Tag: maldives

Kanditheemu islanders suspect sorcery at remote site

An area believed to be a sorcery site has been found in Shaviyani Atoll Kanditheemu, raising the islanders’ level of speculation of sorcery practices.

Kanditheemu Island Council has told local media that an old man found a suspect area on the island jungle’s south side.

Council officials confirmed that the area had been found, but said no official report had been made to the council.

Officials noted that curious islanders found flowers supposedly used to cast spells at the site.

Although the council maintained that fear of sorcery was not a serious issue on the island, it noted that a Facebook group alleging that six people had had spells cast on them had been created to counter the spread of sorcery, local media reports.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Protests to continue as DQP vows to sue government, police

The recent arrest of Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) council members over “slanderous allegations” have increased political tensions in Male’, prompting a series of opposition led protests.

The Vice President of Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) Dr Mohamed Jameel and council member Sandhaanu’ Ahmed Ibrahim Didi was repeatedly summoned to the police headquarters and interrogated in the past four nights, after the President’s Office requested a police investigation into “slanderous” statements made by the pair, alleging the government was working under the influence of “Jews” and “Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives.

Following the arrest of Jameel lastnight, the DQP supporters gathered outside the police headquarters around 8:00pm calling for his immediate release.

Similar confrontations took place when DQP council member Sandhaanu’ Ahmed Ibrahim Didi was briefly detained on Thursday. Didi was released shortly after the Criminal court instructed the police to bring him to the court.

Former Justice Minister was transferred to Dhoonidhoo detention center located on a nearby island, but later brought ahead of the Criminal court where his lawyers team contested the legality of the arrest and won his release.

Meanwhile, verbal and sometimes physical confrontations continued till midnight near the Justice Building, where criminal court is located.

Crowds also gathered outside the residence of Home Minister Hassan Afeef, threw eggs and called for the minister’s resignation on allegations of influencing the police to take measures against DQP members.

Roads leading to President Mohamed Nasheed’s residence Muleaage meanwhile was blocked by the security forces to stop the protestors from moving any closer.

However, the protest outside the Justice Building heated up when a group of pro government or ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) activists gathered, directly resulting in clashes with opposition protesters and police officers attempting to control the crowds.

While MDP activist called for the arrest of Jameel and other opposition members making “slanderous” claims about the government, opposition continued to hail DQP members as “heroes”, and calling for their immediate release.

Police dispersed the crowds with tear gas and detained couple of protestors, who were later released.

DQP vows to sue

Meanwhile, DQP has announced that the party will sue the government and the police over the “unlawful” detention of its council members.

However, speaking to the press on Monday, Dr Hassan Saeed, DQP president and lawyer representing Didi and Dr Jameel, claimed the party has “evidence to prove they were arrested and treated unlawfully”.

He said the party intends to sue “everyone” involved in the arrest, including Home Minister Hassan Afeef and individual police officers who signed off the arrest warrant.

“We will sue [them] in big numbers,” said Dr Saeed, who left the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) coalition shortly after it came to power in 2008.

Referring to the Home Minister Afee’s interview to the media outlets regarding the police investigations, Dr Saeed argued that Afeef is acting outside the legal boundaries by interfering with the police investigations.

“The Home Minister is only supposed to answer the parliament on behalf of the police. [He] does not have any power besides policy making. [He] cannot say which cases must be investigated, who must be arrested or whose detention should be increased,” Dr Saeed asserted.

Dr Saeed claimed the investigating officers have confided that they were “pressured by the government” to interrogate and arrest DQP lead members.

“They [police officers] even apologised to us repeatedly,” Dr Saeed claimed, adding that the government is “destroying a young educated police force for personal gain”.

He also alleged President Mohamed Nasheed of using “police, defence force numbers and weapons” to maintain power and enforce policies.

Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair meanwhile told Minivan News on Monday that “we welcome any court action against the government”.

Zuhair insisted that the government wants to clear its name from the “slanderous” claims before the next election in 2013.

“We are saying it’s enough now,” Zuhair asserted. “All they need to do is tell the police who the Christian priest is. How much he is getting from the government. Under which account the money is deposited. And where they are getting this information from”.

Defend Article 27

Meanwhile, the opposition parties have decided to hold a rally on Monday night, to “defend article 27 “which states “everyone has the right to freedom of thought and the freedom to communicate opinions and expression in a manner that is not contrary to any tenet of Islam”.

DRP official was quoted in the local media saying that the rally is organised because the government is “sabotaging the freedom of expression granted under the constitution by arresting opposition leaders and threatening the media”.

Press Secretary however insists that the “government will be patient to the right freedom of expression and freedom of assembly”.

He also refuted claims of government influence over the police, saying that the “police are absolutely impartial”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police summon Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed for questioning

Police have summoned Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, for questioning at 8.30pm in an “ongoing investigation.”

According to the Criminal Court, the summons was delivered at 12.30pm today. Judge Abdulla had ordered the immediate release of minority opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) Deputy Leader Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed from police custody last night.

A police media official confirmed the summons but could not divulge details of “an ongoing investigation.”

Judge Abdulla’s lawyer and Independent MP for Guraidhoo, Ibrahim Riza, told local daily Haveeru that the chief judge would comply with the summons but was “unaware that police are investigating a case involving him.”

He added that the news “came as a shock” to the judge.

On October 26, Judge Abdulla had ruled that the arrest of Gassan Maumoon – son of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – on suspicion of hurling a wooden block at protesters was unlawful, establishing a precedent that police could not arrest suspects without an arrest warrant “unless the arresting officer observes the offence being committed”.

The contentious ruling led police to release 11 suspects while the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) sought legal clarification on criminal justice procedures.

Ethical misconduct

In 2005, then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed forwarded to the President’s Office concerns about the conduct of Abdulla Mohamed after he allegedly requested that an underage victim of sexual abuse reenact her abuse for the court.

In 2009 following the election of the current government, those documents were sent to the oversight body Judicial Service Commission (JSC), which was requested to launch an investigation into the outstanding complaints as well as alleged obstruction of “high-profile corruption investigations”.

The JSC decided not to proceed with the investigation on July 30, 2009. However in November last year, the JSC completed an investigation into a complaint of ethical misconduct against the judge.

The case was presented to the JSC in January 2010 by former President’s member of the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, after Abdulla Mohamed appeared on private network DhiTV and expressed “biased political views”.

Velezinee observed at the time that it was the first time the JSC had ever completed an investigation into a judge’s misconduct.

“There are many allegations against Abdulla Mohamed, but one is enough,” she said.

“If the JSC decides, all investigation reports, documents and oral statements will be submitted to parliament, which can then decide to remove him with a simple two-thirds majority.”

In October 2011, the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) appealed for assistance from the international community over the “increasingly blatant collusion between politicians loyal to the former autocratic President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, and senior members of the judiciary – most of whom were appointed by Gayoom during his thirty years of power.”

The MDP statement also referred to the corruption trial of Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim, charged with multiple counts of defrauding the former Atolls Ministry, which remains “indefinitely delayed.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President inspects Gulhi Falhu

President Mohamed Nasheed has visited Gulhi Fallhu, a reclaimed area of 50 hectares to be developed into an industrial-residential area.

The project originally stated that 2500 houses would be built in the area.

Global Projects Development Limited (GPD) is running the operation in conjunction with Gulhifalhu Industrial Zone Limited (GIZL).

Since the project began in March 2011 a foundation for a mosque has been laid and a port opened.

During his visit, the President examined the progress of the residential flats, the mosque and pre-school planned for Gulhi falhu.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Addu City Council begins taking down “idolatrous” SAARC monuments

Addu City Council has begun removing monuments gifted to the Maldives by SAARC member countries during the “Building Bridges” summit in November 2011.

Bhutan’s monument, a wooden sign, was taken down on Friday following a demand from demonstrators at the opposition-sponsored ‘Defend Islam’ protest on December 23 that all monuments be removed as they were “idolatrous”.

Councillor Hussein Hilmee told Minivan News that a small group of people had been vandalising the monuments and that police had needed to provide 24 hour security, which was unfeasible.

The leaders of Bangladesh, Pakistian, India, Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka unveiled their national monuments to commemorate the Maldives’ hosting of the SAARC Summit.

The night before the unveiling of Pakistan’s monument a small group of protesters knocked it over, contending that carvings detailing the history of the Indus valley civilisation and a bust of the country’s founder Mohamed Ali Jinah were idolatrous. The monument was removed by Addu City Council and replaced on its plinth prior to the unveiling ceremony.

That evening a group of opposition MPs, including MP Ahmed Mahlouf from former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), were arrested attempting to take down SAARC banners at the airport which they claimed featured Christian imagery.

The Pakistani monument was subsequently set ablaze by demonstrators, after the Adhaalath Party issued a statement claiming that “no Maldivian of sound mind” would allow idols or iconography of other religions to be erected in the country.

The Pakistani monument was “part of efforts by adversaries of Islam to turn the faith that Maldivians embraced 900 years ago upside down,” the party said at the time.

The fate of the monuments quickly became a political football in the wake of the SAARC Summit, as the government began to juggle the perceptions of its regional neighbours with antagonistic public sentiment triggered by opposition-led demands that the monuments be removed.

Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani unveils the contentious monument

Meanwhile, the wave of vandalism continued. The head of Sri Lanka’s lion statue monument was decapitated, and police were deployed to provide protect the surviving structures.

A month after it was unveiled Nepal’s monument, a metal plaque with a coat of arms resembling the country’s national symbol, was stolen during a police shift change.

“We regret what has happened,” Addu City Mayor Abdullah Sodig told Minivan News following the theft of the Nepalese monument. “It was not a religious monument. There is some political motive behind this theft,” he emphasised, citing “opposition party members” as likely suspects.

Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari subsequently requested that government authorities remove the SAARC monuments that conflicted with Islam, although he did not specify which.

State Minister for Islamic Affairs, Sheikh Hussein Rasheed, was more muted, telling Minivan News that he did not believe that the monuments contradicted Islam.

“The Pakistan monument showed how Pakistan became an Islamic country from its Buddhist origins,’’ he said, but added: ‘’Although the monument does not contradict Islam, it should not be kept there if Maldivian citizens do not want it to be there.’’

Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair observed at the time that taking down the monuments would diplomatically be very difficult for the government, “especially where it was handed to us by another Islamic country.”

Removal of the contentious monuments was one of the five demands of the December 23 protesters, who also demanded that the government apologise for a statement to parliament by UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay concerning a moratorium on flogging for extra-maritial sex.

Today, Addu City Councillor Hilmee said the council had sent a letter to the Foreign Ministry requesting that it inform SAARC member countries that it was taking the monuments down.

Deputy Sri Lankan High Commissioner Shaanthi Sudusinghe said the Sri Lankan government had not yet been informed of any decision.

“We have requested that if [the government] is unable to preserve the monument that they hand it over to us,” she said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Mahlouf accuses Maldives history website of promoting other religions

Undersecretary at the President’s Office Fareesha Abdulla has said she intends to file a defamation case against Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) MP Ahmed Mahlouf, after he appeared on DhiTV’s ‘Habaru Therein’ (In The News) and accused her of trying to introduce other religions to the Maldives.

“I have asked the Maldives Police Service on January 11, 2012 to investigate this case,” Fareesha said in a statement.

Mahlouf told Minivan News today that “Fareesha, and her husband, I think he’s a foreigner, run a website called Maldives Culture promoting other religions in Dhivehi.”

“Her husband was [previously] deported and Fareesha stayed away from the Maldives for a long time. Under this government, she is now working in the President’s office,” Mahlouf said.

Maldives Culture is a website run by Fareesha and her husband Michael O’Shea, containing English translations of documents about the history, culture and society of the Maldives.

“There’s no Dhivehi in the site – it’s all in English,” Fareesha said. “There’s nothing about other religions, and Michael was never deported.”

Fareesha told Minivan News that while she could laugh off Mahlouf’s allegations, “they have serious ramifications for me. He is a member of the Majlis and people do trust what he says – they may not check the truth for themselves. I am concerned for my physical safety – I may not be able to walk on the streets without being attacked.”

Mahlouf meanwhile claimed that the government was using the police “to try and stop us talking.”

“There’s no way they can stop us,” he said.

Documents available on Maldives Culture cover topics ranging from Maldivian art, history, social customs to historic photographs and maps of the Maldives, and a Dhivehi-English dictionary.

The site also includes translations of the works of famous explorers who visited the Maldives throughout its history, including the Ibn Battuta, François Pyrard de Laval and HCP Bell.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Tourism pioneer dies

Maldivian tourism pioneer Kan’di Ahmed Ismail Maniku has died while being treated at Sri Lanka’s Nawaloka Hospital.

Maniku diligently served the Maldives’ tourism industry since its introduction in 1972. He received an award from the Ministry Of Tourism in 1997 for being a pioneer of tourism in the Maldives.

He was also awarded the National Award of Recognition in 1997 and National Award of Honour in 2005, in recognition of his many contributions to the tourism industry.

He held many other positions with the government during his life, including Under Secretary at the Foreign Ministry, Second Secretary at the Office of the Maldivian High Commissioner in Ceylon, Representative of the Maldives’ Office at the United Nations, Manager at the Shipping Department, Under Secretary at the President’s Office, and Deputy Minister of Fisheries.

Tourism Minister Dr Mariyam Zulfa left for Sri Lanka last night to attend Maniku’s funeral.

He is survived by his wife Moomina Haleem, the first female cabinet minister in the Maldives and an honouree of the National Exemplary Service Medal, and four children.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: To Flog or not to Flog

A few months ago, a protest took place in the Maldives in defense of the Islamic Huddud (punishment) after a UN delegate spoke out against whipping for adultery from the Maldivian Parliament.

A few years ago, I had heard it argued that it was not Islamic to literally apply the Huddud in this day and age. I wanted to know for sure who was correct about this issue from an Islamic point of view, the fundamentalists or the liberal Islamic scholars.

Seeking answers, I dug out and read a few of my old volumes of Sahih Muslim, as rendered into English by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi. The experience I had wading through those pages rekindled that warm flame within me of the Islamic spirit of Mercy, the Mercy of Allah for all humanity.

This Mercy is understood by all Islamic scholars to be the supreme attribute of Allah. I came to believe that it is perfectly justifiable within a Sunni Islamic context to have the opinion that it is against this Merciful Essence of Islam to literally apply the Huddud in our day and age.

The Huddud (punishment) of flogging for Zina (adultery) is prescribed by the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Also in the Quran, however, in Surah four 15 – 16, it is stated that those who commit crimes such as Zina are to be extended forgiveness and Mercy if the perpetrators repent. As we well know, the view of many fundamentalist Sunni scholars is that these verses prescribing Forgiveness for Zina were abrogated and replaced by the verse prescribing whipping for zina. Many modern Islamic scholars have argued that this is an example of a misunderstanding and misuse of the idea of abrogation.

Let’s look closer at this concept of Naskh, abrogation.

It is one of the fundamental points of Sunni Islam that the Qur’an is the unwritten, eternal Kalam. As an attribute of Allah (Kalam or Speech) it has always existed. Is it possible then, that a ruling of vengeance which has always existed, (as part of the Uncreated Qur’an) could suddenly come into being in the lifetime of our Beloved Prophet (SAW) to replace a ruling of Mercy and Forgiveness which has also always existed.

That is not reasonable. So another perspective is that the Huddud are not so much laws to be applied to all circumstances but are in fact uncreated representations of eternal principles. The highest principle, and the overriding principle in all decision making, is the principle of Mercy, so richly expressed as compassion and forgiveness in the Qur’an and in the Sunnah so very many times.

It is said, in many Sahih Ahadith, for example, that one would be admitted to Jannah (paradise) for having a grain of faith as small as a mustard seed, no matter what his sins were. The practical application of this Mercy comes through the Islamic principle of Maslahah, doing what is best for the community.

In depth study of the Qur’an and Sunnah makes it apparent that the reason the Huddud exist are to make us aware of the immeasurable gravity of the sanctity of life and family, and of the importance of the protection of private property for furthering the development of all the Ummah. The preference for forgiveness is further demonstrated by the near impossibility of applying the Huddud due to the almost impossible to provide demands for proof required by Shariah law (four witnesses to prove fornication for example).

The Prophet’s own preference of the application of forgiveness and Mercy, even when perpetrators confess their sins and demand to be punished, is beautifully demonstrated by a Hadith which recounts an occasion that a female perpetrator of Zina demanded she be punished. The Prophet ignored her, preferring that she accept Allah’s Mercy. She evidently understood the lesson of the sanctity of family which the prescribed punishment for Zinah was meant to teach, and for the Prophet (SAW) that was enough.

As the story goes, this woman persisted in demanding punishment to the point the Prophet could not refuse, and even when she was punished, the Prophet forbade a spirit of vengeance or hate toward her. Sorrowfully, the Prophet demanded reverence, silence; he said he sensed Jannah (heaven) around her as she died. Again, I must emphasise, He did not want to punish her. Such application of punishment was not compatible with the Merciful Intent of the Wahi (the Revelation.)

Unlike some of our present day Muslims, the Prophet was not into protests demanding vengeance and punishment for Zinah, he hated to apply the Huddud and certainly would never have pushed to do so. For he who was sent as a Mercy to the Worlds, it would have been beneath his dignity to make a loud noise about wanting to hurt anybody.

Given our modern understanding and technology, it is possible to promote the gravity of the sanctity of the family and of marriage (the reason for the Revelation of the Huddud) through means such as counseling and education. So it would be most un-Islamic, seems the Islamic preference is Mercy, to literally apply the Huddud for Zinah in our day and age. Of course, those texts will always be there, as they always have, to remind us of the sanctity of family.

There are many great Islamic scholars from the Maldives who agree with the general thrust of this point of view who could actually argue this point a billion times better than I could. Yet since it would be politically damaging for them to share their much needed genius with us right now, I certainly hope that my humble opinion could at least generate some debate about this issue. Eventually I hope to hear from our brave, noble geniuses.

One final thought on this matter.

The Prophet said, and he was not the first Prophet to say it, that he who refuses to show Mercy to others will not receive Mercy from Allah. I wonder what Allah may think of those who’s Zinah and alcohol use had been concealed by Allah’s Mercy, who then demand that that same mercy be denied to others.

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)

EC disputes allegations of discrimination from both MDP and PPM

The Elections Commission (EC) has hit back at criticism from several political parties, rejecting claims of discrimination against the parties.

In a press conference on Thursday, EC members and department heads claimed that the commission fully abides by laws and regulation, while undertaking the tasks mandated to the commission.

“We do not favor or provide any advantages to any political party,” EC Vice President Ahmed Fayaz contended.

EC made the comments following claims by both the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) that the commission was discriminating against the parties.

Speaking at the press conference, EC Director General Ahmed Tholal refuted claims made by MDP, which has complained that that the EC discriminates against the party when processing forms of party membership.

He clarified that the commission was processing the party membership forms based on the date of submission and assured that all the parties are treated equally.

“All the forms are processed as soon as they are submitted,” Tholal said, irrespective of which party it comes from.

EC President Fuad Thaufeeq meanwhile restated that the commission was not discriminating against PPM, while making an inquiry into the recent claim made by its leader Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom that “vote results does not turn out the way people want”.

Fuad noted that the issue has been resolved as Gayoom had later clarified in a letter to the EC that he did not imply that the commission is responsible for it.

However, PPM alleges EC of tarnishing peoples’ confidence in Gayoom and discriminating against the party.

PPM’s media committee president Mohamed Hussain ‘Mundhu’ Shareef has pointed out that court orders calling for a re-count of votes and deeming results of the first parliamentary elections under the 2009 constitution were false and suggest major flaws within the commission.

However, Shareef said that political parties have been asked to support the assumedly independent commission in carrying out certain duties.

“The delay in passing the political party bill is causing difficulties for EC, they have requested us (political parties) to expedite it, and EC also admitted having administrative problems,” he was quoted as saying to local media.

MDP Deputy Chairperson Mohamed ‘Inthi’ Imthiyaz meanwhile told local media that “some important decisions are made without discussing with all the parties and this is now how the commission should function.”

Inthi added that the EC had admitted its shortcomings and intends to resolve them.

MDP has also expressed concern that former secretary general of People’s Alliance Ahmed Shareef is inappropriately entrusted with EC’s administrative duties.

However, EC members countered that the commission is transparent, and functions do not discriminate against any party and are not subject to party influence.

All elections are free and fair and is conducted in the presence of political parties, independent observers and the media, they asserted.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)