Comment: Disempowered women in Maldivian society

I looked at the women outside the Family Court. Some women were pregnant, some were already young mothers. More women came and went, many with an expression either of frustration, desperation, depression, or anger.

Some were fighting to be divorced, some were being divorced, but most of them were fighting for the rights of their children for the maintenance money from their father.

‘Maintenance money’ sounds technical and cold. It is money that children need from their fathers for their basic needs to be met. The Maldivian divorce regulation grants a child Rf 300 (US$23) per month from the father thus turning them into a financial burden for their single parent mothers (or guardian), and a long term social burden of yet another dispensed and ignored sector of the Maldivian society.

How far are the women responsible for the situation they are in?

How educated were they and what opportunities did they forego to abide by traditional and conservative but widely accepted norms in the Maldivian society?

How influenced were they by the cultural beliefs, the religious preaching and their family politics and upbringing? How young were these women when they committed themselves to marriages that left them with one child or more and no husband or male relative to take care of them?

How well informed were they to the rights given to them by their religion?

How misled were they to believe their role was only in the family, to serve their husbands at any time and any moment?

How did they differentiate between their obligations and what they understood as “duties” to the marriage?

What are the stories of these women? Where do they stand in the Maldivian society? What do they know of their constitutional and human rights?

Hundreds of questions raced my mind but I realised how irrelevant all these questions were. The bottom line is these women were powerless and left alone with children with no financial support fighting bitterly a losing battle in a system that was rigid, unjust and refusing to acknowledge the importance of women’s welfare to the betterment of the country.

While Maldives is under pressure to mainstream gender issues, the onslaught of conservative religious preachers is confining more and more women to the four walls of their homes.

Within this isolation, women succumb to a resigned lifestyle removing them from social and professional live, stripping them of their self worth and self confidence over time. It hits hard when the husband starts an extra-marital affair and soon deserts his prime family to start another life with the new woman. In many instances, family and friends joins the deserting husband to re-instate that the man left the woman for reasons such as failing to fulfill the needs of the man, further victimising the woman. Left alone and without love and care, the blamed woman has no one to turn to, within her family or otherwise.

Islam preaches that a divorced woman returns to her father or the eldest brother. Islam, serving to protect the child also expects the Muslim man to provide generously for the child to ensure that the child maintains the highest standard of life as afforded for the father himself.

The truth is the divorced woman’s father has grown too old to care for the divorced daughter and her children; the brother has started his own family (or two families) and is struggling to make ends meet.

Islam gives the men double inheritance to carry these responsibilities. In many instances, divorced women cannot leave the home of her ex-husband because she has nowhere to go. There are many women who continue to stay in the house of the ex-husband, and the divorced couple fall into a pattern of living together without renewing the marriage. On the other hand, it is not always convenient for the man to have his divorced wife living in his house anymore.

While the law on inheritance is unfailingly respected, and men inherit generously, the Maldivian man and the Maldivian courts fail miserably in their religious responsibilities and accountability. The behavior of men and the system is highly secularised when it comes to sharing resources, rights and power with women.

Recently I met a Maldivian lady. She was the typical contemporary Maldivian woman abiding by the social norms, highly defined in her clothing. She stays home looking after three children from a husband who is not home any more. Instead of talking about herself, she spoke about her friend and neighbor. The woman (her friend) had three children and a relationship with a man who supports her financially. He is very good to her and has even built two rooms for her and her children. But he will not marry her.

Women, who are powerless and have not financial independence, slide down on the social scale. They are dependent on men who give them the support that they do not have from relatives and ex-husbands. They succumb to settling down in relationships that are compromised. Fingers point at them for being loose (prostituting) and living in sin.

Here is the difference between choice and compulsion. This situation is created by the Maldivian society. Who is responsible for this increasing issue?

Defining the powerless woman

The powerless women are those who deny their own needs of physical, spiritual and psychological development, do not seek financial independence and do not accept the responsibility of their own well-being. Their financial dependence is self construed and often subject to tribal influences. The powerless women are fearful of stepping out of their familiar disempowering environment; are emotionally dependent, fearful of the unknown; the terror of dislocation and disconnection; scared of predators; devalue themselves; behave like second class citizens; panic about responsibility for their children’s under-performance, and fear of being unable to spare their children from suffering.

Unable to escape their circumstance; insecure about their own role in her life and lastly, refusing to claim their constitutional rights and use whatever structural, institutional or regulatory tools that are available for her to fight for herself.

Powerless women weighs down the social and economical growth of Maldives. Women are poorer than men, carry family responsibilities of children’s upbringing irrespective of the circumstance, and make up half of the Maldivian population. Women head 47 percent of households either as single (when husband remarries or leaves the island to work somewhere else) or divorced parent. The social cost of the disempowered women is high leaving aside reasons of equity and social justice.

The direct consequence of domestic violence results in a crippled workforce and loss of income for both the employer and employee. Disempowered women are vulnerable to manipulation both at home, at workplace and in the society, subject to enforced sex, dependability for her basic material needs and that of her children, mentally and physically unhealthy, more disconnected and therefore less maternal and susceptible to bad parenting.

Confronting the powerlessness and becoming empowered

I glanced back at the women as I left the premises. The common factor that would empower these women was financial independence.

The Maldivian woman must stop curtailing her future when a man enters her life. Women must get informed of their religious and political rights without compromising their individuality and right to a dignified living. Women must become active either professionally or enterprisingly. Women must keep their dreams and not expect someone else to fulfill them. Women must learn to create balance between home and public life.

A financially empowered woman achieves complete independence from socially determined practices. She is able to afford healthcare, education, provide for basic needs and protect and nurture herself and her needs.

Confronting disempowerment and transforming to empowerment must happen at various levels. There is personal development which means assessing personal behaviors, beliefs and expectations, confronting pains and fears, and taking action that empowers. The want and the willingness to be empowered and not to live in the losing circumstance is with the Woman and lies in physical, economic, political and spiritual empowerment.

Who can support women’s empowerment?

Women as mothers and nurturers of the family play a fundamental role in determining the future of their children. Today children grow up in gender defined roles. Mothers must define what they want for their daughters. Influencing and empowering both boys and girls and streamline their thinking to grow up into powerful people, where respect, fairness, sharing responsibility, being accountable and financially independent lies with Mothers who spend most of their time with her children. This is a first step.

Restrictive activities such as motions against women’s participation in various spheres must be stopped. Active inclusion of women through quotas set within a period till women’s participation becomes accepted must be introduced. The political and the diplomatic institutions must assign positions and work to women like they assign it to men. Political parties must stop paying lip service and decorating their windows with women’s chapters. Women in the parties have expressed that although they put selected women for the front-lines of the local council elections, they were not supported like their male counterparts. Many expressed disappointment at the way women in politics were labeled when they ran for office as compared to men who had lifelong records of misconduct.

Compliance laws on polygamy, divorces, child care and alimony, inheritance (including full representation of underage girls and orphan children), compensation and so forth must be covered with civil laws to ensure women are protected and fairly compensated in proportion to what the husband has been able to accumulate in wealth and earning during the marriage.

Women must be educated about “Rung” (customary price money before the marriage), its definition, purpose and the options including what a woman can ask for and under what conditions it must be paid/returned by the man or the woman. Withholding information is a deliberate act of abuse by the state and religious authorities, and women have been misinformed for decades.

Finally it comes down to women to take the leap. The first step lies with women to break through their own glass ceilings. The encouraging factor is some women have done it and so can all others if they will stop the self-fulfilling prophecy of “I can’t make it”.

The perspectives are good and women must capitalise on the opportunities. Each Ministry has a gender focal point. Making them answerable in their roles is something women must do. If you do not want to stay outside the Family Court, begging for child maintenance through a male dominant justice system, live off men, succumb to enforced sex and domestic violence, provide for your children and be healthy mentally and physically, then be truthful to yourself and start earning your own money.

Through individual commitment and participation in formalised groups, women must lobby for changes not compromising the essence of being the woman.

Aminath Arif is the founder of SALAAM School.

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(1)Dislikes(0)

Convicted criminals being brought to court for extention of detention, says Criminal Court

The Criminal Court has claimed that police have been arresting and bringing already convicted criminals to the court and requesting extensions of detention, despite the fact that the individuals are supposed to be behind bars.

On March 18 the police brought a person to the Criminal Court who had previously been sentenced to 45 years imprisonment after he was found guilty of theft, objection to order and three drug related charges, said the Criminal Court.

A second person was also brought before the court who had been sentenced 10 times on different charges and was supposed to be serving 27 years imprisonment, the court said, after he was found guilty of five robbery cases, two cases of objection to order, two cases of driving without license and one case of possession and using of drugs.

”The court’s documents show that those two persons were handed over to the concerned authorities to implement the verdict,” the court said. ”They were brought before the judges on March 18 on charges of robbery and were caught that night while the police was conducting a special operation to curb the violence in Male’.”

The Criminal Court that night ordered police to handover the two criminals to the penitentiary department within two days.

”The court queried why a person sentenced to 45 years prison and another to 27 years, who are supposed to be in jail, were released into society. [Police] replied that it was the Home Ministry that released them,” the court added.

Head of Department of Penitentiary and Rehabilitation Services (DPRS) Ahmed Rasheed told Minivan News that there were many challenges the department had to face when handling the prisoners.

”There are people who escape, people who are released for house arrest, people who cannot be kept inside the cells because of their medical condition,” said Rasheed. ”A very infamous criminal named Mohamed Ibrahim Didi, also known as ‘Kiyawa’, escaped recently.”

Kiyawa, Rasheed said, was brought Male’ to report to the hospital as he had a severe knee injury.

”The doctors said his knee needed to undergo an operation and that he needed to be admitted for a month before operating,” Rasheed explained. ”One day, late in the afternoon, he fled from hospital. There are reasons why a person who cannot stand on two feet by himself escapes.”

Rasheed said in other incidents when prisoners escaped while they were being transferred from island prisons to Male’.

”Somehow their relatives, friends and lovers get to know that they are scheduled to come Male’ at this time for this purpose and will be at the jetty when prisoners arrives, they will all circle around and gather,” he said. ”Some of those times, the prisoners friends will come by, threaten the prison officers and flee.”

He said that currently there were more than 70 prisoners released on parole.

”There will be 15 prisoners in Thilafushi in the work corporation, and there will be fugitives as well,” he said.

Rasheed said a legal framework needed to be established to solve the issues.

”There has to be a lawful system where good prisoners can be granted clemency, such as a reward for a prisoner who learns by heart two books of the Quran or the whole of Quran. If such a law was established then prisoners cannot escape by having a friend in the President’s Office.”

He also noted that there were times DPRS officers were attacked during prisoners’ escapes.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

HRCM investigating leak of child molestation allegations against MP

President of Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) Maryam Azra has said that the commission has begun an internal investigation to find out the source of a story published in local newspaper Haveeru that the commission was investigating an MP regarding child molestation.

Minivan News understands that Haveeru removed the story from its website this afternoon.

When Minivan News queried Azra as whether the commission was investigating such a case, she replied “I do not know.”

”We are trying to find out who it was that has told Haveeru so,” she said.

Haveeru had quoted an official at HRCM as saying that a child molestation case related to a MP had been filed at commission, which was investigating alongside police.
The official declined to reveal the name of the MP, said Haveeru.

Spokesperson of HRCM Ahmed Rilwan told Minivan News that he would “have check whether such a case was reported to the commission.”

”The statement given to Haveeru by whomever was not an official statement,” he said.

A police spokesperson said police had no comment on the matter.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament cuts off live feed to DhiFM, summons journalists

A parliament decision to cut a live feed to private radio station DhiFM and summon some of its journalists before its general affairs committee tomorrow over allegations of contempt during a live broadcast has been roundly condemned by the Maldives Journalist Association (MJA).

”We believe that the media has the authority to report the dialogue of MPs, broadcast what is going on inside the parliament as well as the authority to criticise,” read a press release by the MJA. ”It is a right guaranteed by the constitution and we call on the parliament not to violate that right.”

The MJA notes that the parliament’s action to last week cut the feed – reportedly in response to “disrespect” exhibited to some MPs by DhiFM presenters – was both unwarranted and disproportionate, adding that parliament should have recourse to other means than unilaterally terminating the live coverage of parliament sittings.

”This association does not believe that a responsible institution of the state would have to stop sending live feed to a media outlet in order to complain about its reporting,” reads the MJA statement. ”It is also questionable whether the live feed was stopped after investigating the matter.”

The press association warned that such actions could undermine press freedom by silencing the media.

However, the MJA also called on local media to be responsible in their duties as well as appealing for MPs to ensure the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution are practiced to their full extent.

Parliament Secretary-General Ahmed Mohamed is currently abroad and was unavailable for comment.

CEO of DhiFM, Masoodh Hilmy confirmed that the parliamentary committee sent two letters to the radio station requesting a recording of its ”Breakfast Club” programme last week and summoning the two DhiFM journalists who presented the programme in front of a committee tomorrow.

”We have not yet decided whether we will send the two journalists, because currently we are seeking legal advice to determine whether legally we are obliged to attend parliament if requested,” said Masood. ”We will abide by all laws, and we do not believe that we violated the privileges of MPs.”

Masood characterised the action taken by the parliament as a challenge to the freedom of press.

”It is a step backwards in terms of democracy, I think its the first time in history the parliament has summoned journalists,” he said, adding that the incident was “regrettable”.

Masood added that while DhiFM has not officially been informed that the live feed had been disconnected, “our technical department says that we haven’t been receiving signals from the parliament.”

The MJA’s criticism comes just a month after it spoke out along with other media figures like the editor of Haveeru to criticise police in requesting to speak with some of the paper’s journalists concerning the identity of sources on which it based a report.

The story focused on an alleged blackmail ring that reportedly obtained pornographic images of some high-profile national figures through the internet, which has been the basis of an ongoing police investigation.  Haveeru said at the time that its staff declined to reveal the identities of its sources.

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

Gasim Ibrahim undecided on whether to contest presidency in 2013

Maamigili MP Gasim Ibrahim, leader of the Jumhooree Party, has said he does not intend to back or become running mate of any candidate in the 2013 presidential elections, though he has not ruled out standing for the country’s top political position himself.

Speaking to Haveeru, the former Finance Minister explained that he had opted not to back any candidate for the presidency in 2013 after taking criticism for supporting President Mohamed Nasheed’s ultimately successful campaign in 2008.

“The people are blaming me [for Nasheed’s election]; that this and that happened because of what I did. A large number of people are putting the blame on me,” he told the paper.  “How can I be sure of what would happen to me when I try to bring another person to power? I can only do something for my own self.”

After reportedly supporting Nasheed’s candidacy on the back of the “good things” the president said during campaigning, Gasim said that he had resigned as Home Minister after just 21 days into the new administration.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Two dead in fatal house fire next door to Sala Thai

Police have confirmed the deaths of two people in a fire that broke out in the Orchid building next door to the Sala Thai restaurant in Male’ just after 9:00am this morning.

Police spokesperson, Sub-Inspector Ahmed Ali, said police were currently unable to identify the victims because the bodies were severely burned.

Howver Haveeru reported the identities of the victims as Iuthisham Adam and Dhon Sitthi of Haaji Edhuru, the mother of both Deputy Health Minister Fathimath Afiya and Permanent Representative of the Maldives to the UN in Geneva, Iruthisham Adam.

President later Mohamed Nasheed later visited the scene.

“We don’t know how the fire was caused and police are investigating the incident,” said Sub-Inspector Ali. Minivan News observed police forensic officers on the scene.

Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) firefighters quickly extinguished the initial blaze and took two hours to completely contain the blaze, successfully preventing it from taking hold in adjoining buildings. Minivan News understands that firefighters searching building for the women were obstructed by the weakened second floor and large amounts of smoke.

Large crowds of civil servants from the nearby Velaanage office building gathered behind police tape to watch as successive rescue attempts were made.

The owner of Sala Thai, who was present at the scene, said the restaurant would have to “close for some time” as the fire had damaged the kitchen and destroyed an upstairs storeroom.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: We should not stand aside while this dictator murders his own people

The following is a statement given by British Prime Minister David Cameron to the British Parliament in a bid to justify the UN Security Council’s resolution to authorise international military intervention in Libya, ahead of today’s air strikes. Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed was among the first world leaders to urge intervention.

Over three weeks ago, the people of Libya took to the streets in protest against Colonel Gaddafi and his regime, asking for new rights and freedoms. There were hopeful signs that a better future awaited them, and that, like people elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa, they were taking their destiny into their own hands. Far from meeting those aspirations, Colonel Gaddafi has responded by attacking his own people. He has brought the full might of armed forces to bear on them, backed up by mercenaries. The world has watched as he has brutally crushed his own people.

On 23 February, the UN Secretary-General cited the reported nature and scale of attacks on civilians as “egregious violations of international and human rights law” and called on the Government of Libya to
“meet its responsibility to protect its people.”

The Secretary-General said later that more than 1,000 people had been killed and many more injured in Libya amid credible and consistent reports of arrests, detention and torture.

Over the weekend of 26 and 27 February, at Britain’s instigation, the UN Security Council agreed Resolution 1970, which condemned Gaddafi’s actions. It imposed a travel ban and asset freezes on those at the top of his regime. It demanded an end to the violence, access for international human rights monitors and the lifting of restrictions on the media. Vitally, it referred the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court so that its leaders should face the justice they deserve.

In my statement to the House on 28 February, I set out the steps that we would take to implement those measures. Our consistent approach has been to isolate the Gaddafi regime, deprive it of money, shrink its power and ensure that anyone responsible for abuses in Libya will be held to account. I also told the House that I believed contingency planning should be done for different scenarios, including involving military assets, and that that should include plans for a no-fly zone.

Intervening in another country’s affairs should not be undertaken save in quite exceptional circumstances. That is why we have always been clear that preparing for eventualities that might include the use of force—including a no-fly zone or other measures to stop humanitarian catastrophe—would require three steps and three tests to be met: demonstrable need, regional support and a clear legal basis.

First, on demonstrable need, Gaddafi’s regime has ignored the demand of UN Security Council Resolution 1970 that it stop the violence against the Libyan people. His forces have attacked peaceful protesters, and are now preparing for a violent assault on a city, Benghazi, of one million people that has a history dating back 2,500 years. They have begun air strikes in anticipation of what we expect to be a brutal attack using air, land and sea forces. Gaddafi has publicly promised that every home will be searched and that there will be no mercy and no pity shown.

If we want any sense of what that might mean we have only to look at what happened in Zawiyah, where tanks and heavy weaponry were used to smash through a heavily populated town with heavy loss of life. We do not have to guess what happens when he has subdued a population. Human Rights Watch has catalogued the appalling human rights abuses that are being committed in Tripoli. Now, the people of eastern Libya are faced with the same treatment. That is the demonstrable need.

Secondly, on regional support, we said that there must be a clear wish from the people of Libya and the wider region for international action. It was the people of Libya, through their transitional national council, who were the first to call for protection from air attack through a no-fly zone. More recently, the Arab League has made the same demand.

It has been remarkable how Arab leaders have come forward and condemned the actions of Gaddafi’s Government. In recent days, I have spoken with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan. A number of Arab nations have made it clear that they are willing to participate in enforcing the resolution. That support goes far beyond the Arab world. Last night, all three African members of the UN Security Council voted in favour of the resolution.

The third and essential condition was that there should be a clear legal base. That is why along with France, Lebanon and the United States we worked hard to draft appropriate language that could command the support of the international community. Last night, the United Nations Security Council agreed that Resolution.

Resolution 1973 “Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians”. It establishes “a ban on all flights” in the airspace of Libya “in order to help protect civilians”. It authorises member states to take “all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban”.

Crucially, in paragraph 4, it “Authorises member states… acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, and acting in co-operation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures…to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack… including Benghazi”.

The resolution both authorises and sets the limits of our action. Specifically, it excludes an occupation force of any form, on any part of Libyan territory. That was a clear agreement between all the sponsors of the resolution, including the UK, and of course, the Arab League. I absolutely believe that that is the right thing both to say and to do.

As our ambassador to the United Nations said, the central purpose of this resolution is to end the violence, protect civilians, and allow the people of Libya to determine their own future, free from the brutality unleashed by the Gaddafi regime. The Libyan population want the same rights and freedoms that people across the Middle East and North Africa are demanding, and that are enshrined in the values of the United Nations charter. Resolution 1973 puts the weight of the Security Council squarely behind the Libyan people in defence of those values. Our aims are entirely encapsulated by that resolution.

Demonstrable need, regional support and a clear legal base: the three criteria are now satisfied in full. Now that the UN Security Council has reached its decision, there is a responsibility on its members to respond. That is what Britain, with others, will now do. The Attorney-General has been consulted and the Government are satisfied that there is a clear and unequivocal legal basis for the deployment of UK forces and military assets. He advised Cabinet this morning, and his advice was read and discussed.

The Security Council has adopted Resolution 1973 as a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security under chapter VII of the United Nations charter. The resolution specifically authorises notifying member states to use all necessary measures to enforce a no-fly zone and to protect civilians and civilian populated areas, including Benghazi.

At Cabinet this morning, we agreed that the UK will play its part. Our forces will join an international operation to enforce the resolution if Gaddafi fails to comply with the demand that he end attacks on civilians. The Defence Secretary and I have now instructed the Chief of the Defence Staff to work urgently with our allies to put in place the appropriate military measures to enforce the resolution, including a no-fly zone. I can tell the House that Britain will deploy Tornadoes and Typhoons as well as air-to-air refuelling and surveillance aircraft. Preparations to deploy those aircraft have already started and in the coming hours they will move to air bases from where they can start to take the necessary action.

The Government will table a substantive motion for debate next week, but I am sure that the House will accept that the situation requires us to move forward on the basis of the Security Council resolution immediately. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House call on Colonel Gaddafi to respond immediately to the will of the international community and cease the violence against his own people. I spoke to President Obama last night and to President Sarkozy this morning. There will be a clear statement later today, setting out what we now expect from Colonel Gaddafi.

We should never prepare to deploy British forces lightly or without careful thought. In this case, I believe that we have given extremely careful thought to the situation in hand. It is absolutely right that we played a leading role on the UN Security Council to secure permission for the action, and that we now work with allies to ensure that that resolution is brought about. There will be many people in our country who will now want questions answered about what we are doing and how we will go about it. I intend to answer all those questions in the hours and days ahead, and to work with our brave armed services to ensure that we do the right thing, for the people of Libya, for the people of our country and for the world as a whole.

Tonight, British forces are in action over Libya. They are part of an international coalition that has come together to enforce the will of the United Nations and to support the Libyan people. We have all seen the appalling brutality that Colonel Gaddafi has meted out against his own people. And far from introducing the ceasefire he spoke about, he has actually stepped up the attacks and the brutality that we can all see.

So what we are doing is necessary, it is legal, and it is right. It is necessary because, with others, we should be trying to prevent him using his military against his own people. It is legal, because we have the backing of the United Nations Security Council and also of the Arab League and many others.

And it is right because we believe we should not stand aside while this dictator murders his own people. Tonight, of course our thoughts should be with those in our armed services who are putting their lives at risk in order to save the lives of others. They are the bravest of the brave. But I believe we should all be confident that what we are doing is in a just cause and in our nation’s interest.

David Cameron is the Prime Minister of the UK.

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)

High fines and prison sentences as High Court concludes 33 elections cases

The High Court of the Maldives has concluded all 33 cases concerning elections and has delivered verdicts on the cases.

The High Court said it has fined eight candidates who ran for the Local Councils Elections Rf 20,000 (US$1556) for giving false information to the Elections Commissions (EC).

Seven candidates who ran for the Local Councils Elections were fined Rf 12,000 ((US$933) for running as a candidate when “the court found that they had unpaid decreed debts, which makes the person ineligible for running as a candidate,” said the High Court.

One person was sentenced to one year imprisonment for obstructing the elections, said the High Court, while another person who filmed his vote was fined Rf 12,000 (US$933).

The High Court ordered the Elections Commission to hold the elections on Haa Alifu Kelaa Island Council and elections of Haa Alifu Atoll Councils once again.

In addition, there was no reason that two ballot boxes QO3.09.01 and Q03.09.02, kept in Faresmathoda, should be declared void, said the High Court.

The Court also ordered the Elections Commission to break the security seal of Ballot Box number W07.1.1, which was kept in Hinamfushi Prison, and ordered that it be recounted.

On February oath taking ceremonies for successful candidates have been held in all but 14 areas, where the High Court ordered the suspension of the ceremonies until the cases filed regarding the elections were concluded.

Ceremonies scheduled to be held for H.Dh Nolhivaranfaru island council, H.Dh Nolhivaram area Atoll council, N. Miladhoo island council, R. Maduvvari island council, R. Maduvvari Area Atoll council, G. DH Faresmathoda island council, G.Dh Faresmathoda Area Atoll Council, A.Dh Dhangethi island council, A.A Mathiveri island council, A.A Atoll council, L. Atoll council, G.A Vilingili island council,G.A Atoll council and L. Dhambidhoo island council were delayed by order of the High Court.

The ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s Deputy Secretary General Mohamed Imthiyaz recently said in a statement that the Local Council Elections were not conducted fairly, and accused the Elections Commission giving more power to a ”specific political party.”

Imthiyaz said that MDP’s complaint bureau had received “more than 1000 complaints” regarding the elections from different areas, which could potentially affect the result of the elections.

”MDP has requested the Elections Commission re-conduct elections in some councils and to recount the votes in some others,” said Imthiyaz.

The MDP said it had received information that an under-aged boy had voted in the local council elections and that a house that should have been registered in Galolhu South was registered in Mid-Galolhu area.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Western military intervention in Libya imminent after skepticism over shaky ceasefire

The UN Security Council has passed a resolution authorising military action in Libya, excluding occuption by foreign troops, opening a window for not just a no-fly zone but air assault on President Muammar Gaddafi’s tank columns.

Gaddafi’s forces last week pushed the disorganised and increasingly demoralised rebels back to their stronghold of Benghazi, raising international concerns that a retaliatory massacre was imminent. The rebels had held several key oil towns and even neared the outskirts of the Libyan capital of Tripoli on the back of army defections and a regime caught off-guard, but was steadily pushed back by foreign mercenaries, tanks and Gaddafi’s airforce.

The UN resolution expresses “grave concern at the deteriorating situation, the escalation of violence, and the heavy civilian casualties” and notes that Gaddafi’s response to the uprising “may amount to crimes against humanity” and pose a “threat to international peace and security”.

The resolution explicitly calls for a ceasefire and the immediate implementation of a no-fly zone to protect civilians from Gaddafi’s airforce, and furthermore calls on UN member states “to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory”.

After weeks of prevaricating, US President Barack Obama yesterday demanded that Gaddafi cease his advance on Benghazi and withdraw troops from towns formerly held by the rebels, while US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton confirmed that the outcome of international action would be the removal of Gaddafi from power.

Already engaged in two wars in the Middle East, the US had resisted calls from countries including France, the UK and the Maldives for intervention in Libya. US generals had observed that maintaining a no-fly zone would mean bombing Gaddafi’s anti-aircraft defences and would effectively be an act of war.

The US change of heart appears to have come after the 22-member Arab League this week called for a no-fly zone across Libya, arguing that President Muammar Gaddafi had compromised the country’s sovereignty by using the air force to bomb his own population.

Gaddafi responded by calling a ceasefire, reportedly hours before bombers were due take off, and invited international observers into the country.

The move bought the 42-year autocracy some time, but attracted little patience from world leaders.

“Once more, Muammar Gaddafi has a choice,” said US President Obama. “Let me be clear: these terms are not negotiable … if Gaddafi does not comply with the resolution, the international community will impose consequences and the resolution will be enforced.”

UK Prime Minister David Cameron said that Gaddafi was “a dictator no longer wanted by his people, but determined to play out in real time a bloody slaughter. It is a slaughter that we now have the power, the demand and the legal basis to stop. That is why what we are doing is right.”

News of the resolution was met with jubilation in Benghazi, although there was widespread skepticism over whether Gaddafi would adhere to his ceasefire – suspicion that was warranted when bombing and shelling continued that evening, and a fighter plane crashed into the city itself after it was shot down by rebels.

Spokesperson for the Libyan Transitional National Council Essam Gheriani, the body given legitimacy last week in Paris as the face of the popular uprising, told the UK’s Guardian newspaper that the resolution had “avoided a great deal of bloodshed.

“The revenge Gaddafi would have taken in Benghazi would have been worse than anything we’ve seen before even in a city where he had mass hangings in public. It has been a great morale booster,” said Gheriani.

“This was an international community that for once gave priority to human lives over economic interests.”

Fighting continues across the Middle East as entrenched dictatorships struggle to quell a surge of democratic uprisings. Snipers in Yemen yesterday shot dead 30 protesters in the country’s capital, while opposition leaders in Bahrain have been arrested after the government invited 1000 Saudi troops into the country to crush the Shia uprising in the minority Sunni-ruled country.

Yesterday’s sudden international support of forcible regime change in Libya is likely to increase the confidence of demonstrators in other repressive countries in the region.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)