The Adhaalath Party (AP) led by Sheikh Hussein Rasheed has called on the country’s Home Minister to immediately withdraw the alleged suspension of Police Deputy Commissioner Mohamed Rishwan after media reports yesterday claimed that he had been punished for not following orders to take control of the Thulusdhoo Atoll Council’s office.
Both Police and Home Minister Hassan Afeef have yet to officially confirm whether reports of the suspension are true, yet politicians have now moved to criticize the alleged decision to reprimand Rishwan.
”We call on Hassan Afeef to leave the military dictatorship characteristics and to follow the feelings of the citizens,” said the Adhaalath Party in statement on their official website.
The reports relate to ongoing disputes between the government and some local councils over the legality of decisions to relocate their offices.
Beyond criticism of Home Minister Afeef, the party also praised Deputy Commissioner Rishwan for having shown “a great example.”
”The courage you [Rishwan] has shown for the sake of the citizens and to uphold the law is something that we will never forget,” said the Adhaalath Party in the statement.
”We call on the police not to let anything happen against the laws.”
Among changes occurring to the country, the Adhaalath Party said the most important of these was the decentralised administration ushered in by last month’s local council elections.
”As a matter of fact, it is a great change, however, the image we saw in some areas were totally different,” said the party. ”Home Minister Afeef has been trying to get police illegally involved in these issues occurring in some areas.”
The party accused the current government of manipulating the police for their own ends and violating human rights and laws.
However, Afeef yesterday told Minivan News that the position of Deputy Commissioner “is not given by me and [the matter] is not related to me.”
Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam said he could not comment on the issue or confirm whether the reports appearing in local media were true.
(0)Dislikes
(0)Related Posts
Supreme Court suspends prominent lawyer pending investigation for contempt 
Police Deputy Commissioner announces resignation
Police refuse to comment on reports of deputy commissioner’s suspension
Young man dies in attempt to flee from police
Police officer in charge of Dhoonidhoo put detainees to work
Police conduct random checks on flights bound to Turkey
for minivan news, does a news becomes fit to print if it is related to Adhaalath party only? So far, your Articles are like "Adhaalath party says this about this issue..." "Adhaalath party thinks like that about that issue", "Adhaalath party does that about the other issue.." why so much emphasis on one specific party? Are you some kind of Adhaalath party monitors? what about the rest of the 10 or 11 other political parties? dont they have anything to say about any thing?
what i think is, your one sided articles (which paramounts to propaganda) is just to attract comments from the anti-religious people, who will keep on commenting about Adhaalath party and not about the actual issue on the hand.
for example, in this article the real story is the suspension of police deputy commissioner. lets just see how many people comment on that and how many people comment just to bash Adhaalth party, islam, etc...
Well, Adhaalath has scored this time. Deputy Commissioner Mohamed Rishwan would be obliged to Adhaalath and may return this favour in future.
to Zeenath
even though the news is not covered by minivan news, DRP, the countries largest opposition, has also called on Home Minister to reinstate Police Deputy Commissioner. They went a bit further than Adhaalath, calling that they wont give their confidence vote to Minister Hassan Afeef and will obstruct the annual state address of president on parliament.
so your assumption of Deputy commissioner owing a favor to Adhaalath is groundless, and if he does owe a favor it should be to DRP.
minivan news is obsessed with adhaalath party...
@ yaamyn
"minivan news is obsessed with adhaalath party…"
You for got to add "and Islam".
C'mon guys, you know Adhaalaath is more entertaining than everyone else although they hate the idea of entertainment.
@ ahmed
typical mindset of a secularist
adhaalaath rules, maybe it was during the stone age.
If Adhaalath rules I wonder what they will tell the police to do? They will take away our freedom like Mulla Umar did in Afghanistan. Now when they don't have power they will find a way to stand on our head.
adhaalath hates the idea of entertainment but the irony is adhaalath is the most entertaining party. the stupid yet funny comments they make in national matters and the big beard clowns appearing on tv. ppl laugh even by seeing a glimpse of those big beard funny hair style guys on tv. the huge beard funny hair style and funny dress - the whole package - its hilarious for maldivians. i love these guys. im not trying to offend anyone im just telling you the facts as it is. sorry if anyone got offended.
if true secularism rules i wonder what they will tell the police to do? They will take away our freedom, they will ban the construction of minarets and mosques as in Switzerland. They will ban hijab as in France and those wearing it will be denied any government service or education like in Turkey.
It's a political tug of war between the mullahs and the secularists.
Where the secular public have broken free from the political clergy and church, there has been stupendous cultural, social and political growth. Norway, Sweden and Western Europe being good cases in point.
Countries like India have survived as single nations for this reason too - the secular nationalism that overcomes the even entrenched linguistic and religious divides.
On the other hand, wherever politicians feel that their religion is the best reason why they should be in office, the people suffer. Afghanistan. Iran. Egypt. Libya, Bangladesh, Pakistan. Saudi Arabia.
There is perfect statistical correlation between the power of the mullah and the level of backwardness experienced in these countries.
The Adhaalath is desperately trying to exert its 'influence', having for the first time won anything in an election during last council elections.
This is a party that has no reason to exist, except for the single strategy they employ of using their beards to demand obedience i.e., prostituting religion for mere power.
Zoon,
At least they won't be constitutionally denied the simple right to exist.
I do not know of any Muslim who prays inside a minaret, nor do I know of any religious requirement in Islam to have that structure outside a prayer room.
When I read about it, it turned out that the original idea for minarets came from churches (in Morocco? I forget)
Both France and Switzerland, being secular countries, allow all Muslims the full freedom of religion - to preach, profess and worship.
The simple idea behind secularism is just that the state does not interfere in your basic Human Right, defined so clearly in Article 18 of the UNDHR.
The reason why religious fanatics and mullah politicians cannot accept the idea is because it, by definition, reduces their chances at power.
Unlike France and Switzerland, the Maldives, which is not a secular country, does not grant its own citizens (not even Muslims) this right.
In our country, we have one political party today that DECIDES what all citizens SHOULD "believe".
I'm amused at the thought that if someone else were to emerge, then we'll might all very well have to abandon our faiths every 5 years corresponding to every regime change.
A political party that decides if you go to heaven. What a joke.
Adhaalath will prosper, no matter how much the cursed secularist wishes otherwise.
"The simple idea behind secularism is just that the state does not interfere in your basic Human Right, defined so clearly in Article 18 of the UNDHR"
so, how much of the "basic human right" is protected by imposing restrictions on building place of worship for muslims. Anyone can build any structure, there are casinos built in these countries structurally similar to mosques. but if it is an actual mosque for muslim prayer then it is a big no from the secular authorities. Even if they do permit it, it will be always accompany an anti-campaign against mosques and muslims in general.
How much of the basic freedom is protected in these secular countries when state impose restriction on peoples clothes? wearing a headscarf, or a veil is grounds for hefty fines, or arrest by law in some of these great secular countries. and it is even okey for the people from public to heress veiled women. A small example, is the case where a muslim women who got stabbed to death inside a german court, while police stood watching and then shot her husband. This incident received no attention from the german government authorities or from the German media, and the killer walk free and is even protected by the state. Well, this is one of many examples of how perfect the secular system is.
Then there is the case of turkey, which is strictly secular, where the army cracks down on faithful everyday and even prevented the party which people elected from running the country in 1990s (just to protect the great secularism) the current government which has the backing of people is hindered and even coups attempted aginst it just to protect secularism.
so with these things we can just assume that if true secularism comes to rule in maldives, which has large practicing muslim populace, we will face darker days than the Portuguese.
Yaamyn,
"In our country, we have one political party today that DECIDES what all citizens SHOULD believe.
I’m amused at the thought that if someone else were to emerge, then we might have to abandon our faiths every 5 years corresponding to every regime change."
Get your head examined, Yaamin.
A single political party doesnt decide your faith.
The religion of the state is written in the constitution of maldives. And this constitution was passed anonymously by the peoples representatives at maldives parliament.
Are these secularists nuts now opposing democracy and the will of the people?
And maldives is not the only country that has rules like this. there is a small country (yes it is a country with a separate government, military, police, etc..) in the midst of Europe named Vatican which limits the practice of other faiths in their territory.
And, lastly your comment about one party deciding who goes to heaven, is just too stupid to reply.
@ i love adhaalath on Wed, 2nd Mar 2011 1:11 PM
Secularists are the most funny people i know of. its funny that most of these ppl cant grow a beard or a lousy moustach for that matter cox of lack of testosterone and other hormones. ppl laugh when they see these no-beardy, feminine, disease riddled, with funny hair style and funny dress – the whole package – its hilarious for maldivians. and their comments are not worth a rats a$$. i love these guys. im not trying to offend anyone im just telling you the facts as it is. sorry if anyone got offended.
Egypt, Libya, Bangladesh are not religious countries. In each of these countries religious parties are banned and their members are jailed. There is no application of shariya. The courts run based on English common law and other colonial era laws with some bits and pieces from religious laws. secular dictators are in power in all of these places. There is perfect statistical correlation between this and the level of backwardness experienced in these countries.
I have commented on the beginning of this page on Tue, 1st Mar 2011 5:42 PM.
See, my point is valid.
No one commented on the suspension (pending sacking) of the Police Deputy Commissioner. the secularists were head over heels bashing Adhaalath, islam, muslims, etc.. and a few people restored to defending islam, Adhaalath from their attacks.
I should say the strategy of those running this website is being achieved, by their one-sided coverage of things and involving Adhaalath and religion in every issue. The actual news story is lost in the fighting between the two groups. I say, since this website is seen as government leaning, when an anti-government story breaks, simply involve religion in the heading and in the news, so that no one will talk about that particular anti-govt issue and everyone will battle secular vs islam.
A foreigner who visit this website may even get the impression that there is a civil war between the faithful and the un-faithful, because of the hateful and loathing comments by secularists and like minded people. While the reality on the ground is totally different in Maldives. Plenty of maldivians goes with their life peacefully practicing their faith and those that dont practice their faith go on with their life as well ( be it drugs, alcohol, or whatever, or nothing of this mentioned..)
i wonder why do the beards wear funny dresses. yeah they wear dresses. not shirts. wonder why cant they wear a decent pair of jeans and a shirt.
is it that they r still living in the stone age as cavemen or is it required by a particular sect of the religion which we dont know of.
purpose of this question is highly intelectual, nothing personal. i jst need to know. and btw im not a secularist. im a muslim who goes to mosque every friday... yes the maldivian type...
on my way back to male' from trivendrum, on the flight a fully coverd black hijab woman was seated rows back my seat. she was fully coverd cant see even her eyes. from departure to arrival to male international airport, all those time i was on the edge of the seat praying god for nothing to happen to the flight like a bomb blast in mid flight. i guess everybody was so scared like me. we have to find a solution to this psycho-social terrorism.
Zoon,
"but if it is an actual mosque for muslim prayer then it is a big no from the secular authorities."
Not true.
The authorities (i.e., the government) in Switzerland was actually campaigning FOR the minarets to be allowed, if you care to remember.
But the Swiss system of direct democracy means that right wing opponents of (what they consider) Islamic cultural invasion
were free to campaign to get their mission accomplished through a referendum.
The reasons WHY they chose to oppose symbols of "Islam" rather than say, Buddhism or Hinduism or any other religion, is something I do not expect you to analyze honestly, and so we come to your next statement -
"Even if they do permit it, it will be always accompany an anti-campaign against mosques and muslims in general."
Once again. The question here is WHY Muslims. Why not Hindus, or Jains or Jews or Buddhists?
The Mullah will try to convince you that this is because of some kind of CIA Jewspiracy to demonize Islam.
But the truth is simply that people have come to fear Islam, and not in a good way. They have come to associate it with backwardness, cruelty, and butchery and violence and oppression of women.
I know it is unfair to a majority of the billion and half Muslims in the world, but it is not the average white person's fault either.
All of the above characteristics of butchery, intolerance and oppression are perfectly valid descriptions of wahhabi Mullahs and their intolerant, supremacist ideology.
The modern liberal Western society are proud of their values of freedom, and they are reacting to Islamism today the same way they reacted to Nazism - by considering it a threat to the society, and the values they cherish.
And I can't say they're completely wrong. The answer lies in Pakistan, or the Maldives.
Pakistan was born with a secular founder - but today, yet another senior public figure was murdered by fanatics because he dared ask for minority rights.
The Maldives has become spiritually and morally bankrupt, and our youth are going and murdering people in our neighboring countries ever since wahhabism reached our shores.
The West has a right to defend its society against such violence - and they're doing it.
Average Muslims are suffering not because of a proactive Western mission against "Islam" - but reactive western society horrified by what they have seen and heard about Islam by the Mullahs, in Pak, Afghanistan, etc.
Think,
Bangladesh became an actual secular country only recently. After decades of religious fanaticism fueled violence and bloody murder campaigns.
Egypt is the home to Al-Azhar. Nasser might have been a secular Arab nationalist But that was half a century ago.
People like Mubarak depended on the allegiance of Sheikh Tantawi and other Azhar clerics to maintain their grip over the population. Not exactly a secular way.
Libya. Have you listened to Gaddafi speak just yesterday? About "them"
being infidels, and his "Green Book" is chock full of Islam and "socialism" - and that is apparently what his 42 year old reign has been based on.
Hence. Not secular. I also mentioned Pakistan which is clearly burning in the flames of fanaticism today. Why did you ignore that?
The problem with people like zoon is that, there's very little introspection involved.
I cannot, as a Maldivian who denies even the right to exist to Dhivehi minorities, nor extend basic human rights to foreigners, complain about secular countries in the West who treat Muslims with a lot more dignity, and give them full freedom to migrate, have citizenship, study in their schools, provide for their health and build their mosques, etc.
You can do very little about Switzerland banning minarets. But you CAN start working towards treating your own fellow Dhivehi minorities better. You CAN start treating foreigners in this country better.
But you'll do neither. You'll continue to insist that "they" (Dhivehin born and brought up in Dhivehi Raajje) do not deserve any rights, but that the 300 or so - out of 3 million Muslim women, according to statistics - who cannot wear hijabs in public offices are 'oppressed'.
You think a constitution passed by a few lawmakers in the Maldives that threatens to strip dhivehin of their citizenship (without even consulting them) is just fine, but a minaret ban implemented through direct democracy in one of the very few countries in the world has such a system is 'oppressive'.
Why don't you look at yourself first, and complain about your own deeds before criticizing countries that treat even their immigrant Muslims orders of magnitudes better than you treat your own people?
Yaamyn, y dnt u go to Vatican and tell pope about the oppression of non-christians in that country. NO NO NO dont tell yaamy that. If it happens in Europe there is nothing wrong, Europeans are perfect!
molest,
Whose point are you arguing? Vatican City is not a secular, liberal democracy.
It is a clergy town run by clerics and led by a Pope who rules for life, which is the opposite of secularism and modern democracy.
On the other hand, the Vatican city is barely a large campus populated entirely by bishops and cardinals. Out of the entire Western world, you had to choose a town with less people in it than the island of Hulhumale in it as an 'example' of "oppression".
How pathetic is that?
I'd like to add that Vatican City maybe a theocracy, but at least it is some degrees more enlightened than some others I can name.
They don't whip women in public, nor have 'beard inspections', or enforce God's discipline by murdering people who disagree with them, and hanging their bodies from poles like the Taliban did.
A more enlightened theocracy, you could say - despite all the stuff with Child molestation, which I guess comes with part of being a religious cleric.
@molest on Wed, 2nd Mar 2011 11:37 PM
'Yaamyn, y dnt u go to Vatican and tell pope about the oppression of non-christians in that country. NO NO NO dont tell yaamy that. If it happens in Europe there is nothing wrong, Europeans are perfect!'
That's what you have to say to Yaamyn's reasoned and considered argument?
Why do you even pretend that you know what he is talking about? Why do you bother?
It's time to grow up as a nation, and realise that there are other ways of having an argument than to "dhaiy dholhi dhashah aiy koppaalaafa" curse people and insult their mother or their person at the top of our voices.
Yaamyn: well said!
I just don't get why mullahs have to dictate how/what the rest of the nation should behave/believe.