Category: Society & Culture

Supreme Court upholds High Court’s ruling to allow civil servants to take part in political activities.

The Supreme Court has today ruled that article 53 of the Civil Service Act is inconsistent with article 30[a] of the constitution, and has supported the High Court ruling invalidating the article 53 of the Civil Service Act.

The case was appealed by the Attorney General at the Supreme Court, after the High Court determined that the article 53 of the Civil Service Act was inconsistent with article 30[a] of the constitution.

Article 53 of the Civil Service Act states that Civil Servants cannot participate in any political activities while article 30[a] of the constitution states that it is a right of every citizen to take part in political activities.

The Supreme Court’s verdict read that section 77[a] to [d] of the Civil Service Act that defines political activities, which has mentioned every single activity that would come to a person’s mind when they think of political activities, and that article 77[a] to [d] was defined as definitely inconsistent with the constitution’s article 30[a].

Local media reported that the case was lodged with  the High Court by a former civil servant who worked at the Youth Ministry named Mohamed Haanim, who was dismissed from his position after he took part in an opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) rally.

The case was logged to the Supreme Court on March 2009 and the case reached to a conclusion yesterday.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Citizens honor Evan Naseem in rally against torture

Maldivians honored the eighth anniversary of Evan Naseem’s death and the subsequent shootings at Maafushi Jail in a rally at the tsunami memorial today.

The events of 20 September 2003 are considered critical moments in Maldivian democracy that led to the ousting of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

About 100 people attended the rally, which featured speeches and posters of torture victims. The event will continue tomorrow at 4:00pm.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) founding member Mohamed ‘Bounty’ Nazim described his experience of Naseem’s death, and the protests that followed in Male’.

“We went to the cemetery and saw Naseem’s body. I cannot tell you how it felt. I felt very, very sad, the support I had for [former President] Maumoon was gone when I saw Naseem. I called my friends to come join us in protest against Maumoon,” he said.

On September 20, 2003, prisoners at Maafushi jail allegedly rioted against prison personnel, demanding an explanation for fellow inmate Evan Naseem’s death. Nineteen people were injured and three inmates killed.

Naseem “died due to grievous hurt caused to him by some personnel of Maafushi Jail Security System,” a report filed by the former administration claimed.

Citizens in Male’ rioted when Naseem’s mother Maryam allowed people to see her son’s body, which bore signs of torture.

Nazim said over 5000 people participated in the riot, and that police threw rocks and used arms against them.

Nazim informed Minivan News that today’s protest was “not an MDP event”. He said in two days he and 11 others would register the NGO “Activist Association of Maldives”, which will raise awareness about the penal system and strive to “stop the punishment of innocent people there,” Nazim said.

“We worry about Nasheed,” he said, referring to the Maldives’ current president. “Why not bring Maumoon to justice? There is proof that he ordered the shooting at Maafushi. But Maumoon is still powerful in the judiciary. I’m hoping that one day, we will have justice.”

Fliers are handed out that portray injuries done to men in prison during Gayoom's presidency

Nazim said that protests will be held every year on September 20. Previous anti-torture protests were suppressed by the police, but “Nasheed gave us the freedom to speak, and today we are here peacefully,” said Nazim.

Over 3,000 messages were sent out and MPs were invited to the event. MP Reeko Moosa, who was claims to be a victim of torture, told the crowd that Gayoom “would not be allowed to hold power again”.

“We are happy now because there is no news that torture is happening under this government,” Moosa claimed, speaking to Minivan News. “But we are still watching things very carefully. Gayoom is trying to take power again, but it will not happen. We are against torture happening in the Maldives ever again.”

Moosa did say that the current administration “could do more.”

“The government needs more investigation, and it needs to bring the torturers to court,” he said.

Other speakers spoke out against Gayoom and his newly-formed Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM). One man said the public should go to Gayoom’s house and “bring him out to face the people’s justice.”

Several torture victims who spoke to Minivan News expressed strong resentment for Gayoom. One Abdulla Naseeru said his “blood is boiling” and he wanted “to reach out and beat Gayoom.”

Naseeru reported being handcuffed and beaten in the same cell as President Nasheed for six months, and said he had spent a total of two years in prison.

“I wrote a letter to Gayoom after about my beatings, and his response was that the army and prison guards cannot be investigated,” he said. Naseeru said he still hears reports of prison beatings, and fears current investigations will be stopped by members of the former administration who still hold office.

Although the rally took place during school hours, a few interested teens joined the crowd. One said he was interested in politics, while his friend said he was curious to see what was happening. Both boys said their peers are aware of the issue.

Among those who attended the rally was a former army private who said he was willing to come out against Gayoom.

Evan’s mother Maryam Naseem was also in attendance. “It is very hard to be here,” she said. But she was pleased that Male was paying attention to the issue.

A government investigation into the events at Maafushi jail was launched by former President Gayoom, but the officers who were convicted were released before fulfilling their jail sentences. In June 2011, the case was re-opened and three former prison guards were sent back to jail.

Then-captain Adam Mohamed, who was allegedly responsible for Maafushi at the time, remains free.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC appeals Civil Court injunction to halt appointment process

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has appealed a Civil Court injunction issued on September 8 to halt the appointment of judges to superior courts pending a ruling on the legitimacy of the process.

A group of lawyers had filed a case contesting the legality of the JSC’s evaluation criteria – contained in a regulation drafted by the commission – on the grounds that it conflicted with both the constitution and the Judges Act. The lawyers requested the Civil Court to abolish the regulations and declare the commission’s shortlist void.

The final interviews of 17 shortlisted candidates were due to place on September 10, two days before the injunction or staying order was delivered.

The lawyers also claimed that two shortlisted candidates had close ties – as a spouse and a business partner – with two members of the commission, suggesting a clear conflict of interest as neither had recused themselves from voting in the JSC panel.

At today’s first hearing of the appeal at the High Court, JSC Lawyer Mohamed Waheed Ibrahim argued that according to article 143(a) of the constitution the Civil Court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the constitutional validity of “any statute or part thereof enacted by the People’s Majlis.”

In addition, Waheed contended the Civil Court order violated articles 144(a) and 145(c) of the constitution as well as articles, 20(a) and (b), 36 and 37 of the Judicature Act.

Waheed further argued that the Supreme Court had set a judicial precedent by transferring a Civil Court case regarding the appointment of five judges to the High Court bench.

In January this year, Criminal Court Judge Abdul Bari Yoosuf at the Civil Court claiming to show procedural and legal issues in the JSC vetting process. Bari’s case was later entered into by Family Court Chief Judge Hassan Saeed as a third party.

On January 20 – three days before the judges were due to be sworn in – the Civil Court issued a temporary staying order halting the appointments pending a final ruling.

The Supreme Court however transferred the case from the lower court a day later and conducted two hearings before dismissing it without issuing a verdict.

Waheed also claimed that the JSC was not offered enough time to prepare a defence as the Civil Court issued its injunction or temporary staying order on the night the case was filed.

The JSC requested the High Court to overrule the Civil Court order and declare that the trial court did not have the jurisdiction to rule on constitutional matters.

In response, Husnu Suood, former Attorney General representing the group of lawyers, contended that the case filed at Civil Court was not exclusively about the constitutional validity of the JSC regulations.

Suood explained that the issue was “problems in ranking certificates” in the JSC evaluation criteria, which the lawyers argued unfairly favoured graduates of the Islamic College of Maldives (Kulliya). The case also alleged conflict of interest on the part of two members, Suood added.

Moreover, Suood continued, a November 2008 Supreme Court ruling established a precedent that it did not have “exclusive jurisdiction on constitutional matters”, referring to a case filed by eight MPs appointed by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom contesting their dismissal by President Mohamed Nasheed.

The Supreme Court had ruled that the case should have been filed at a lower court.

On the issue of the High Court appointments, Suood noted that there was no judicial precedent set as the Supreme Court had not issued a verdict before dismissing the case on a technicality.

Disputing the JSC’s claim that the Civil Court had informed the commission of its hearing after office hours, Suood noted that the JSC had issued press statements between 4:00pm and 8:00pm on September 8.

In addition, the lawyers now claim that based on statements by the JSC at the Civil Court hearing, the regulations were not valid as they were not published in the government gazette.

The High Court panel consisting of three judges adjourned today’s hearing after informing the lawyers that a second hearing would be held if there were further matters to clarify.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Three men accused of Hoarafushi hostage murder face terrorism charges

The Prosecutor General (PG)’s Office today pressed criminal charges against three persons accused of murdering 61 year-old Hussain Mohamed after taking him hostage and robbing him on Hoarafushi in Haa Alifu Atoll.

Hussain, a prominent businessman known as ‘Hussainbe’, was found dead inside an abandoned house in September last year.

The PG’s lawyer told the judge that the three of them stole more than Rf 100,000 and US$1000 in cash but the three denied the charges, according to local media.

Police at the time said they believed that year-old Hussain Mohamed may have been murdered.

An official from the island office had told Minivan News that the body was discovered by the caretaker of the building that night.

“There were no injuries on the outside his body,’’ said the island official. ‘’He is from another island but has lived in Hoarafushi for a long time.’’

Local media reported that Manik’s hands were tied behind his back with rope, and that the body was lying on the ground in a prone position when discovered.

The island official said that it had rained heavily the previous evening, and that “nobody goes out in the rain. The streets would probably have been empty.”

The sale of oil in Hoarafushi in Haa Alifu ceased following the death of the prominent businessman.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Amana Takaful seeking to “kick start” Maldives stock market with landmark IPO

Sharia-compliant insurance company Amana Takaful will issue 800,000 shares in an initial public offering (IPO) on the Maldives Stock Exchange (MSE).

In a first for the country, 20 percent of the shares will be made available to expatriates and 15 percent to overseas applicants. The remaining 65 percent will be offered to Maldivians.

The Sri Lanka-based company hopes to generate Rf16 million (US$1.4 million) in proceeds through the IPO, by selling shares at a low issue price of Rf20 (bundled in packages of 25).

Amana Takaful’s board of directors announced the IPO on Monday afternoon at the Nasandhura Palace Hotel.

CEO of Amana Takaful Maldives, Hareez Sulaiman, said the IPO would “change the way the Maldivian Stock Exchange operates as this will be the first time that Maldivians, expatriates and foreigners will be able to purchase securities in a Maldivian listed company.”

The decision to price the shares low “at a price affordable to any average Maldivian” also promised to “be a kick starter for an active stock market which may benefit the entire economy at large,” the company said in an accompanying statement.

The company expects the Sharia-compliant nature of its business to be a key attraction in the market, it noted in its prospectus, with the “growing religious awareness within the domestic market further reinforcing [Amana Takaful Maldives’] decision to embark on expanding its shareholder base in the Maldives.”

Globally, Director of Amana Takaful Osman Kassim, also chairman of the first licensed Islamic bank in Sri Lanka, Amana Bank, explained that Islamic finance was “a phenomenon worth 1.4 trillion and growing at a rate of 20 percent annually.”

It functioned, he explained, through the prohibition of riba, or interest.

“Taking a return without participating in the risk of the return is not allowed, be it 1 percent or 99 percent. Any additional revenue is riba,” he said. “Even if you give a loan and he gives a gift, and is not in the habit of giving a gift, that is also riba.”

Islamic finance in its current form emerged 40 years ago, Kassim explained, first in Egypt and the Arab Emirates.

“It promises to be a just system. Interest is oppression – the charging of something where nothing is due,” he said, noting that in the wake of the global financial crisis, “All major banks now have Islamic financing products, and the more adventurous have their own Sharia Councils.”

Certain terminology used in Islamic finance was now routinely used in normal banking, he said, also observing a rise in financial offerings that were all but labelled Sharia-compliant.

In its IPO prospectus, the company predicted strong potential growth on the back of a higher disposable income as the rufiya eased against the dollar, brought on by a “significant” decrease in the cost of imports.

The key areas of the Maldivian economy – fishing and tourism – had shown strong growth, the company noted. Tourist arrivals grew 18 percent in 2010, while bed nights grew 13 percent even as capacity grew by almost 3000 beds to roughly 24,000.

Fishing was a key area of interest to the company given the high number of insurables. The industry had registered a slight decline in productivity in recent months, the prospectus noted, but nonetheless annual fish purchases had increased 29 percent and fish exports by volume had risen fourfold. Higher prices had led to 77 percent increase in monthly earnings.

The company has set a target of 30-40 percent growth in the Maldives, identifying a key market as the local, atoll and city councils following the government’s policy of decentralistion.

“Considering the current trends in religious conciousness, it is generally believed that the level of awareness and preference for investing in Sharia- compliant investments would be greater at the grassroots level,” the company noted.

It also indicated its intention to offer a micro-insurance product in the Maldives targeting the expatriate market.

The IPO will open on September 20 and close on October 19. The company has pegged a minimum subscription of Rf 2.4 million (US$156,000) or 15 percent to proceed with the IPO.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Maldivian government endorses Deobandi Islam, the religion of the Taliban

The Religious Unity Regulations have provided the clearest indication yet of the official direction religion in the Maldives is taking: towards Deobandi Islam, the religion of the Taliban.

Among 36 institutions of Islamic learning approved by the regulations is the ultra-orthodox Jamia Darul Uloom in Deoband, India and at least six affiliated madrassas.

Established in 1867 to bring together Muslims who were hostile to British rule, the Deoband madrassa, created the so-called ‘Deobandi Tradition’ committed to a literal and austere interpretation of Islam. For the last 200 years, the Deobandi Tradition has argued that the reason Islamic societies have fallen behind the West on all spheres of endeavour is because they have been seduced by the amoral West, and have deviated from the original teachings of Prophet Mohammed.

It is the fundamentalist Deobad Da-ul-Uloom brand of Islam that inspired the Taliban movement. Many of the Taliban leadership in Afghanistan and in Pakistan are graduates of the Deobandi-influenced seminaries in Pakistan. Mullah Omar, for example, attended the Deobandi Darul Uloom Haqqania madrassa in Peshawar.

The Kabul Centre for Strategic Studies has reported that so many of the Taliban leaders were educated at the school that its head cleric, Maulana Sami ul-Haq is regarded the father of the Taliban. The Deobandi Tradition is highly critical of Islam as practised in modern societies, feeling that the established religious order had made too many compromises with its foreign environment.

The mission of the Deoband is to cleanse Islam of all Western influences, and to propagate their teachings with missionary zeal. Increasingly, the Deobandi movement has been funded by the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia, leading to the former being co-opted by the latter.

Without a clear indication – such as ‘Darul Uloom’ appearing in the name of the institution – it cannot be said with certainty how many of the total of 10 listed Pakistani institutions in the regulations  are categorically Deobandi.

Available facts suggest, however, that more than just the two Darul Ulooms listed in the Regulations are Deobandi. It is the Deobandi that has the largest number of religious seminaries in Pakistan – of 20,000 registered seminaries in Pakistan, 12,000 are run by Deobandi scholars; and 6,000 by the Barlevi, with whom the Deobandi have many disputes.

Among the 10 Pakistani institutions approved by the regulations is also Jamia Salafia, a seminary whose alumni include several leaders in Al-Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba, the organisation behind the Mumbai terror attacks in which a Maldivian is alleged to have participated. It is also the leading supplier of Salafi neo-conservatism in the Maldives.

Even when the approved list of institutions in the regulations’ list goes beyond South Asian borders, it gravitates towards the Deobandi movement. The list includes, for example, the Dhaarul Uloom Zakariya in South Africa. The only institute in Britain the regulations approve of is the Islamic Da’wa Academy, a place which produces the Muslim equivalent of a missionary. Why is there such an acute need to proselytise in a country where the population already believes in Islam except to propagate a particular view?

The Deoband HQ has recently sought to distance itself from violent extremism. For the powers that be in the War on Terror, what matters is the graduation from extremism to violence. But, for societies such as the Maldives, and for the people who have to live under its precincts, what matters more is the oppression that extremism imposes on daily life. This is the reality that a Maldivian people living under the Religious Unity Regulations will have to face.

The application of the Deobandi school of thought on Maldivian women is a frightening prospect that is not too far in the distant future. The Taliban’s stance on women is a clear indication of the scale of the potential problem. An example of the Deobandi’s take on women is the 24 April 2010 Fatwa by the seminary in Deoband that declared it ‘haraam’ and illegal according to Sharia for a family to accept a women’s earnings.

‘It is unlawful for Muslim women to do job in government or private institutions where men and women work together and women have to talk with men frankly and without veil.’

Embarrassed by the angry reaction in the Indian media and among women’s groups, the Deoband madrassa denied it banned women from the work place and only insisted that working women be ‘properly covered’. As analysts have pointed out, however, what the Fatwa suggests is that women can only work in such places where they can fully veil themselves and where they cannot ‘frankly’ talk to men, whatever that means. The Fatwa effectively banned Muslim women from the workplace in India.

The Religious Unity Regulations stipulate that no one should propagate their particular ideology of Islam as the ‘right Islam’. This stipulation looks good in writing, and is perhaps what has allowed the government to spin the document as ‘a crack-down on extremism’.

It is true the regulations prohibit the promotion of a particular ideology of Islam as the ‘true Islam’. But by regulating what truth about Islam would be considered as legitimate in the first place, a pre-selected knowledge of the ‘right Islam’ – what looks like Deobandi Islam – is being imposed on the people that pre-empts the regulations themselves. It is clear from the staggering changes that have occurred in Maldivian faith in the last decade that the Deobandi movement has been a resounding success in the country. Now it has the chance to flourish further, with no conflicting opinions to be allowed in.

Clamping down on other forms of Islam is, in fact, a defining characteristic of the Deobandi Tradition. Although from a global perspective the Deobandis are only one of many religious expressions of Islam, from the Deobandi point of view, theirs is the only true Islam.

The Deobandi regard all other forms of Islam as heretical, leading to continued tension and long-term violence between the Deobandi and other Muslims. In Pakistan, where the Deobandi is known to have played a crucial role in establishing an Islamic state, the Deobandi Taliban have carried out many acts of violence against followers of the Berlevi tradition, which many Pakistan’s Muslims follow.

The Religious Unity Regulations have already created tensions among those who have claimed the mantle of ‘religious scholar’ in the Maldives. The Islamic Foundation of the Maldives is arguing against the Regulations on the basis that the requirement of a first degree as a prerequisite for the Preachers License is unconstitutional. It is also fighting for the religious right to describe Jews as ‘evil people and liars’.

The Adhaalath Party, meanwhile, has objected to the regulations because the President and his advisors apparently watered down the purity of their contributions to the draft Regulations by contaminating it with “provisions from English law…not suited to a 100 percent Muslim country”, echoing the founding principles of the Deobandi Tradition.

‘Compared to the first draft’, President’s advisor on the Regulations, Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail, said, “the regulations do not impinge on freedom of expression”.

What matters is not whether, comparatively speaking, the first draft is a veritable Magna Carta. What matters is the final draft that has been gazetted. And it severely restricts the freedom of the Maldivian people in the name of the ‘right Islam’ – Deobandi Islam. To spin the document as something that “will allow liberal-minded thinkers to convince people of the middle ground” is deliberately misleading if not an outright lie. This document does the exact opposite.

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)

‘Island President’ wins People’s Choice award at Toronto International Film Festival

“The Island President” was awarded the Cadillac People’s Choice Award for Best Documentary at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF), one of the world’s five most prestigious films festivals.

The award was delivered in a uniquely democratic fashion, voted not by critics but by festival audience members who attended the screening. The film was one of 25 submissions in the documentary category.

Director Jon Shenk has previously won awards for his documentary films, notably “Lost Boys of Sudan” and “Smile Pinki”; the latter received an Oscar in 2009.

A government official who met Shenk during his time in the Maldives in 2009 said the government knew he was a successful director, and hoped for a positive response.

The official noted that the Maldives is known internationally for tourism and climate change, but hopes that this award will bring more awareness to areas such as North America.

State Minister for Tourism Mohamed Thoyyib called the documentary a “big achievement for the Maldives”, promoting the destination to audiences in North America who were previously unaware of the country’s “pristine, clear waters, white beaches, and beautiful fish.”

Thoyyib added that in spite of its title the documentary was not about President Mohamed Nasheed but rather about the issues facing the Maldivian people. The film raised awareness of global warming, portrayed and promoted “the unique ” Maldivian culture and language, and illustrated government transparency, said Thoyyib.

“No scene was created or scripted, some reviewers even noted that the film’s most unique aspect was that it shot real events on a level that had never before been achieved in the Maldives, or within other governments,” Thoyyib said.

Thoyyib noted that the Maldivian government had benefited a great deal from the film, but had not spent money on its production.

“There is a lot to be achieved directly and indirectly when something positive happens,” he said, adding that tourism revenue was likely to increase. “But this doesn’t solve the issue. The President will keep on raising his voice on global warming.”

Funding for the documentary was provided by the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, ITVS, Impact Partners, Sundance Documentary Fund, and Atlantic Philanthropies.

Minister of Tourism Dr Mariyam Zulfa said that the President had gained the attention and support of the international community before the film was produced. “The under water cabinet meeting that the President hosted in 2009 generated a lot of interest in the Maldives as an eco-destination,” she said.

Zulfa expects the film to have a positive impact on both tourism and eco-awareness. “Generating interest in the Maldives is always a good thing. We are adopting green standards and reducing waste, and are always open to new ideas from the international community,” she said.

The documentary was also screened at the exclusive Telluride Film Festival in Colorado earlier this month. Hollywood Reporter named “The Island President” one of the festival’s “Top 12 films to know”.

In the coming months, “The Island President” will be soliciting distributors for viewing in cinemas and on public television. The film already has a contract with the US’ Public Broadcasting Service, which had helped fund the project, and will be aired on US television next year.

A screening of the documentary is scheduled for the Maldives later this year.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

New religious unity regulations crack down on extremist preaching in Maldives

New religious unity regulations have been published in the government’s gazette cracking down on extremist and unlicensed preaching of Islam in the Maldives.

The regulations reflect the enforcement of the Religious Unity Act and were originally put forward by the Islamic Ministry, but have undergone numerous drafts and revisions over the past year. The penalty for violating the regulations under the Act is 2-5 years imprisonment, banishment or house arrest.

Under the regulations – the government’s interpretation of the Act – scholars foreign or local must be licensed to preach in the Maldives by the Islamic Ministry, and have received at least a first degree at one of 36 listed universities.

None of these are Maldivian institutions, although the regulations stipulate that new institutions would be evaluated on a case by case basis, and the list reviewed every three months.

The regulations contain general principles for the delivery of religious sermons. These include an emphasis on specifically referencing the Quran when statements are made, and clarifying the authenticity of Hadith.

Preachers are instructed not to express anything “against general agreement” reached among Islamic scholars, or provide any information “ about issues disputed among Islamic scholars that serves to create disunity among the people and result in internal conflicts.”

The regulations also require preachers to refrain “from passing off as Islam one’s personal stand – that may result in obstruction of human progress and development and hinder modern findings and intellectual advancements.”

Controversially, preachers are also asked not to preach in a manner that flaunts human dignity, that may be interpreted as racial and gender discrimination, prevent people from education or health services in the name of Islam, or demeans the character or creates hatred towards people of any other religion.

Foreign scholars preaching in the Maldives “should not talk against Maldives’ social norms, nor should they criticise Maldives’ domestic policies and laws,” the regulations state.

It remains illegal to propagate any other religion other than Islam, and to carry or display in public books on religions other than Islam, “and the translation into Dhivehi language such books and writings on other religions.” Proselytising by foreigners remains punishable by deportation.

Articles involving comparisons between Islam and other religions, “and description of sayings and expressions about Islam by people of other religions, and dissemination of Muslim expressions on other religions”, are exempt, according to the regulations.

Media is banned from producing or publicising programs, talking about or disseminating audio “that humiliates Allah or his prophets or the holy Quran or the Sunnah of the Prophet (Mohamed) or the Islamic faith.”

“This also includes the broadcasting of material (on other religions) produced by others and recording of such programs by the local broadcaster, and broadcasting such material by the unilateral decision of the local broadcaster,” the regulations stipulate.

Reaction

At a press conference today, the Islamic Foundation of Maldives (IFM) contended that the regulations conflicted with both the Maldivian constitution and the Quran.

In February this year, the IFM filed a case at the High Court requesting that outdated provisions in the Protection of Religious Unity Act of 1994 be abolished.

Article 2(b) of the Act states that permission to preach or offer instruction in religious matters must be sought in writing with the President.

Islamic Foundation Lawyer Shaheem Ahmed argued today that the Act conflicted with article 27 of the constitution, which states that, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and the freedom to communicate opinions and expressions in a manner that is not contrary to any tenet of Islam.”

“Sadly however no hearings have been conducted in this case so far. We don’t know why this is so,” he said.

In addition, Shaheem argued, the Ministry of Islamic Affairs did not have the legal authority to enact regulations that restricts or limits fundamental rights and freedoms enumerated in chapter two of the constitution.

Article 16 states that the rights and freedoms contained in the chapter could be restricted “only to such reasonable limits prescribed by a law enacted by the People’s Majlis”.

“After this regulation was approved, from this day onward no one without a degree could teach Islam in any school in the country,” he said, adding that imparting knowledge of Islam by a person without a degree would also be illegal.

As provision 5(l) of the regulations prohibits speech that could “incite hatred among the public, demean or undermine the human dignity of followers of another religion,” Shaheem noted that the Quran described Jews as “evil people and liars” and cautioned against “taking Jews as your friends.”

“Would expressing something like this from the Quran incite hatred or love towards us from Jews?” he asked. “The people who formulated this regulation should consider that the basis of Islam is the Quran.”

Quran 2:120 states that, “Never will the Jews or Christians be pleased with you till you follow their religion” while 5:51 reads, “Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya’ to one another. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliya’, then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers and unjust).”

Sheikh Ibrahim Fareed Ahmed meanwhile called on Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Bari to “repent” for approving a regulation that conflicted with the Quran.

“[The regulations] obstruct the freedom granted by Almighty God to spread Islam. It is therefore completely void,” he claimed.

Fareed called on the government to review the regulations and reconsider enforcing the new rules, urging Islamic Minister Bari to consult religious scholars who were not Adhaalath party members and “not make such decisions on your own.”

“We urge very respectfully and with affection, to reconsider this and change [the regulations] so that it does not conflict with the Quran,” he said. “And don’t try to narrow Islamic matters in the country.”

IFM President Ibrahim Fauzee meanwhile revealed that the foundation was preparing to mount a legal challenge to the regulations at the Supreme Court.

Adhaalath Party condemns regulations

The Adhaalath Party, which controls the Islamic Ministry, issued a press statement today criticising the removal of “very important principles” from the original draft, and distanced the party’s religious scholars from the regulations.

The statement notes that the regulations were drafted by a legal team from police and 11 prominent religious scholars and approved by three Attorney Generals.

“We would like to inform the beloved Maldivian people that the party condemns [the changes] in the harshest terms and the party’s religious scholars and members renounces the gazetted regulations,” it reads.

“We note that provisions from English law have been added that were not in the regulations before and are not suited to a 100 percent Islamic community. We also note that other dangerous changes have been made to the regulations,” reads the statement signed by Sheikh Ilyas Hussein, vice-president of Adhaalath party’s council of religious scholars.

“While the Minister of Islamic Affairs [Dr Bari, president of the religious scholars council] was requested to not agree to publishing the regulations in the gazette without consultation with the party’s
scholars, we want to reveal that the regulations were brought out in the form it is in the gazette without any discussion at all with Adhaalath party’s council of religious scholars.”

Among the clauses that were removed were provisions outlining criteria for issuing preaching licenses, and prohibitions on broadcasting “un-Islamic” material.

These included provisions that preachers must be Sunni, and according to the Adhaalath Party, a provision requiring that religious fatwas (edicts or rulings) must be issued in accordance with the Sunni sect
was also removed, and so-called ‘blasphemy’ laws appeared to be toned down.

Laws forbidding independent prayer congregations were also scrapped.

The amendment regulations published in the government gazette yesterday was made up of 12 provisions, whereas previous drafts contained 40 provisions and a number of sub-clauses.

A more ‘academic’ approach

Former member of the Special Majlis and the new Constitution’s drafting committee, Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail, who was involved in redrafting the regulations, told Minivan News that they set out a more “academic” approach to preaching Islam in the Maldives, and were targeted at curbing the spread of extremism.

“[The regulations] do not impinge on freedom of expression, compared to the first draft, and I believe we have taken out those elements,” Ibra said.

“We have observed in this country and elsewhere that there are people who misquote the Quran and twist it around to propagate their agenda. These provisions curb that,” he explained.

“What in effect we are ensuring is that preachers should not say whatever comes to their mind. We say that if those preaching religion must refer to sources – the Quran and the Prophet’s sayings – so someone can independently verify if they wish.

“Where scholars deliver sources on areas and issues that are in dispute, these regulations require that they should state that,” he said.

“We put in a provision that prohibits hate speech, such as no one should propagate xenophobia or negative sentiments towards other religious.”

The criminalisation of those who violated the Act was not stipulated by the regulations, but in law, he explained.

“Currently the parliament is reviewing the relevant legislation (the Religous Unity Act), what we are doing is simply setting out how this can be enforced,” Ibra said, confirming that 2-5 years sentences was “more or less” what was in the Act.

Enforcement would ultimately be a court decision, he explained, with the Islamic Ministry only having the right to temporarily suspend preaching license pending the outcome of the court decision.

Ibra suggested that religious groups active in the Maldives – such as the Islamic Foundation of the Maldives and Jamiyyath-al-Salaf – should welcome the regulations, “as until now there has been a move by some people to silence them. These regulations do not silence them, but ask them to engage and follow procedures in their work. There are no ramifications for any particular group – again this different to what was originally proposed.”

He disputed that outlawing extremist preaching would drive the practice underground, and lead to a repeat of the 2007 Himandhoo incident, in which islanders donned red motorcycle helmets and armed themselves with batons and knives to defend the Dhar al Khuir mosque from a police crackdown.

In the ensuing skirmish, a policeman was taken captive and another’s hand was severed. Shortly afterwards a video discovered on an Al Qaeda forum was found to contain footage taken inside the Dhar-al-khuir mosque moments before it was raided by police.

“Himandhoo  was not based on religion – those where highly politicised times,” Ibra said. “What I believe is that this will allow liberal-minded thinkers to convince people of the middle ground. Initially there may be some reactions, but I’m optimistic.”

Download an unofficial translation of the new regulations (English)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Concerned citizens seek court order against committee allowance

A group of concerned citizens protesting a controversial Rf20,000-a-month (US$1,290) committee allowance, approved by MPs for themselves in December 2010, have filed a case at Civil Court seeking a court order to stop the Finance Ministry from releasing the funds to parliament.

A loose association of concerned citizens and members of civil society organisations launched a campaign last month after parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) decided to issue a lump sum of Rf140,000 (US$9,000) as committee allowance back pay for January through July this year.

Speaking to press outside the court building, lawyer Mohamed Shafaz explained that the grounds for the claim were constitutional provisions on non-discrimination (article 17) and equal protection and benefit of the law (article 20).

“For example, the reduced amount from civil servant’s salaries was in the 2010 budget [to be paid back] and in the 2011 budget as well if you look at it properly,” he said, arguing that Finance Ministry could not release funds for MPs’ committee allowance, which was approved in December 2010, without paying back civil servants.

“The money is coming from the same place,” Shafaz continued. “If something the civil servants have not received is going to be given to others, which was approved much later, the chance of civil servants receiving the reduced amount will be very slim.”

A court order was sought to halt the release of the funds until a court of law delivers a ruling on the issue, Shafaz said.

Shafaz also referred to article 43 of the constitution, which states that “Everyone has the right to administrative action that is lawful, procedurally fair, and expeditious.”

Austerity or bust

In October 2009 – almost a year into the new administration – unpopular pay cuts of up to 15 percent for civil servants were enforced as part of austerity measures to alleviate the country’s ballooning budget deficit – among the highest in the world at 26 percent of GDP in 2009 (the International Monetary Fund had refused financing to Sri Lanka because the country’s fiscal deficit reached 10.5 percent).

However the austerity measures were met with a severe political backlash. In December 2009, the opposition-controlled parliament added Rf800 million (US$62 million) to the 2010 state budget, including the restoration of civil servant salaries to previous levels and subsidies for sectors ranging from fishing and agriculture to private media.

“One of the primary drivers of the large fiscal deficit has been government spending on public wages, which has more than doubled between 2007 and 2009, and is now one of the highest in the world relative to the size of the economy,” Rodrigo Cubero, IMF mission chief for the Maldives, said in January 2010.

“Measures that would substantially raise the budget deficit, such as a reversal of previously announced wage adjustments, would also put the [IMF-backed structural adjustment] programme off track, jeopardising prospects for multilateral and bilateral international financing,” Cubero warned at the time.

After weeks of legal wrangling over restoring civil servants salaries, the Ministry of Finance accused the Civil Service Commission (CSC) of hiding “a political agenda”, and in February 2010 filed a case with the police asking them to investigate it on suspicion of trying to topple the government “and plunge the Maldives into chaos.”

At the height of the dispute in early 2010, permanent secretaries were ordered to submit different wage sheets by both the Finance Ministry and the CSC.

In April 2010, the Civil Court ruled that Finance Ministry did not have the legal authority to overrule the CSC. Although the government contested the ruling and refused to restore salaries to previous levels, the High Court upheld the lower court ruling in May this year.

Consequently in November 2010, the IMF delayed its third disbursement under the US$92.5 million programme, citing “fiscal slippages” caused by insufficient progress towards reducing the wage bill and passing tax legislation.

In March this year, Cubero told Minivan News that the IMF saw “bringing the fiscal deficit down as the key macroeconomic priority for the Maldives.”

“A large fiscal deficit pushes up interest rates, thereby undermining private investment and growth, and also drives up imports, putting pressure on the exchange rate and inflation, all of which hurts the Maldivian people, particularly the poor,” he said.

“With the government borrowing at the rate it has [to plug the deficit], it reduces the amount of credit available to the private sector, and that constrains the ability of the private sector to provide jobs and employment,” Cubero explained. “That then constrains economic growth. Furthermore, by spending more than it earns, the government is putting pressure on imports and the exchange rate.”

An internal report by the World Bank obtained by Minivan News observed that the Maldives was “facing the most challenging macroeconomic situation of any democratic transitions that has occurred since 1956.”

Civic action

Volunteers for the civic campaign meanwhile distributed information leaflets at bus stops in Male’ yesterday.

“Two of our group went on the bus and talked to passengers,” said Badr Naseer, a senior activist in the effort. “Ninety-nine percent of people support [the cause].”

Badr said he had personally filed a complaint at the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) requesting an inquiry into claims by some MPs that they functioned as “welfare officers” for their constituents.

Earlier this month, Transparency Maldives (TM) condemned remarks by MPs justifying the inflated allowance, noting that “such actions fall under article 3 of of the anti-corruption law and article 13 of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act regarding bribery.”

Badr revealed that the group had met MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, parliamentary group leader of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and MP Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, leader of the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) as part of diplomatic efforts alongside the street activism.

He added that the citizens group also hoped to meet former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – who is in the process of forming a new party with a number of MPs previously in the DRP – to discuss the committee allowance issue.

The awareness raising campaign is set to continue from 4:30pm to 6:00pm today at bus stops and ferry terminals in Male’.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)