Day: November 19, 2011

Supreme Court rules Kaashidhoo MP cannot attend parliament sittings

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that Independent MP Ismail Abdul Hameed could not attend parliament sittings as long as his conviction by the Criminal Court on corruption charges is not overturned.

The full bench of the apex court however ruled that the Kaashidhoo seat could not be declared vacant until Hameed exhausted the appeal process.

After the High Court upheld the Criminal Court verdict earlier this month, the convicted MP has filed an appeal at the Supreme Court, which has yet to decide whether to hear the case.

At Thursday’s hearing, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz noted that under section 55 of the parliamentary rules of procedure, an MP convicted of a criminal offence could no longer attend sittings and participate in votes, adding that this was the norm in free and democratic societies.

The Chief Justice however stressed that Hameed had the right to appeal his conviction, with the possibility that it could be overturned.

Parliament sittings have meanwhile been disrupted and cancelled since October 24 due to a dispute between opposition and ruling party MPs over Hameed’s right to attend sittings.

The resulting deadlock has seen sittings cancelled for three consecutive weeks, excepting the week-long holiday preceding the SAARC summit on November 10 to 11.

Addressing objections of opposition MPs who insisted sittings could not go ahead with Hameed in attendance, Speaker Abdulla Shahid had said that in cases of dispute parliament did not have the legal authority to determine if an MP was stripped of his or her seat.

Shahid noted that according to article 74 of the constitution, “Any question concerning the qualification or removal, or vacating of seats, of a member of the People’s Majlis shall be determined by the Supreme Court.”

Opposition MPs however contended that there was no room for dispute as an MP with a sentence to serve could not attend parliament.

Following the second week of forced cancellations, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Ahmed Nihan told Minivan News that opposition MPs did not wish to disrupt proceedings but were objecting because article 73(c)(3) of the constitution clearly stated that MPs found guilty of a criminal offence “and sentenced to a term of more than twelve months” would be stripped of their seat.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Addu City Council to purchase Dhiraagu shares

Addu City Council will buy Rf 400,000 (US$26,000) worth of shares in telecoms provider Dhiraagu, reports Haveeru, following the company’s initial public offering last month.

Dhiraagu had earlier announced its intention to sell 11.4 million shares at Rf 80 (US$5.1).

“We’re completing the process of purchasing the stocks in order to gather funds for our activities. By the grace of God, it’ll be a successful investment,” Addu Mayor Abdulla ‘Soabe’ Sodiq was reported as saying in Haveeru.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police refute media reports of “petrol bomb” set off under Education Minister’s car

Police have refuted media reports of a “petrol bomb” set off under Education Minister Shifa Mohamed’s car last Thursday while she was in Jamaluddin School.

A press statement issued today explained that police received reports of a blast from a bottle exploding inside the school compound at 8:00am on Thursday.

A second bottle blew up 20 minutes later while officers were at the scene.

“The investigation so far has revealed that what exploded was a ‘PET’ bottle, there was no trace of petrol in the bottle and it was not made with any kind of explosive substance,” reads the police statement.

It added that media reports of a “petrol bomb” detonating under Education Minister Shifa’s car outside Jamaluddin School “contained false information.”

Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam told Minivan News that the substances inside the bottle produced a gas which caused the plastic bottle to burst with a bang.

“It’s the sort of thing kids do for fun,” he said. “But after the reports that it was petrol bomb we had a lot of people calling us very concerned.”

Police had no information to suggest that Shifa’s car had been deliberately targeted, Shiyam said.

Police appealed to media outlets to cover such incidents “more responsibly” to avoid unduly alarming the public and parents of school children.

The Education Minister was not responding to calls at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

SAARC Summit reveals Indian interest in Gan: Daily Star

Addu in the south of Maldives suddenly became vibrant as all the eight heads of states and governments arrived for the Saarc Summit held on November 10 and 11, writes former Bangladeshi High Commissioner to the Maldives, Selina Mohsin, for Bangladesh’s Daily Star newspaper.

On July 28, 2011, the government of India provided a grant of US$5 million to Maldives for the Saarc Summit in Addu. In return, the government of Maldives officially handed over a plot of land in the capital for the Indian Mission. Simultaneously, agreements for the construction of a multi-disciplinary university and health centres and upgrading of an existing hospital in Laamu Gan in Addu Atoll were finalised with an Indian company.

Two earlier Saarc Summits were successfully hosted by Maldives in the capital Male. The necessary buildings and infrastructure were present in the capital so why was this summit held in Addu at such a great cost? Two reasons can be cited. The first was concern that opposition parties might create a disturbance during the Summit and the other was a preference by India in collaboration with Maldives to develop Addu Atoll. India has a particular interest in Gan island in Addu.

Gan’s strategic location in the Indian Ocean was identified by the British, who first established a base there during the 2nd World War as part of the Indian Ocean defenses. In 1956, the British took over Gan and developed a Royal Air Force base with a large runaway, jetties and a series of causeways connecting several islands in the Atoll, which served as a Cold War outpost. In 1976, the British pulled out. India had recently shown keen interest in Gan as a strategic location, but an attempt to establish a base there was revealed in the Indian media and halted after an outcry from the People’s Majlis of Maldives on issues of sovereignty.

After the Mumbai bombing, India began a project to network all the 7,500 km of its coastline with radar. India probably intends to include Maldives in its security grid to have a permanent presence in Gan for its surveillance aircraft and ships. Secondly, India would like a secure foothold in the Indian Ocean where the power of China is increasing. Beijing has pockets of influence around India with the Chinese built ports of Gwador in Pakistan and Hambatota in the southern coast of Sri Lanka. As 60 percent of Chinese oil imports come from Africa, China has to maintain its ability to protect its interests on this ocean route.

It is felt that India, by providing a grant for the Saarc Summit and by building facilities in Addu Atoll, will surely gain a strong presence in Gan.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Making sense of the rejection of the Other

The resurgence of religious politics is a global phenomenon.

From Khomeini’s theocracy in Iran to the rise of Islamic movements in Egypt, Tunisia, Nigeria, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Malaysia, Islamist politics has continued to be a salient feature of the Muslim world.

Religious politics, however, is not limited to the Muslim world.

Hindu nationalism in India, ultra-orthodox politics in Israel, Protestant fundamentalism in the US, religious politics in Australia, Catholic ultra-conservative politics elsewhere, and the crises of secularism in several Western European countries, mean religion is a global political topic.

The first thing that we should keep in mind therefore is that religion is not an issue unique to the Maldives.

This is important in order to avoid the false sense of an outside ‘Civilised World’ in possession of all good values. The truth is reasonable accommodation has become a profound issue in several of the so-called liberal democracies.

The second point is we need to avoid the mistake of blaming solely Islamism in our failure of reasonable accommodation. Islamism in the Maldives is a recent phenomenon, largely coinciding with democratisation since 2004.

Our shrill polemics could hardly clarify the main underlying issues around religion in the Maldives. I believe the issues around religion run deeper than recent Islamism. Let’s, for instance, take the recent cases of SAARC banners and monuments.

There have been broadly three main groups of positions on the issue: a) those who reject the monuments and the banners largely because they supposedly show imageries of other religions; b) those who accept the imagery saying they are not really supposed to be religious imageries or idols as such; and, c) those who decry Maldivian ‘intolerance’, ‘ignorance’, or ‘fanaticism’.

a) What is largely true for the first group is that their publicly cited main excuse for rejecting the monuments and banners is not particularly or only Islam. For it would be extremely hard to justify destruction of imagery and idols of other religions purely based on Islam. It would be impossible to cite a purely religious rationale to reject freedom of religion.

b) What is true for the second group is their assumption that if the imageries were really supposed to be religious imageries or idols in the public sphere, it might be OK to reject them.

c) What is largely true for the third group is there is a collective, generalised image of the Maldivians: thus, we hear remarks such as ‘Maldivian intolerance’, ‘undeserving people’, ‘fanatically intolerant state’, and so on.

If so, I think there is something common to the reaction of all three groups. The underlying issue is not Islam as such. ‘Intolerance’ as such does not explain it either.

Based on these three sorts of reaction, I submit there is something about the Maldives as a nation that does not allow reasonable accommodation. Indeed, the dominant Maldivian national identity is uniquely exclusionist. It automatically excludes the possibility of any reasonable accommodation.

Therefore, much like the Muslim veil is seen as an affront to the secular character of France, any non-Muslim religious symbol or imagery in the public sphere is an affront to the Maldivian national self-understanding.

This national self-understanding has now become our background national self-understanding. That is, we are not necessarily even aware that we act under its hegemonic influence. It is our taken for granted identity.

Fortunately or unfortunately, national identity is not given or primordial.

Identity is a construction of discourses, symbols, and myths. Political and other leaders could be effective agents of construction of identity. For this to happen, modern developments such as newspapers or other communication media are necessary.

It is no trivial matter that a chapter in President Gayoom’s biography, A Man for All Islands, is entitled ‘A Sense of Identity’. When Gayoom came to power in 1978, the Maldives hardly had any sense of collective identity.

Maldivians, of course, were Dhivehin. However, despite President Amin’s initial efforts since late 1940s, Maldivians had not imagined themselves as a nation.

It came down to Gayoom, with the widespread availability of means of communication, to construct such an identity.

Today this national identity is coming under immense strain.

With the pluralisation and fragmentation of religious discourses, with the increasing number of migrants of other faiths, and the Maldives becoming part of the globalised world, life would not be either easy or just with an out-dated national self-understanding.

It’s time for us as a nation to consider seriously Islam’s universal values of equality and love.

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)