahim said relatives of one of the candidates had turned up to the polling station to strong-arm voters in the queue.

“I told them you cannot force people. Give them the freedom to vote for who they want,” he said.

NGO Transparency Maldives is the latest organisation to voice concern.

A statement issued yesterday highlighted three main problem areas: allegations of bribery (vote buying and vote selling), allegations of abuse of power (threats, intimidation, hindering campaigns), and compromising voter secrecy.

The EC has estimated at least 3,000 people voting locally and abroad could have their right to a secret vote compromised in situations where a single voter uses a ballot box outside his or her constituency.

Voter turnout

Although a low voter turnout was expected by many today, in Male’ certainly, most of those strolling around bore purple-stained index fingers.

Of those interviewed by Minivan News, only one, Abdullah Moosa, a vendor at Male’s vegetable market, said he would not be voting today.

“The candidates are contesting for their Rf66,000,” said the 70-year-old, shrugging his shoulders dismissively. “The elections won’t be independent as the candidates will be deceiving the public.”

Moosa, who voted for Gayoom in the presidential elections, described the experience as “the worst” of his life.

“Parliamentarians in the Maldives are backbiting. They don’t use their time to make the laws,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Minivan News brings you the final instalment in a three-part interview with Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed. A founding member of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) and later, the New Maldives, a faction within the party which aimed to make the Maldives a liberal democracy, Shaheed has served under two successive administrations. In the 2008 presidential elections, he was independent candidate Dr Hassan Saeed’s running mate. In January, the pair formed the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), which is part of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) led coalition government.

Why don’t you tell me a little bit about this award that you have recently won?

I’m very happy to be named Muslim Democrat of the year. They’ve been looking at the work that I do. I’ve been very much in the limelight since the tsunami. I was the government spokesperson, trying to defend a reform agenda but I was putting it together as well. I am recognised as very strong on human rights and advocacy.

We had a government here which was very adamant on cultural human rights. I changed that round to put it into the international perspective, but in the end I also left them because you can take a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

The work I did in the previous government trying to move towards democracy and the work I did after being in the government, to pressure them and to build a coalition and currently in trying to sustain the government.

I sent a paper to the conference. The paper looked at what we were doing in the Maldives to bring democracy, but in particular how the former government had used Islam as a tool for control and how we thought we could dismantle that and make Islam a positive force for democracy in the Maldives.

How did the previous government use Islam as a tool?

The point is before the last regime came to power, we had a very relaxed regime towards Islam with almost Sufi traditions being practised here. But I think they almost Salafised it. Gayoom is perhaps a moderate in many ways but his language is that of a Salafist. Islamic brotherhood in Egypt is very Salafist in many ways.

So they used Islam for everything in the country, they used something Islamic as the benchmark to look at. So Islam came into every aspect in modern politics, it came into every ritual, in every political event and anyone who opposed the regime faced the danger of being labelled un-Islamic.

What was the impact on this?

The negative effects of this are it obfuscates rational thinking. Islam strikes a very emotive chord in people here and it doesn’t necessarily bring out the most rational thinking. It also presents in some ways an official version of Islam sanctioned by the government. What I mean to say is that Islam is in any case very diverse.

So you have a problem with an official version of Islam sanctioned by the government?

Imposed.

In an ideal world how should it be?

Well Islam has a lot to do with the individual and God. We don’t have to have an intercessory in between the two. But when you have secular authorities pronouncing on these issues, they mix the two. And one very unfortunate development is that when they drafted the last constitution in 1977, the Islamists argued that in a Muslim country you can’t have a separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive.

So the president assumed powers as the head of judiciary as something Islamic, which is not the case. Then again when it came to denying representation, they used Islam as the justification. They misused Islam for political gain, the primary one being the role of the president as head of the judiciary.

For now I’m very happy to be in a 100 per cent Muslim country having achieved homegrown democracy. It’s not something that was imposed on us. The movement for democracy grew in the country…we’re still trying to complete the revolution here.

(…)

We don’t think Islam and democracy are incompatible. We are also showing that an Islamic country can be pro-West. In fact, an argument you don’t hear from us but they quote throughout the Islamic world is that the West is to blame for a lot of things. Now you don’t hear that argument from us. We don’t blame the West for anything.

But we think there are things the Islamic world ought to be doing and can do to build bridges with Western countries. The point is we as Muslim countries must recognise certain things, like international law for example and the fact that we’re living in a globalised society and that there is the United Nations.

These basic things we recognise, the Islamists don’t do that. We are a country that recognises the universality of human rights. We recognise that Islam can co-exist with other values.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)