Tag: islam

Adhaalath party welcomes Shaheem’s resignation action

The Adhaalath Party, led by Sheikh Hussein Rasheed, has welcomed the decision of former State Islamic Minister, Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed to resign from his position.

Sheikh Shaheem resigned from his position last Thursday after reportedly accusing the government of being “irresponsible” in trying uphold the religion of Islam and even attempting to erase the religion from the country, according to Miadhu.

”Sheikh Shaheem fulfilled his responsibility with integrity,” a statement issued by Adhaalath Party said. ”He put forth the interest of the nation and religion more than his self-interest in fulfilling the national duty.”

The Adhaalath party stated that ”by divine will, it is sure that although Sheikh Shaheem was not in a senior position of the government, his contribution to the party and the people will be still ongoing.

The party said it was very fond of Sheikh Shaheem and hoped that his work will be written in history.

”All the council members and party members will be with Sheikh Shaheem in whatever danger he would have to face with.”

Minivan News was unable to get any official word from Sheikh Shaheem.

President Mohamed Nasheed has appointed the Adhaalath party’s own president and former State Home Minister, Sheikh Hussein Rasheed in the vacant State Islamic Minister’s role.

Minister of Islamic Affairs, Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari is also a member of Adhaalath Party.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: The extremities of democracy

The biggest threat to Maldivian democracy, it is increasingly said, is ‘extremism’.

Yes, there is an existential threat to Maldivian identity and its traditional belief system from specific sects and ideological movements claiming a monopoly on Islam.

But, how effective a counter strategy is it to pin the broad label of ‘extremists’ on them, describe them as a threat to our democracy, and place them outside of rational engagement? Is it not a contradiction in terms to describe as a threat to our democracy what are in fact the strongest, loudest and most influential voices within it?

Ignoring the role that democracy has played in their success reduces the chances of mounting a credible challenge. Consider how they came to be such change-makers in the first place.

The campaign for the ‘hearts and minds’ of the Maldivian people, which the Wahabbis or Salafis (and/or other groups yet to be officially documented) have run for the last decade is as thoroughly modern a campaign as any in the world’s most established democracies.

It was launched at the grassroots level and taken to the very top, sustained throughout by clever use of modern media. Their message is simple and powerful as most media-savvy messages are: “We come with The Right Islam. Reform, or forever be damned”.

From every available media platform – traditional and new, mainstream and niche – they have, for the last ten years, repeated the same message: “Our Islam is The Right Islam. Embrace it, or go to hell.”

These movements, just like any other successful democratic campaign, did not merely saturate the media with their message, but made their presence felt deep within the community. They pounded the pavements to talk the talk, made door-to-door calls, opened corner shops, performed acts of charity and carved out for themselves important roles within the community.

Their representatives are in Parliament, lobbying hard to push through changes that would make the law of their choice the dominant (or only) law in the country. With the same goal in mind, they impede the progress of any legislation they deem incompatible with their own ideologies, dismissing them as ‘un-Islamic’.

In doing so, they reiterate the same message at the top as they do at the bottom: “We have brought with us The Right Islam, the only Islam. Reform, or be forever damned.”

Their presence is similarly strong in the administration itself, with their representatives holding office at all levels from the ministerial cabinet to the filing cabinet. They have forged strategic political alliances that allow them leverage in key policy decisions they deem are in conflict with their ideologies. They have eager activists ready to take to the streets to protest against policy decisions they are unhappy with. Their presence is prominent in the judiciary to an even greater extent than it is in the other two branches of power.

From educational qualifications to dress code and type of punishment meted out – it is their beliefs that are being pushed as the judicial norm.

Bolstered by their unprecedented success on the domestic front, they have tried to stretch their reach to foreign policy and beyond, offering ‘extremist rehabilitation expertise’ to the wider world. Throughout all this, their campaign remains on message: “We have brought you The Right Islam. Reform, or be forever damned.”

The successes of their campaign to establish themselves as the official form of Islamic belief in the Maldives cannot be denied: it is most startlingly visible in our appearance – from the way we dress and how we comport ourselves to our demeanour.

Beyond the visible, these movements are rapidly changing the very fabric of Maldivian society. They have: (re)introduced draconian practises long since abandoned such as marriage of under-age girls, sex slavery and genital mutilation; legitimised domestic violence by providing instructions on a ‘right way’ and a ‘wrong way’ to hit a woman; sanctioned marital rape as an inviolable right of every husband to demand sex from his wife(s); reduced the female gender to no more than objects of sex, servitude and reproduction; and sexualised girls, some times as young as four or five, by making them wear the veil. This is a practise that, in effect, condones paedophilia with its underlying assumption that it is natural or normal – not aberrant or abnormal – for adult males to be sexually aroused by prepubescent children.

These movements, along with others, are fundamentally changing what it means to be Maldivian, what it means to be Muslim in the Maldives, and what Islam means to Maldivians.

But, whatever we may think of these movements – enlightened, misguided or crazy – it would be unwise to place them outside of our democracy. Such a claim is based on the assumption that democracy is an antidote to extreme thoughts, beliefs and any resultant violence.

To the contrary, research has shown that democracy – precisely because of its inherent freedoms – offers a more conducive an environment to the expression of extreme views, thoughts, and violence, than other forms of government. If we are to adequately deal with these movements, we need to do it within, and with, democracy.

We must first recognise the movements for what they are: political actors engaged in a democratic battle for power. They are running on the platform of religion, heaven is their campaign promise, and they have taken Islam hostage as their running mate.

Instead of labelling them ‘extremists’ – synonymous now with ‘crazies’ – they need to be confronted as rational actors with a specific political agenda. Without that recognition, it is not possible to adequately challenge their bid to establish a religious hegemony in the Maldives.

Seeing them as political contenders rather than a purely religious presence also creates the opportunity to loosen their stranglehold on Islam. Their success in convincing Maldivians that they have brought us ‘The Right Islam’ is most evident in how any criticism of their practices, rituals and beliefs has come to be immediately and unequivocally equated with criticism of Islam itself.

The myth that Islam is not just monotheistic but also monolithic has been propagated so successfully by the campaign machines of these pseudo-religious ideologues that it has come to be accepted as the ‘truth’, a given that is rarely if ever questioned.

It is this deafening silence of the opposition and their inability to perceive of, and engage with, these movements as legitimate forces within our democracy that pose the biggest challenge to its existence. None of the organs of democracy – of the state or within civil society – have so far challenged their campaigns and their Messiah-like claims of having brought The Right Islam to ignorant Maldives living in Jaahiliyaa.

The Maldivian Constitution ties its people unequivocally to Islam, but it does not demand that citizens follow a particular sect or ideology within the religion.

These ideologues – as part of our democracy – have every right to their beliefs, but they do not have the right to coerce or force all other Maldivians to follow them in their chosen path. It is the democratic right of every Maldivian to refuse to listen to their messages, to freely discuss, and observe, other ways of practising Islam and to deny them a monopoly on God.

Neglecting to do so is not just self-censorship but a betrayal of the democratic ideals that the Maldives and a majority of its people have embraced.

These religious sects have gained such influence within the Maldivian society not only because of the strengths of their campaign but equally because of the weaknesses of the opposition.

As a democracy, the government cannot be in the business of regulating people’s beliefs; it is up to the people to stand up for themselves and refuse to become subservient to another. If those who disagree remain silent – either as hostages to the dogma that to oppose these politico-religious movements is to oppose Islam; or because they are branded ‘extremists’ and denied rationality – their success is assured.

If that is not the direction in which we wish to take the Maldives, we need to find out who these people are, what they believe in and what they really want. We need to create a public sphere in which we can openly challenge these beliefs and goals. The biggest threat to our democracy is our failure to use our democratic right to disagree. It is in this silence that the frighteningly real prospect of a democratically-elected theocracy is growing stronger every day.

Munirah Moosa is a journalism and international relations graduate. She is currently engaged in research into the radicalisation of Muslim communities and its impact on international security.

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)

Israeli eye surgeons visiting Maldives to “illegally harvest organs”, claims Islamic Foundation

The Islamic Foundation of the Maldives has reiterated calls to the Maldives government to “shun all medical aid from the Zionist regime” with a team of seven Israeli eye surgeons due to arrive in the country next month, claiming that Isreali doctors and surgeons “have become notorious for illegally harvesting organs from non-Jews around the world.”

An article on the Foundation’s website titled “Beware of Israeli eye surgeons” claims Israeli medical teams have harvested organs from dead Haitians after the devastating earthquake that struck country as well as from Palestinians killed in fighting in the longstanding Arab-Isreali conflict.

“The health authorities in Maldives have to take utmost caution in allowing Israeli medical surgeons into this country and Maldivians who apply for treatment from these doctors have to take precautionary measures to avoid any foul play,” it reads.

A day after the government-run Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) announced the imminent arrival of the Israeli doctors, the Islamic Foundation called on the government not to normalise relations with the Jewish state or “accept any sort of assistance from Israel as long as they are in the lands of Palestine.”

President of Islamic Foundation Ibrahim Fauzy told Minivan News last week that the Foundation does not recognise Israel as a state, asserting that “it is also against our religion to have relationships with Jews.”

IGMH has meanwhile invited interested patients to register before December 2 for a screening process before treatment.

In November last year, Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed narrowly survived a vote of no-confidence forwarded by the opposition for his role in the government’s plans to normalise relations with Israel.

Dr Shaheed has stressed that the government has not signed an agreement to establish diplomatic ties between the two countries.

Humanitarian mission

Speaking to Minivan News today, Political Counsellor at the Israeli Embassy in New Delhi, Itay Tagner, stressed that the delegation was coming to the Maldives “on a purely humanitarian mission”.

“Top eye doctors from Israel are coming voluntarily with the full cooperation of the government, the Health Ministry and the Disaster Management Centre,” he said, adding that the delegation will operate “under guidance of the relevant authorities.”

The team of surgeons will conduct eye camps in Male’, Gaaf Dhaal Thinadhoo and Addu Atoll Gan “for free, for no cost”, Tagner explained, and will bring surgical equipment, including a mobile surgery unit.

He dismissed the claims by the Islamic Foundation as “ridiculous and outrageous” with “not one gram of truth to it”.

“They are just trying to spread hatred,” he said. “This is a beautiful partnership between two peoples. It is nothing political. It’s just doctors from one country coming to another to build bridges between people.”

Tagner argued that Isreal “has no problem with Islam”, pointing out that 20 percent of its population were Muslims “who enjoy full rights as citizens”.

Asked if the Embassy was concerned about opposition from some segments of society, Tagner said that “the camps will be taking place with the full cooperation, assistance and sponsorship of the Maldivian government,” he said.

“It has been coordinated for a long time. I have been to the Maldives recently and I saw nothing but preparations. Everybody was very excited.”

He added that a 10 to 15 minute procedure performed by the eye surgeon could restore eyesight to the blind: “Once you see a person come out after 15 minutes and his whole life has changed, that picture is worth more than ten thousand words.”

“A doorway for Jews”

Addressing supporters at a rally Thursday night, opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Afrashim Ali claimed that Israelis and other foreign elements that “should not be allowed to enter a 100 percent Muslim country” will gain a foothold in the Maldives as a result of handing over management of the Male’ International Airport to Indian infrastructure giant GMR.

“[The airport deal with GMR] will open a big doorway for the people of Israel, who are brutalising Palestinians without any justification, to come to the Maldives and take over,” he said.

The leader of DRP’s religious wing asserted that it is “expressly forbidden” to give any assistance to Israel as “they forced Palestinians out of their homes and brutalised them only because they say ‘We are Muslims’.”

He added that “the loss of this airport from Muslim hands” would open “a huge door to help those who deliberately, antagonistically torture Muslims.”

Warning of the consequence of foreigners exerting influence on domestic affairs, Dr Afrashim said that “when foreign kings and businessmen and company heads get a foothold in a small country like the Maldives, the result will be that they will never leave.”

He added that the second step of the foreign invasion would be to “sow discord” and ferment chaos “to destroy the country”.

To back his assertion, Afrashim quoted from the Quran 27:34: “She said: ‘Verily! Kings, when they enter a town (country), they despoil it, and make the most honourable amongst its people low. And thus they do.’”

“They will destroy Islam in the Maldives,” he warned.

Meanwhile, speaking at a press conference today, Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed said that the Maldivian government and people wished to declare its “support and cooperation” to the Palestinian people on the occasion of the International Day of Solidarity with Palestinians.

“The Maldives is a country that has always been with the Palestinian people,” he said. “We have always called for the freedom of the Palestinian people and advocated for their rights.”

Moreover, the government was trying to establish stronger ties with Palestine, said Shaheed, noting that President Mohamed Nasheed has had phone conversations with Palestinian leaders and had appointed an ambassador to Palestine.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Communication among Muslims a key challenge: Farah Pandith

Extremism is the ‘front and centre’ of concerns shared by Muslims all over the world, at least according to Farah Pandith, the US State Department’s Special Representative to Muslim Communities, who is paying a four day visit to the Maldives.

Pandith, who reports directly to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is using the visit to meet with government and political figures, as well as NGOs and local people, to look at the possible social challenges facing the Maldives as an emerging Islamic democracy, as well as how best to respond to such difficulties.

Speaking on Sunday at the American Centre in the National Library in Male’ to an audience of local people and foreigners from across the private and public sector, Pandith said that even in the current Facebook age, communication among Muslims was seen as a major challenge facing Islamic communities.

According to Pandith, a large proportion of the world’s Muslims are believed to be under 30 years of age, yet the US Representative claimed that amidst a divide between followers of the faith and non-Islamic people, many young Muslims were not part of the “conversation” relating to differing faiths and viewpoints.

The representative said that this lack of communication about Islam in some cultures has further added to a global culture of ‘us and them’ between Muslims and other faith and belief groups.

In such a climate, the US State Department claims to now be looking to work with NGOs and local enterprise to better directly address discontent in Islamic societies all over the world.

In considering this more hands on approach by the US government, Pandith acknowledged that some US foreign policy during the last deacde, particularly in the Arab world, had been “unpopular” – not just amongst Muslims but large swathes of the world’s population. However, she claimed the country was moving beyond a so-called “freedom agenda” of pushing democracy, by trying instead to promote initiatives and activities designed to directly address prominent social concerns.

In addressing local audience members at the talk, Pandith asked the 20 or so people in attendance what it meant to them to be Maldivian and Islamic.

The response, according to some in the audience, was confusion and possible consideration of leaving the country amidst concerns over what they perceive as issues of free speech in relation to the role of faith.

Having met Pandith during her visit, State Minister for Islamic Affairs Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, told Minivan News that principles such as free speech and human rights were an important part of the Maldives constitution and the influence of Islam in the country.

“The Maldives is very unique as we are both 100 percent Muslim and democratic,” he said.

Pointing specifically to Article 27 of the constitution, Shaheem stressed that there was freedom of speech within the Maldives, though this right to speak was bound by the principles of the Islamic faith.

Ultimately, the State Minister for Islamic Affairs claimed that Islam has formed the backbone of Maldives society for hundreds of years and was central to national ideas of human rights and free speech.

“In war for example, Islam forbids the killing of woman and children,” said Shaheem as an example of the religion’s impact on the notion of human rights.

In relation to the potential challenges of establishing more debate over Islam in the country, Shaheem said he believed the major concerns the ministry faced in the country were more related to drugs and the emergence of extremist ideas, both religious and non-religious in nature.

Although stressing his belief that the country has no Al Qaeda-style organisations, the State Minister said it was important to counter and not give any opportunity for more radical, extreme forms of Islam to take root in the country.

To try and meet this aim, Shaheem claimed that education and academic pursuits formed a major part of efforts to retain the country’s status as a moderate nation.

The Islamic Ministry says that greater links it has with many western nations like the UK reflects a more collaborative relationship with Muslim communities across the world.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: How does Islamic Sharia go against human rights?

On the November 6, 2010, Minivan News published in its Comments and Opinion column an article titled “HRCM and Islamic Sharia,” written by supposedly feminist local writer, Aishath Aniya.

The article is mainly about Aniya’s objection to a suggestion by the HRCM President who said: “Human rights protection can be successfully achieved adhering to the principles of Islam.”

As such, Aniya has made two daring statements.

In the fourth paragraph, she writes: “For a moment, I could not understand what she [HRCM President] was trying to say. Her words suggested that HRCM – the highest authority to safeguard human rights in the country has joined the religious narrative that poses a clear threat to human rights, social justice and economic sustainability of the country.

And, in the fifth paragraph, she continues: “I am quite assured that if HRCM engages within the confines of Islamic Sharia, as it is understood now, we could be a long way from protecting and sustaining human rights in the Maldives.”

I read the article repeatedly. And what I noticed was that other than making a bold— and perhaps, emotional—statement, Aniya could not prove her point.

I also noticed that Aniya may have not done sufficient research. Because when I read the last sentence of the 14th paragraph, I was convinced that she apparently does not know the difference between Sunnah (saying and living habits of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and Ijthihad (the process of making a legal decision by independent interpretation of the legal sources, the Quran and the Sunnah).

I understand Aniya’s objection to the adherence of Islamic Shariah. But she has failed to explicitly say where and how Islamic Sharia actually goes against human rights, social justice and the economic sustainability of a modern society.

Aniya has extensively quoted Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im, Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law. But it was mainly about the origin of Islamic Sharia, its sources and the developments during the early days.

She has not discussed which Acts of Islamic Sharia are inconsistent with the norm of a modern society, and how.

The two primary sources of Islamic Sharia are the Quran and Sunnah, something Aniya also has acknowledged by quoting An-Na’im. Does she hold a view that the Quran and Prophet’s teaching goes against humanity?

If the objection is to the “traditional interpretation” of Quran and Sunnah— thereby calling for modern interpretation, then who is more appropriate for the task. Should we rely on the view of a single scholar or should we respect the consent of the majority of the scholars?

Aniya is certainly impressed with An-Na‘im work. John L. Esposito, Professor of Religion and International Affairs at Georgetown University has the following interesting comment on An-Na’im’s book, Islam and Secular State: “Although An-Na‘im wishes to present his views from within the Islamic tradition, he also states early on that his arguments are not exegetical in nature and therefore do not aim to interpret traditional Islamic sources such as Qur’an, hadith, tafsir, or legal theory (usul al-fiqh).”

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)

No clash within Adhaalath Party over statement criticising ‘fake wedding’ regulations, says Shaheem

State Minister for Islamic Affairs and Adhaalath Party member Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed has refuted reports in local media yesterday of a “clash” within the party, following a press statement it released on November 11.

In the statement, the party expressed concern about the government’s new regulations governing ‘symbolic’ wedding ceremonies, drawn up in the wake of the humiliation of a Swiss couple in Dhivehi by staff at Vilu Reef Resort and Spa.

Resorts deemed to break the aggressive new regulations can now be fined up to Rf one million (US$78,000), or even have their license to operate suspended under the Tourism Act.

Non-Muslims are unable to get married in the 100 percent Islamic Maldives, but many tourists pay for elaborate ‘renewal of vows’ ceremonies, often requesting a ‘Maldivian flavour’ to the proceedings. The infamous Vilu Reef ceremony reportedly cost US$1300, with an optional US$440 photograph service made available.

In its statement, the Adhaalath Party condemned the government for failing to consult with religious scholars before publishing the new regulations.

“Marriages are not performed in the Maldives as a cultural ceremony. Maldivians marry according to the rules and regulations of Shariah,” the statement said.

“This makes it impossible to see how a Maldivian wedding can be regarded as a cultural act. It is an important religious rite. It is the view of the Adhaalath party that the performance of symbolic traditional Maldivian wedding ceremonies, or the performance of a symbolic Muslim wedding ceremony between two non-Muslims, are both acts that belittle the sacred beliefs of Islam.”

The statement raised several specific concerns with the regulations: most significantly that under Article 10(b) of the Constitution, “no law can be made in the country that is in conflict with the tenets of Islam. No Maldivian citizen is under any obligation to recognise as legitimate any laws that do not follow those Constitutional stipulations.”

The regulations were, the Adhaalath Party claimed, “therefore void.”

Furthermore, in allowing foreigners to choose the language of the ceremony, the regulations “leave the door open for foreigners to travel to the Maldives and verbally abuse Maldivians in a foreign tongue that Maldivians do not understand.

“It should be noted that these regulations do not make it an offence for tourists to denigrate Maldivians and use filthy language against them,” the statement added.

Adhaalath also expressed concern that the regulations did not stipulate according to which religion the symbolic ceremony should be practiced, and that such regulations theoretically allowed such symbolic weddings to be performed between same sex couples, “a practice that has become common in the West.”

“Introducing regulations such as these that allow practices of other cultures and religions to occur in the Maldives, and to use legitimate legal mechanisms of the country to do so, is a way of legitimising such practices,” the Party’s statement read.

“It is a way of legalising un-Islamic activities to occur in the Maldives. Such acts, even if symbolic in nature, are unconstitutional. Because of the various such problems with this law, and because of the doors that they open, we wish to draw the attention of our beloved citizens to these regulations.”

The party also accused the government of failing to implement the recommendations of scholars in matters such as the attempted introduction of the sale of alcohol to foreigners on ‘inhabited’ islands, “trivialising” the subjects of Islam and Dhivehi by suggesting they be made optional at A-level,and victimising the Arab-Islamic system of education at Arabiyya school.”

Senior members of the government were, the party alleged, disregarding “and [treating] as of no value the advice and counsel of the [Islamic] Ministry on such issues.”

If the government continued on its current path, the party warned, “Adhaalath will have to reassess its alliance with MDP, the ruling party.”

No clash

Local newspaper Haveeru reported yesterday of a “clash” among the Adhaalath Party’s senior leadership over the statement, claiming that the party’s President Sheikh Hussein Rasheed Ahmed – also the State Minister of Home Affairs – had sought to distance himself from the statement.

Haveeru reported Scholars Council member Mohamed Didi, also one of the party’s founders, as saying that Sheikh Rasheed “could not dodge the statement on any grounds as he chaired the council meeting.”

“Sheikh Rasheed was chairing the meeting when members of the committee, which drafted the statement, were selected. The statement was made in reference to the issues noted at the meeting,” Didi reportedly told Haveeru.

Speaking to Minivan News yesterday, Sheikh Shaheem said that while he did not wish to comment on the statement itself, reports of “a clash” within the party over the matter were erroneous.

“There is no clash within the party – there is strong unity within the party. Just because there is a different opinion doesn’t mean there is fighting,” he said.

The Adhaalath Party was not taking any action against the government, he said, and had decided to request a meeting with President Mohamed Nasheed after the holidays to resolve the issues through discussion.

“Adhaalath was just giving a reminder to the government that things are going the wrong way. If the government resolves the problems then there’s no issue,” he said.

The concern was rather the government’s failure to discuss the new regulations with scholars, he explained.

“Islam is an important part of this country and you cannot boycott scholars,” he said. “There will be big challenges if [the government] boycotts the opinions of scholars.”

The Islamic Ministry was part of the government and had a role to provide advice and discuss such matters, Shaheem explained.

“The Maldives has been a Muslim country for 900 years, but this doesn’t mean we’re against other religions. We have [foreign] doctors, nurses, teachers – these people live with us here and enjoy our life[style]. But the Maldivian people want to keep their culture and respect for their religion. If the regulations are not in opposition against Islamic principles, we are not against them.”

Islam did not recognise civil marriages, Shaheem said: “We don’t do fake weddings, we do serious marriage.”

“If we want to [provide ceremonies] for guests the regulations must be good – [for instance] there are strong laws for alcohol, so only foreigners can buy it.”

He highlighted some specific concerns with the new regulations, which are technically now in effect after being published in the government’s gazette.

“If the ceremony is conducted in a language we don’t know, there is a possibility people will come and do what the [Vilu Reef staff] did, if it’s in a language we don’t have. The regulations should specify what languages should be used,” Shaheem suggested, adding that he was also concerned about the regulations theoretically allowing ceremonies to be performed between same-sex couples.

The Islamic Ministry, was, he said, part of the government and aimed to promote moderate Islam by preaching respect for other cultures and peoples in Friday sermons, and providing the government with suggestions on matters such as how the subject of Islam should be taught in schools.

“I recently spoke to some children in grade 11-12, and they had some very extreme ideas,” he said. “It is important to teach Islam properly, by teaching about terrorism and what [concepts] such as jihad really mean, and that innocents should not be killed. An understanding of extremism and human rights – these are things that can be taught in Islam. But when Islam is not taught or is made optional, [students] will go to other places, such as [extremist] websites.”

Problems with the regulations could be resolved through discussion, Shaheem said. “There are some legal and religious concerns among some scholars, but we are not against guests coming to our country.”

Translation of the Adhaalath Party’s statement. Original available on the party’s website (Dhivehi).

11 November 2010

“Tourism is the backbone of our economy, it is very important that we develop our tourism industry.

But, tourism should be developed in ways that are compatible with Islam. As a 100 percent exemplary Muslim state for the last nine hundred years, it is within Islamic thinking that Maldivian culture and traditions have been formed. This is made clear in the Constitution.

In the same manner matrimony in the country has too evolved within the principles of Islam. Marriages are not performed in the Maldives as a cultural ceremony. Maldivians marry according to the rules and regulations of Shariah. This makes it impossible to see how a Maldivian wedding can be regarded as a cultural act. It is an important religious rite.

It is the view of the Adhaalath party that the performance of symbolic traditional Maldivian wedding ceremonies, or the performance of a symbolic Muslim wedding ceremony between two non-Muslims, are both acts that belittle the sacred beliefs of Islam.

This is the case whether the service is provided as a means of appeasing tourists, or to financially exploit them.

Islam does not allow anyone to benefit from the improper exploitation of non-Muslims. The alternative is to allow foreigners to renew their marriage vows in the Maldives according to their own traditions and wants. Neither the Maldivian Constitution nor its culture permits the display of any other religion in the Maldives.

It has been decided by the Maldivian Fiqh Academy that the display of any other religion on Maldivian soil is unacceptable both in terms of law and in terms of spirit. We condemn the government for delaying the implementation of this edict by the Fiqh Academy and express concern that the government has failed to accept the ‘formal recommendations’ made by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs towards the government’s efforts to draft new regulations on symbolic wedding ceremonies in the Maldives.

The Adhaalath Party fully supports the recommendations by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and their rationale. On behalf of all members of the Party and on behalf of its Advisory Committee, we would like to thank the Ministry for its limitless work in this regard.

The government has kicked the knowledge of scholars in the face, and failed to implement their recommendations. We call upon the government to immediately cease these activities that goad the beautiful culture of Islam and attempt to break the spirit of Islam.

Revealed below are the points of legal importance:

Article 271 of the Constitution states that any regulations that Maldivians need recognise as applying to them are regulations arising from a law approved by the Majlis. The regulations on symbolic wedding ceremonies refers to the Maldivian Tourism Act as its source and, having been published in the Government Gazette, are now legally binding.

Article 10(a) of the Maldivian Constitution states that Islam is the religion of the Maldivian state, and the source of its laws. Article 10(b) states that no law can be made in the country that is in conflict with the tenets of Islam. No Maldivian citizen is under any obligation to recognise as legitimate any laws that do not follow those Constitutional stipulations. The regulations are, therefore, void.

Law, as it is defined in Article 274 of the Constitution should be interpreted as: ‘Laws that have been passed by the Majlis and ratified by the President and regulations arising from such laws’.

Even though Article 43(a) of the Constitution does allow anybody resident in the Maldives to get married in the Maldives, Article 16(a) states that the right is dependent upon being compatible with the tenets of Islam. The regulations on symbolic wedding ceremonies is one that is aimed not at Maldivian but tourists. Even though the regulations stipulate that it is symbolic, the following issues can be noted when we contemplate the regulations from the perspective of law as well as that of the concept of marriage itself.

a) What a symbolic marriage ceremony is, and the degree of its legitimacy,

b) The regulations do not stipulate according to which religion the symbolic ceremony should take place.

Under the circumstances where there is no requirement that all tourists to the Maldives be Muslim, it is possible that some of these symbolic ceremonies could be conducted according to rituals of other religions. It also means that these regulations will allow such symbolic “wedding” ceremonies to be performed between same sex couples, a practice that has become common in the West.

c) Introducing regulations such as these that allow practices of other cultures and religions to occur in the Maldives, and to use legitimate legal mechanisms of the country to do so, is a way of legitmising such practices. It is a way of legalising un-Islamic activities to occur in the Maldives. Such acts, even if symbolic in nature, are unconstitutional.

d) The legitimacy of the person officiating at the ceremony is dubious. Right now, these ceremonies are conducted by Maldivian staff members at resorts. What are the legal or religious powers, it can be asked, of the registrar who performs these marriages, symbolic marriages or renewal of vows for non-Muslims. The question also arises of under what policy the management of a resort would certify the validity of the wedding vows that were so renewed or a wedding so conducted.

e) Article 5 (a) of the regulation says that the ceremony should be conducted in the language requested by the couple wishing to have the ceremony in the Maldives. This opens the door for ceremonies such as this to be conducted in a language other than Dhivehi, and for representatives of other religions such as priests to travel to the Maldives to conduct such ceremonies. Furthermore, it leaves the door open for foreigners to travel to the Maldives and verbally abuse Maldivians in a foreign tongue that Maldivians do not understand. That is, in fact, some have suggested, the reason why such a regulations was needed. It should be noted that these regulations do not make it an offence for tourists to denigrate Maldivians and use filthy language against them.

f) Article 7(a) of the regulations, which says that the ceremony can be conducted by someone other than a Maldivian, means there is a chance a priest may travel [to the Maldives]. As mentioned before, the representation of any other religion in the Maldives is a crime.

Because of the various such problems with this law, and because of the doors that they open, we wish to draw the attention of our beloved citizens to these regulations.

The Adhaalath Party is extremely concerned about the regular and continuous manner in which the Islamic personality of the Maldives is being confronted. The attempt to sell alcohol on inhabited island by using similar regulations, attempts to trivialise the subjects of Islam and Dhivehi in the school curriculum by trying to make them optional modules and victimising the Arab-Islamic system of education at Arabiyyaa are among such activities that can be noted here.

Adhaalath participated in the spirit of ‘the Maldives that the nation wants’ and decided to be a part of the government on the guarantee that religious affairs of the country will be conducted according to the advice of religious experts. However, it is with deep concern that we state today, the government has failed to seek the advice of the religious affairs ministry in various major issues regarding Islam.

We wish to note, also, that it is a matter of great concern and seriousness for Adhaalath that some members of the current government have chosen to disregard and treat as of no value the advice and counsel of the Ministry in such issues.

It is very clear what happened on the issue of the regulations governing religious unity. If these matters continue without change, Adhaalath will have to reassess is alliance with MDP, the ruling party.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Miss France pageant a Maldivian tolerance test for tourism, says MATI chief

While perhaps cliché to suggest that visually-immaculate beauty pageant participants can help change the world, Secretary General of the Maldives Association of Tourism Industry (MATI) ‘Sim’ Mohamed Ibrahim believes hosting the Miss France 2011 competition is at the very least a positive development for travel in the country.

Speaking to Minivan News, Sim said that beyond providing a touch of glamour to the Maldives, hosting such a high-profile international event highlights the wider aim of expanding the country’s appeal to guests of varying religions, politics and attractiveness.

Part of this year’s Miss France event, thought to be one of the European nation’s biggest annual televised spectacles, will be held at the Coco Palm Bodu Hithi resort in the North Malé Atoll before moving on to Caen, Normandy for a crowning ceremony to be held on December 4.

Having originally started back in the 1920s, this year’s contest sees 33 participants from across France staying at the resort between November 11 to 18 to partake in a number of photogenic activities such as water sports, Maldivian cooking, exploring local natural curiosities and even filming a music video.

Although the concept of women parading around in haute couture and swim wear is seemingly at odds with the more conservative day-to-day values expected of women living in the Maldives, concerns over cultural sensitivity appear to be missing the point for the industry. Sim says he hopes Miss France 2011 will be the the first of many events that will reshape perceptions of tourism in the Maldives by encouraging greater acceptance of the industry among local people.

Sim claimed that amidst concerns over growing religious fanaticism in the maldives, displaying greater tolerance towards a large number of events and guests welcomed to the country was vital to the overall survival of the country’s lucrative holiday business.

Unless a sufficient replacement source of income can be located, Sim said, the country is likely to continue looking to similar high profile events to boost its image as a secluded desert island escape for global travellers.

“It [Miss France] has found its way to the Maldives, there are likely to be many more [high profile] events to come,” he said.

Although still a moderate Islamic nation, beyond the potential credence of hosting a bevy of French beauties at one of the country’s resorts, Sim suggests that trying overcome the intolerance creeping into some sections of Maldivian society remains a key aim for both the travel industry and government.

Having been a Muslim nation for hundreds of years, fears of growing extremism in the Maldives are, according to Sim, a more recent development for a nation that has generally tried to peacefully coexist with neighbours and foreigners.

Whether to the benefit or detriment of the Maldives, Sim says that the Miss France event also highlights the need to diversify the country’s appeal beyond hotel stays to meetings, incentives, conferencing and exhibitions – collectively termed ‘MICE’.

As a striking counterpoint to the country’s hosting of Miss France 2011, the Maldives garnered a different sort of global attention earlier this year after holding peace talks between members of Afghanistan’s parliament and various other political and armed groups linked to the nation’s ongoing insurgency.

President’s Office Press Secretary, Mohamed Zuhair, confirmed back in May that that all in involved the peace talks had valid passports and visas. The talks, which did not directly involve the Maldivian government, were reported to have taken place at the country’s Paradise Island Resort.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Extremism threatens our economy

We’ve heard in recent news government officials referring to rising fear of Islamic extremism in the Maldives.

We’ve heard about children not being vaccinated or not being sent to school in the name of religion; women being provided with a single bucket of water for the day, again in the respect of religious norms; children being restricted from music and other types of art; male children being forced to wear trousers shin high; schools threatened for asking male children to shave their beards; the classifying of many immaterial matters outright haraam such as smoking, watching movies or cartoons (Tom & Jerry, Mickey Mouse), singing, playing or listening to music, women travelling of women without a husband or family member, the showing of hair or wearing of perfume by women; or news and blogs promoting genital mutilation of females.

Another serious threat is the increased preaching of hatred against the west. The west (the majority of whom are understood to be Christians or Jews) is portrayed as the singular prime threat to the religious stability of the country.

This is a paramount danger to our economy given our dependence on foreign money. We should keep in mind that an act such as the one that happened at Sultans Park a few years ago could cripple our economy, slashing our foreign income.

Currently, the government is committing the Maldives to large contracts with foreign nations, with majority populations of Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and others. The Maldives is not self-sufficient and therefore we are at the mercy of other nations who are willing to ally with us and help us bear fruit. We cannot afford to live on the annual ration of a few tonnes of Saudi dates.

During recent years, many industries and public services are being capitalised on foreign investments. At such a time, how can we even allow the thought to draw a religious boundary around ourselves? We have been selling liquor and allowing illicit sex on all our resorts for almost 40 years because we cannot let religious boundaries starve us to death.

Our main politico-religious party is Adaalath Party, who also has its presence in the government sphere, ruling the Ministry of Islamic Affairs. They are assigned the responsibility of upholding the religion of the country – Islam – with a reported US$16 million budget.

Adaalath recently held one of their statutory meetings at a prominent public space (Alimas Stage). The whole meeting was aired live on Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation’s TV channel, MNBC one. The station is well known for its pro-government programming.

I was watching intently one of the speeches of this meeting. I found it really distasteful and offensive, to hear one of the famous preachers in the country, Sheikh Ilyas, known for being arrogant and blunt about religious statements.

He was saying that Muslims should not trust Christians or Jews in any way for they are not reliable on their word. He went on to say that any agreement made by them would never be kept. He mocked human rights and women’s rights as tools used to evade Islamic prudence. Every now and then he raised a copy of Quran above his head and said that he was presenting the word of God.

It is hard to imagine why the government, on one hand, is acknowledging the spreading extremism in the country, while at the same time is assigning public funds for the spreading of such extreme and radical ideologies.

The reason is that it is constitutional for the government to uphold and strengthen Islam as the religion of the country. And the government fulfils this part very smoothly: sets up a specific Ministry (the first religious ministry of the country), puts the leading religious political group in charge, and assigns a significant chunk of budget for their purpose.

Here is something the Ministry of Islamic Affairs published on their website (in local language), followed by a translation (by a blogger) during the Haiti disaster:

“Are there any Muslims in Haiti? Do we have to gain wisdom from this [disaster]? Haiti is a caribbean island nation, located not far from America. A certain number of Muslims live there. It is reported that they are not good people. There is no doubt about this; such earth quakes are moral lessons for everyone. Such [disasters] are caused by God because of the actions of mankind.”

Now, the public is at a loss for words. Those who are assigned the responsibility of upholding and strengthening Islam in the country, are advocating against the government’s policies and also promoting extremism. They are outright in saying that no deals should be made with infidels (such as Christians or Jews, who are not trustworthy as per God). They mock human rights and women’s rights in public.

It doesn’t take one to wonder, why this could happen? Why is the government apologetic about growing extremism but still allowing such things to preached in the public? Is our government crippled from doing anything about this?

Firstly, the Islamic Ministry was a promise the ruling party made during the elections. Protecting Islam was one of the major five promises of the ‘Other Maldives’ campaign. Since Adaalath sided with the MDP during the coalition to overthrow Gayoom’s dictatorship, MDP duly handed the reigns of the ministry to Adaalath. On top of this, our constitution demands our government promote and strengthen Islam. As such the government is carrying out their constitutional responsibilities.

Our constitution also says that Sharia is based on the Quran and those findings, judgments and rulings concurred by the majority of religious scholars. When the majority of the leading scholars of the country concur on hatred against Christians, Jews and other infidels, backed up by our Constitution, what should the government do instead of sleeping with the enemy? I think the government should change their partner, before its too late.

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)

Islamic Ministry launches toll free religious helpline

The Ministry for Islamic Affairs has launched a toll free hotline for advice on matters of religion, reports Haveeru.

Launching the hotline on Thursday, State Islamic Minister Sheikh Shaheem Ali Saeed said Ministry scholars would be available to answer religious queries on 8003008901.

The Ministry also announced it had received Rf 25 million (US$1.9 million) in alms as of October 2010.

“We used to get about Rf13 to 14 million. Last year we collected Rf27 million and this year we have already collected Rf25 million. This is a huge improvement,” Haveeru reported Shaheem as saying.

The Ministry also released four free books covering alms giving and Islamic rulings on the practice. Media outlets were also awarded prizes for positive coverage of the Ministry’s works, Haveeru reported.

“Before I start my work every day, I check the websites of newspapers. I get encouragement from the media reports that praise us and try to correct mistakes identified in the reports that criticise us. I believe that media reports should be credited for the good name Islamic Ministry has been receiving,” Shaheem said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)