The hottest topic in political circles these days is that of Parliament’s recess. When the Speaker put the matter to vote, I voted for recess. In spite of all the “spinning” that has gone on, I still believe that I made the right decision. Let me outline why. I apologise in advance for those readers who often express frustration because my Posts are too long. This one will be long. For the first time in my Parliamentary career, I have been questioned by some of those who support the work I have been doing, about the way I voted in Parliament, and I feel it is my duty to explain my justification for that vote. I must be accountable for my actions to the People. Next to my belief in Allah, my most fervent belief is that public officials must always act in the interest of people and that accountability by public officials to the public is of paramount importance.
Some of these writings and musings of mine are a bit long because when I try to write things concisely, I tend to write at an abstract level, and there are many readers who do not have the background information on many of these things, and they find it difficult to put what I write in the proper context. Subsequently, they pose many questions for me, seeking further clarifications and amplifications. So I try to write assuming nothing about readers’ background information.
Therefore, for those of you who have asked me about it with the sincere intention of finding out the reasons for the Recess, let me try to expound the reasons.
The Background
When the Constitution was being written, the initial draft prepared by the Drafting Panel for the Transition Chapter did not specify any dates for anything. It just listed periods for various activities. Further, the consultant and the panel advocated concurrent Presidential and Parliamentary elections, within a period of six to eight months. However, DRP, who held the majority at the time, insisted on specific dates, and wanted the Presidential elections, Parliamentary elections and Local elections in that order. MDP at the time was arguing for the reverse.
When dates were being proposed, I lamented, begged, wrote out detailed lists of activities and appropriate and realistic periods, all to no avail. The Chapter was written in late January / February 2008, and it was envisaged that the Constitution would be ratified in early March. If that had happened, it would have given us 8 months to make all the preparations for the Presidential elections and a full year to make preparations for the Parliamentary elections, and nearly eighteen months for the preparation of Local elections.
However, the Sub-committee of the Drafting Committee couldn’t finish the final editing of the constitution until nearly July. This was mainly because the Attorney General sent a document listing 301 “problems” with the Constitution (the Constitution has 301 Articles!), and the committee had to go through each and every one of them. Why? Because there was a veiled threat that unless they were accommodated, the President would be advised to send back that Constitution for reconsideration, which would have meant the death of it because then we would be required to get a two third majority to pass it.
Then the President took a further one month to ratify it, which meant it didn’t get ratified until Thursday, the 7th of August. Incidentally, if it had not been ratified by Thursday, the Election Commissioner would have been required under the old constitution to announce Presidential Elections under the old constitution on the following Sunday, which would have meant it would not have been a multi-candidate election, but the old Parliament-approval-followed-by-referendum system. This would have happened had we not demonstrated outside the Palace, which some labelled as the “Spectacle at the Palace”.
Therefore, what was written to allow an eight month period for Presidential elections was suddenly shortened to two months, because the envisaged ratification date was overshot by six months, but the election date was fixed. I believe this was done deliberately by DRP to hold the elections amid confusion. MDP also subscribed to it at a later stage. So did the Republicans.
We all know what happened in the Presidential elections. The whole thing was a bloody mess and a debacle.
In the process, the old and the new governments very conveniently “overlooked” THEIR constitutional duty and did not submit the necessary bills for Parliamentary elections to Parliament.
Due to the late ratification of the Constitution, what was envisaged as a one year period for preparations for Parliamentary elections was cut short to 5 months. The late submission of the bills has actually shortened the effective period to less than two months.
Both governments were fully aware that Parliament recess would come at the end of December, and that the Parliament would be fully engaged in the budgetary process during the whole of December. Therefore they knew very well that by delaying the submission of the bills until December actually meant that the bills would not be completed by early January. This would mean that it just left one month for everything to be done to hold the elections.
Nobody actually expected the Parliament to be firm on this issue and that Parliament would resist being bulldozed and coerced into denying the Maldivian People the right to take part in a free and fair election, an election which followed DUE PROCESS. So now that Parliament has done exactly that, they are trying to tarnish the Parliament, and in the process have successfully created a Supreme Court which can over-rule Parliament any time they want. Worse, they have destroyed the credibility of the only Institution in this country which has actually delivered any freedom and power to the people. After this Debacle, the People are left with a eunuch of a Parliament.
The Vote
Against this backdrop, on the 25th of December, just after the budget was passed, the Speaker asked for a vote (without any debate) on whether Parliament should go for recess as stipulated in the Constitution and the Standing Orders of the Parliament.
I voted for the motion.
In voting for the motion, I asked myself the following questions :
Will going for a recess violate the Constitution? The answer was No. It would not violate the Constitution for the facts that : 1. Article 83 of the Constitution quite clearly specifies that the Parliament shall have three sessions in a year, and that the beginning dates and the end dates of each session should be specified in the Standing Orders of the Parliament; and the date specified in the Standing Orders for the beginning of the Major recess for Parliament for 2008 was the end of December. In fact even the Supreme Court recognized this in their “ruling”. 2. Following the Presidential elections, Husnu Suood and a group of lawyers went to the High Court to nullify the elections because the elections had not been completed by 10th October as specified in Article 301 of the Constitution. The High Court ruled that overshooting that date did not constitute a violation of the Constitution because those dates in the Constitution were not absolute. The Supreme Court had not over-ruled that decision of the High Court.
Will not going for recess and quickly finishing the bills allow elections to be held by 15th February, as specified in the Constitution? The answer was No. It could not be done for the simple reasons that: 1. It would have taken about 10 days to finish those bills. Some would argue that it could be done in three days. But I disagree because the Standing Orders of the Parliament outlines a process for the passing of any bill, and simply following that process would have taken that amount of time. This meant that the bills could not have been passed before the end of the first week of January (The Lunar and Gregorian New Year Holidays fell into this period as well). That meant The Elections Commission would have about thirty five days to complete the elections. In the meantime, the Elections Commission had communicated in writing to the Parliament that they would need the bills to be passed by 18th of December in order to conduct the elections by the 15th of February. They wrote three times. They came in person to Majlis Committee and are on record stating that it could not be done, and they would need a minimum of fifty days to do it. 2. Article 170 of the Constitution spells out quite clearly the responsibilities of the Elections Commission in holding any election. Among these are delineating and announcing boundaries well ahead of time, publishing voter lists and registries with enough time allowed to address voters’ complaints, educating the Public about the elections. So I asked myself, should I allow the Elections Commission to shirk these responsibilities and hold a farce of an election yet again? The memories of the Presidential Elections are still fresh in my mind. So I knew the elections could not be held AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONSTITUTION by the DATE SPECIFIED IN THE CONSTITUTION anyway. If we held on to one requirement, we would be forced to violate the other requirement. Which way do I go? I decided, even if the date is passed, we must facilitate the election AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONSTITUTION.
In taking this decision, I deliberated on article 75 of the Constitution, that MPs must always act in the best interest of the NATION and ALL its people, in discharging their duties. In making this decision, we were taking the brunt of all kinds of accusations, but saving the Elections Commission from being forced to violate the Constitution. That is our job. To make the best decision for the Nation in spite of accusations from political opponents.
Has the Parliament worked to discharge its duties? The Answer was a big resounding Yes. Parliament has worked round the clock since January 2006, and has not had a proper recess since September 2006. As for me, this is the first recess I have had since then.
Who will benefit by a snap election? The answer was, the major league political parties, and it would put individual candidates at an extreme disadvantage. The sense I am getting from the public is that the Public do not trust political parties yet. The next lot would be the power hungry politicians sitting on the sidelines. They don’t want to waste a day out of the arena.
One final consideration in my decision was that if the Election was held properly, HA Atoll would get one more seat in Parliament, because statistical projections and numbers tell us if their population was increased by a few, they would be entitled to one more seat from what the Elections Commission was specifying now. It would increase from four to five.
The Summary
The summary is that by going for recess, Parliament has not violated the Constitution, and we would not have had a proper election anyway in the time specified, and that this was due largely on the failing of the government to submit the bills on time, and had nothing to do with Parliament.
I made the decision on behalf of the people who elected me, and for the benefit of the Maldivian People. I still think I made the right decision, and on Monday, when Parliament convenes, I will still make the same decision. If the people punish me in the next election for working in their interest by not re-electing me….well…it is their prerogative, and I will respect it. But I still would not change my mind on this issue. If the People weigh my contributions to this nation in the last four years as their elected representative against this one vote, and my stand on it, and this one vote outweighs four years of sacrifice and hard work, well….what can I say? It will decide for me, once and for all that the Maldivian people do not subscribe to my ideals and principles. This issue has to be tested now. The upcoming elections will show whether the People share my vision for this country and my principles.
Forgive me folks, for the lengthy Post, but I had to spell it out in detail.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
The Pendulum Is Swinging
The Supreme Court gave a ruling today in the Case of the Century. They ruled, but did not decide. The plaintiffs pleaded the Court for a ruling that the Parliament had violated the Constitution and that the Parliament would stand dissolved on the first of March. Surprisingly, the Supreme Court was silent on both counts in its “verdict”. I had always thought that people went to Court for a remedy regarding a grievance. The Supreme Court certainly gave none in this instance. I am a bit baffled that “eminent lawyers” are claiming that the Supreme Court decision was in favour of the plaintiffs. Must be because I am not a lawyer. I suppose only lawyers are expected to understand Court decisions, and an interpretation has to be made on how the Court interpreted the Law. A bit convoluted, all this legal stuff, I conclude.
In the most convoluted decision to ever come out of a Maldivian Court, what was apparent is this: The Supreme Court is of the opinion that they are the Supreme body in the country, and they do not recognize Parliamentary immunity.
This is exactly what I have been fearful of (Refer my Post entitled “The Power Pendulum”). I have seen this coming from a distance.
The Court referred to “inherent jurisdiction of the Supreme Court” when the Constitution quite clearly states only four instances of original jurisdiction for the Supreme Court, and everything else is referred to jurisdiction as defined by the Law (of which there is nothing yet), or original jurisdiction of a case on appeal against a High Court decision. How can there be “inherent jurisdiction and powers of a court” in constitutional supremacy?
This case has opened a door for a tug of war, the ultimate result of which can only be a Judiciary whose powers will be curtailed. They have committed what would be considered sacrilege in most democracies.
The flexing of their muscles is further evident in a statement issued by the Supreme Court which warns that anyone commenting on a Supreme Court decision will be punished. Where in the world did they gain the power to limit the right of speech through a press release? Does the copy of the Constitution they refer to come minus article 16 and article 19? They have ventured again into the exclusive powers of the Parliament : the power to make law and define punishable offences.
This is my worst nightmare coming true. After ruling against Parliamentary immunity, they are shamelessly moving onto curtailing fundamental rights and freedoms and liberties of the people. Well, the “eminent lawyers” may sit and watch in awe and reverence at the power of the Supreme Court. They may very conveniently disregard the issue when the Supreme Court shifts immunity from Parliament to the Supreme Court. But I shan’t. The Supreme Court can put me in jail if they like. But even they will not strip me of my right and freedom to express myself. I purchased that right with my own sweat and blood from a tyrant who ruled this country for 30 years.
Yes, the Pendulum is Swinging. It hasn’t stopped yet. Right now, it is on the verge of going out of tolerance range.
In the most convoluted decision to ever come out of a Maldivian Court, what was apparent is this: The Supreme Court is of the opinion that they are the Supreme body in the country, and they do not recognize Parliamentary immunity.
This is exactly what I have been fearful of (Refer my Post entitled “The Power Pendulum”). I have seen this coming from a distance.
The Court referred to “inherent jurisdiction of the Supreme Court” when the Constitution quite clearly states only four instances of original jurisdiction for the Supreme Court, and everything else is referred to jurisdiction as defined by the Law (of which there is nothing yet), or original jurisdiction of a case on appeal against a High Court decision. How can there be “inherent jurisdiction and powers of a court” in constitutional supremacy?
This case has opened a door for a tug of war, the ultimate result of which can only be a Judiciary whose powers will be curtailed. They have committed what would be considered sacrilege in most democracies.
The flexing of their muscles is further evident in a statement issued by the Supreme Court which warns that anyone commenting on a Supreme Court decision will be punished. Where in the world did they gain the power to limit the right of speech through a press release? Does the copy of the Constitution they refer to come minus article 16 and article 19? They have ventured again into the exclusive powers of the Parliament : the power to make law and define punishable offences.
This is my worst nightmare coming true. After ruling against Parliamentary immunity, they are shamelessly moving onto curtailing fundamental rights and freedoms and liberties of the people. Well, the “eminent lawyers” may sit and watch in awe and reverence at the power of the Supreme Court. They may very conveniently disregard the issue when the Supreme Court shifts immunity from Parliament to the Supreme Court. But I shan’t. The Supreme Court can put me in jail if they like. But even they will not strip me of my right and freedom to express myself. I purchased that right with my own sweat and blood from a tyrant who ruled this country for 30 years.
Yes, the Pendulum is Swinging. It hasn’t stopped yet. Right now, it is on the verge of going out of tolerance range.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Responsibility
The Maldives has made history, I think (I am not sure on this), by holding a trial with the Parliament as defendant. The Supreme Court has ruled that there is no immunity for parliament in the constitution. Among the reasoning for this ruling was that it is in the inherent power of the Supreme Court to take on the responsibility of deciding what is best for the nation, and that the Attorney General had asked for an opinion from the Court on this issue, and therefore it constitutes as a valid reason for trying the Parliament in Court.
Effectively, what the Court is saying is that if the Executive asks for an opinion from the Court regarding Parliament’s actions and decisions, it then falls into the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to sit in judgment over Parliament, disregarding the clauses defining Immunity and Privilege of Parliament.
I could make a lengthy case for the Supremacy of Parliament. But that is not the topic of this Post. The topic is Responsibility.
The Parliament is being accused of not discharging its duties and acting “irresponsibly”, and the Supreme Court is going to pass judgment on Parliament any minute now. I do not wish to comment on this issue either.
I just want to pose a few questions regarding responsibility and irresponsibility.
Article 149 (d) of the Constitution says that Parliament should pass a law on judges (or more commonly known as a Judicature Act) which would guide how judges should discharge their duties. While the Constitution was in its final stages of being written, I wanted to submit such an act to Parliament to get it ready for implementation. I was told that the then Attorney General had employed a consultant from the Commonwealth to write such a bill, and the government would submit it to Parliament as a matter of priority. After the Constitution was passed, I begged the Legal Reform people that the first bill should be that because I was afraid that with the high degree of independence being given to judges and the courts, and due to the weakness of the courts, the Judiciary may step out of bounds and start messing things up. I was promised that it would come very quickly, but it never did. To date, there is none. The result? Judges are out of control. They are ruling arbitrarily to send lawyers to jail for non-appearance to court on contempt of court. They have refused to act according to the criminal procedures code “because it was too difficult to do so”. The Supreme Court has ruled to take away powers given to the JSC by law to increase their control on the High Court and Trial Court. The Supreme Court has accepted a case for hearing which was kicked out of the high court without going through an appeals process and reversing the High Court’s Judgment.
They are doing whatever they like in the name of “inherent powers of the Court” while at the same time quoting Constitutional Supremacy. How can you have “inherent powers” which are not defined in the law when the Constitution is Supreme?
Are the courts, specially the Supreme Court acting “responsibly”?
The Legal Reform Ministry of the Qayyoom Government never submitted any bill on parliamentary elections or constituency boundaries. Neither did the Attorney General of the Nasheed Government until early December, when they clearly knew the Majlis was going into recess, and the budget bills were under way. Did the Legal Reform Minister and the Attorney General act responsibly?
Article 155 of the Constitution says quite clearly that the Parliament has the power to pass law which sets out the jurisdiction of all the courts, to pass law on administrative arrangements and procedural arrangements of the courts. Why didn’t the Legal Reform Minister or the Attorney General, submit those bills to Parliament? Were they acting responsibly?
Why isn’t there a Judicial Void in the country in the absence of laws which spell out jurisdiction of courts, administrative arrangements, procedure of courts and laws which spell out qualifications of judges and guidelines for adjudicating? Are the courts acting within the constitution? Does any of these courts have the jurisdiction to pass judgment on anything? Are they acting responsibly now?
Were the former officials of the Legal Reform Ministry acting responsibly when they took a matter before the Supreme Court when all the while they knew they had a High Court Ruling against them, and the Supreme Court had not overturned the High Court’s ruling? Were the same people acting responsibly when they opened up a can of worms and allowed a confused Supreme Court to assume powers out of their jurisdiction? Were they acting responsibly when they took the matter to courts when they knew full well that Parliament never had the chance to make these laws because the same people never submitted the bills for Parliament’s consideration?
Such is Responsibility and how different people interpret it.
Effectively, what the Court is saying is that if the Executive asks for an opinion from the Court regarding Parliament’s actions and decisions, it then falls into the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to sit in judgment over Parliament, disregarding the clauses defining Immunity and Privilege of Parliament.
I could make a lengthy case for the Supremacy of Parliament. But that is not the topic of this Post. The topic is Responsibility.
The Parliament is being accused of not discharging its duties and acting “irresponsibly”, and the Supreme Court is going to pass judgment on Parliament any minute now. I do not wish to comment on this issue either.
I just want to pose a few questions regarding responsibility and irresponsibility.
Article 149 (d) of the Constitution says that Parliament should pass a law on judges (or more commonly known as a Judicature Act) which would guide how judges should discharge their duties. While the Constitution was in its final stages of being written, I wanted to submit such an act to Parliament to get it ready for implementation. I was told that the then Attorney General had employed a consultant from the Commonwealth to write such a bill, and the government would submit it to Parliament as a matter of priority. After the Constitution was passed, I begged the Legal Reform people that the first bill should be that because I was afraid that with the high degree of independence being given to judges and the courts, and due to the weakness of the courts, the Judiciary may step out of bounds and start messing things up. I was promised that it would come very quickly, but it never did. To date, there is none. The result? Judges are out of control. They are ruling arbitrarily to send lawyers to jail for non-appearance to court on contempt of court. They have refused to act according to the criminal procedures code “because it was too difficult to do so”. The Supreme Court has ruled to take away powers given to the JSC by law to increase their control on the High Court and Trial Court. The Supreme Court has accepted a case for hearing which was kicked out of the high court without going through an appeals process and reversing the High Court’s Judgment.
They are doing whatever they like in the name of “inherent powers of the Court” while at the same time quoting Constitutional Supremacy. How can you have “inherent powers” which are not defined in the law when the Constitution is Supreme?
Are the courts, specially the Supreme Court acting “responsibly”?
The Legal Reform Ministry of the Qayyoom Government never submitted any bill on parliamentary elections or constituency boundaries. Neither did the Attorney General of the Nasheed Government until early December, when they clearly knew the Majlis was going into recess, and the budget bills were under way. Did the Legal Reform Minister and the Attorney General act responsibly?
Article 155 of the Constitution says quite clearly that the Parliament has the power to pass law which sets out the jurisdiction of all the courts, to pass law on administrative arrangements and procedural arrangements of the courts. Why didn’t the Legal Reform Minister or the Attorney General, submit those bills to Parliament? Were they acting responsibly?
Why isn’t there a Judicial Void in the country in the absence of laws which spell out jurisdiction of courts, administrative arrangements, procedure of courts and laws which spell out qualifications of judges and guidelines for adjudicating? Are the courts acting within the constitution? Does any of these courts have the jurisdiction to pass judgment on anything? Are they acting responsibly now?
Were the former officials of the Legal Reform Ministry acting responsibly when they took a matter before the Supreme Court when all the while they knew they had a High Court Ruling against them, and the Supreme Court had not overturned the High Court’s ruling? Were the same people acting responsibly when they opened up a can of worms and allowed a confused Supreme Court to assume powers out of their jurisdiction? Were they acting responsibly when they took the matter to courts when they knew full well that Parliament never had the chance to make these laws because the same people never submitted the bills for Parliament’s consideration?
Such is Responsibility and how different people interpret it.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Procrastination
The Maldives has been heading towards economic disaster for quite some time now. There are many factors, I am told by economists, which have contributed to this economic demise. I am not an economist, and I don’t understand their jargon half the time. So, I will just try to look at this from a common sense angle. I may be wrong, I may be right. I don’t really know. I hope those who know better than I do in this area will shed some light on these issues.
For a number of years, the Government had been spending more money than it earned. The Majlis would be fooled into believing that it was a balanced budget that they were passing, but at the end of the first quarter, the budget would already be in the deficit. “Short term loans” would be taken from the MMA Ways and Means account which invariably became permanent. What this effectively means, I suppose, is that the MMA would just print more and more bank notes to honour government cheques for which there was no substantial backing in kind. Inflation creeping in was the result, because the Rufiyaa could not hold its own against the dollar. Artificial control of Rufiyaa value meant a kind of a soap bubble was created for a time.
I could be way off the mark here. If so, somebody please point out and put us on the right track.
In the meantime, consumer confidence was at an all time high, and people just kept on spending and spending like there was no tomorrow. Credit cards were made more accessible to white collar workers, creating credit for consumption. But there was no real credit available for production. At the end of the day, if the fuels for consumption cannot be maintained, the bubble has to burst.
Government spending was hugely in the recurrent area and there was an ever burgeoning civil service. I remember, in 1994, when I was a civil servant, I was working on a World Bank Project, and the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund warned the Government to seriously cut back civil service employment. However, in the past 14 years since then, the civil service has grown out of all proportion. For the previous Government, employing more and more people in the civil service was a means of controlling them and their families, especially in the atolls, when it was time for elections. In the absence of formalized political parties, “government employees” constituted the ruling party.
It is claimed that there are close to 40,000 government and state employees. This, in a nation of 300,000 people. That means close to 40% of the working population are in government employment, which is mainly a consumption area. To offset this, foreign workers have to be brought for the production side, losing real foreign currency in the process. A labourer employed for a monthly salary of USD 150 sends home, on average USD 1,000 per month.
These are just some aspects. There are many more, I am sure. Whatever it is, I hope that the Nasheed Administration does not make the same mistakes that Qayyoom’s Administration made. Somewhere along the line, we will have to bite the bullet. Procrastinating facing the inevitable and hoping for a miracle will not help. The earlier we devalue the Rufiyaa the sooner it will start to recover. Drastic reduction in spending is necessary to try and generate some savings to address the national debt which has spiralled out of control. A time for austerity is here, and we had all better embrace it.
Government borrowings from abroad could be used to offset the deficit. But then again, the Government would have to borrow again from the MMA for day to day spending. The net result is more or less the same, with a little bit more external debt than before. The only option left would be to pump more notes into circulation, which in turn will bring up inflation, creating a greater momentum towards devaluation. Otherwise, the MMA would have no option but to dishonour Government cheques presented to them.
The financial crisis in the world has also at its roots lending and consuming beyond means. Banks have taken huge risks in lending without proper collateral. Age old, and tested standards of basic accounting has been ignored, putting financial markets at great risks.
The bottom line is what household wives have known for ages. You just can’t spend what you don’t have. One fine day, it will catch up with you, and you will have to pay. “Kanmathee Store” is a creation of living beyond the means, at a national level.
To my untrained and ignorant “economics mind”, I see certain steps that will have to be taken sooner or later. They are:
- We have to devise a way of retaining foreign currency that we earn
- We have to reduce consumption, particularly wasteful and luxury items
- More people have to be engaged in production than consumption related activities, i. e, the civil service has to be reduced, and the work force diverted to more productive areas
- Government sector has to be much, much, more efficient by reducing wasteful spending
- Stimulus has to be provided for not only big business, but also to small and medium businesses. SMEs are the hardest hit in these times, but they also generate more employment on the whole, and generally keep the whole economy running
- Allow the creativity of the private sector to take off, and stop thinking in “populist” terms
These are just some thoughts of an average person. Do forgive me for my ignorance in these matters. It is for the Government to devise policies and strategies to make these things work. I hope that a more down to earth approach will be adopted by the new government to address these issues.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Being a Muslim
Islam, like most other religions, or all other religions is a set of beliefs that one has about one’s existence, the existence of the universe, of God or a Supreme Being, of the Hereafter, which in turn impacts on how one conducts one’s life. Belief is a deeply personal thing, and religious belief is a commitment one makes to oneself, out of one’s own volition. No matter what is said and done, ultimately, religion for each person has a profoundly different meaning as it relates to the psyche of each individual which is shaped by one’s own circumstances, past and present. For some, religion is vastly exhilarating and enabling, while for some others it becomes limiting and crippling.
I would like to share some of my thoughts on religion as it relates to me. This Post, by the nature of its very contents, is extremely personal, and it may run against the grain of others. I feel compelled to write this as I am increasingly disturbed about the trend that religious discourse is taking in our society. All I ask of readers is to be tolerant of views expressed here.
First and foremost, I claim no expertise in Islamic Jurisprudence or Shariah. I have never studied the subjects at University and have no formal training in the area. However, I am a deeply religious Muslim, and I have made attempts at reading and understanding the Quran, Hadhith and academic writings of scholars on various subjects relating to Islam. I have also engaged in countless discussions and debates with scholars over the past 15 years or so. All this in a quest to quench my thirst for knowledge in the subject and to become a “better Muslim”.
Amongst the many and varied opinions and views expressed about the teachings of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence are the four main sects or mazhabs, and the views of those scholars who do not particularly subscribe to any mazhab, but claim to get inspiration directly from Quran and Sunnah. From the knowledge that I have gathered from the teachings of all of these, I have come to one conclusion : that there is a wide spectrum of beliefs among scholars ranging from ultra-conservative, literal interpretations to highly progressive and liberal interpretations of Islamic doctrine. I tend to lean towards the progressive end of the spectrum, which stems from my belief that Allah meant us to live our life to the full and that times change and divergent and progressive thinking should not be constricted in the name of religion. This is not say that I deny un-crossable boundaries in Islam. Nevertheless, I believe that Islam is an enabling religion, and there is plenty of space within the boundaries, and that the societies of Arabia some 15 centuries ago should not define and limit the possibilities of the 21st Century.
What disturbs me most is the increasing push among some scholars to impose a narrow interpretation of religion to usurp the liberties of people, particularly those of women. I keep pondering on the teachings of Quran and the Prophet (saw) as I know it, which I am certain promotes those liberties, and establishes the equality of sexes beyond doubt. That some schools of thought should seek to become the dominant worldview, and thus promote intolerance disturbs me. It appears to me, that there is a strong push for thought control, and hence behaviour control, in the name of religion, on the part of some scholars. That such scholars are rejecting scientific thought out of hand, and believe that knowledge of the Shariah alone gives one the right to dictate over all other knowledge is alarming.
One is reminded of how, in the Middle Ages, Priests in Christianity gradually gained control over the masses through claims of being intermediaries of God. The epistemological significance is enormous : the only source of knowledge is through the Sharia. Is an Islamic Inquisition in the making?
As a Muslim, I believe that ultimately, I am accountable to Allah, and Allah alone, for my actions. If other Muslim brothers and sisters believe I am straying, they may, and they should, remind me. But ultimately, it is for me to listen, evaluate and act. Religion, by its nature, is one dimension of human sociology, and by extension human psychology. Just as we, students of sociology, philosophy and psychology should attempt to understand Religious Scholars, it might do well for Religious scholars to make an attempt at familiarizing themselves with Sociology, Psychology and Philosophy. Thereby we may create a common ground for mutual exchange of ideas.
If I, as a Muslim ignorant of Arabic, have to let go of my faculties and submit myself to interpretations made by people with knowledge of Arabic, can I, or will I be held accountable for my actions on Judgement Day, or will I be absolved and they be held accountable should I err by following them?
To be a Muslim, for me, is to completely submit myself to Allah, and Allah alone. Therefore as a believing Muslim, it is my duty to think about what is right and what is wrong, and decide for myself.
If I have offended anyone by these thoughts, I apologise profusely. It was not meant to do so. Just expressing a point of view.
May Allah bless us all, and guide us in our quest for his Rah’mah.
I would like to share some of my thoughts on religion as it relates to me. This Post, by the nature of its very contents, is extremely personal, and it may run against the grain of others. I feel compelled to write this as I am increasingly disturbed about the trend that religious discourse is taking in our society. All I ask of readers is to be tolerant of views expressed here.
First and foremost, I claim no expertise in Islamic Jurisprudence or Shariah. I have never studied the subjects at University and have no formal training in the area. However, I am a deeply religious Muslim, and I have made attempts at reading and understanding the Quran, Hadhith and academic writings of scholars on various subjects relating to Islam. I have also engaged in countless discussions and debates with scholars over the past 15 years or so. All this in a quest to quench my thirst for knowledge in the subject and to become a “better Muslim”.
Amongst the many and varied opinions and views expressed about the teachings of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence are the four main sects or mazhabs, and the views of those scholars who do not particularly subscribe to any mazhab, but claim to get inspiration directly from Quran and Sunnah. From the knowledge that I have gathered from the teachings of all of these, I have come to one conclusion : that there is a wide spectrum of beliefs among scholars ranging from ultra-conservative, literal interpretations to highly progressive and liberal interpretations of Islamic doctrine. I tend to lean towards the progressive end of the spectrum, which stems from my belief that Allah meant us to live our life to the full and that times change and divergent and progressive thinking should not be constricted in the name of religion. This is not say that I deny un-crossable boundaries in Islam. Nevertheless, I believe that Islam is an enabling religion, and there is plenty of space within the boundaries, and that the societies of Arabia some 15 centuries ago should not define and limit the possibilities of the 21st Century.
What disturbs me most is the increasing push among some scholars to impose a narrow interpretation of religion to usurp the liberties of people, particularly those of women. I keep pondering on the teachings of Quran and the Prophet (saw) as I know it, which I am certain promotes those liberties, and establishes the equality of sexes beyond doubt. That some schools of thought should seek to become the dominant worldview, and thus promote intolerance disturbs me. It appears to me, that there is a strong push for thought control, and hence behaviour control, in the name of religion, on the part of some scholars. That such scholars are rejecting scientific thought out of hand, and believe that knowledge of the Shariah alone gives one the right to dictate over all other knowledge is alarming.
One is reminded of how, in the Middle Ages, Priests in Christianity gradually gained control over the masses through claims of being intermediaries of God. The epistemological significance is enormous : the only source of knowledge is through the Sharia. Is an Islamic Inquisition in the making?
As a Muslim, I believe that ultimately, I am accountable to Allah, and Allah alone, for my actions. If other Muslim brothers and sisters believe I am straying, they may, and they should, remind me. But ultimately, it is for me to listen, evaluate and act. Religion, by its nature, is one dimension of human sociology, and by extension human psychology. Just as we, students of sociology, philosophy and psychology should attempt to understand Religious Scholars, it might do well for Religious scholars to make an attempt at familiarizing themselves with Sociology, Psychology and Philosophy. Thereby we may create a common ground for mutual exchange of ideas.
If I, as a Muslim ignorant of Arabic, have to let go of my faculties and submit myself to interpretations made by people with knowledge of Arabic, can I, or will I be held accountable for my actions on Judgement Day, or will I be absolved and they be held accountable should I err by following them?
To be a Muslim, for me, is to completely submit myself to Allah, and Allah alone. Therefore as a believing Muslim, it is my duty to think about what is right and what is wrong, and decide for myself.
If I have offended anyone by these thoughts, I apologise profusely. It was not meant to do so. Just expressing a point of view.
May Allah bless us all, and guide us in our quest for his Rah’mah.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Charity begins at home
Ever since Majlis remuneration was set at Rf 62,500, much has been said about it. The main reason for public dissatisfaction about the issue was, I believe, due to a deliberate attempt by the then Information Minister to try and discredit parliament in the public by immediately giving the decision huge media coverage. Television Maldives simply stated the amount, and asked members of the public their opinion on it. Of course there was dissatisfaction, because the public were not told that all Cabinet Ministers and about 100 other political appointees were being paid the same, some of them more. The public were not told why this decision was made.
Ever so often, whenever anyone wants to bash an MP or the Majlis, they talk about this. With time, the benefits also keeps growing exponentially in the public mind. I have largely remained silent about the issue. But I believe the time has come now for me to disclose details of Majlis remuneration and benefits and why I voted for it at the time.
Firstly Majlis remuneration and benefits. It is as follows:
Each Member of the Majlis is entitled to :
Rf 42,500/- as salary
Rf 20,000 as allowance
*Medical insurance for the MP, spouse and children
A Diplomatic passport
Use of VIP lounges at airports (both national and international, domestic and overseas)
Immunity from arrest on their way to and back from Parliament
Assistance (non-monetary) from government offices across the country, should they visit the offices or any island.
*Medical insurance has still not been issued.
These are (excepting salary and allowance) standard benefits to MPs in most democratic countries. Honour is accorded to them because they are charged with making decisions on behalf of the entire nation, and more importantly, the people honoured them by electing them to be their representatives.
The salary is equivalent to that of Cabinet Ministers. Cabinet Ministers at that time had many other perks of office, and unlimited medical expenses from the government accounts.
In return for these benefits and honour, MPs are expected to work without specified hours in the Majlis. The sittings (jalsa) of the Majlis is only one aspect of an MPs work. Most MPs work in 2 or three committees (sometimes more). On average, an MP often spends time at the Majlis from 9 in the morning through to 10 in the evening, with breaks in between, depending on timings of committees, working through most weekends as well. In addition, most conscientious MPs are available to their constituents either by phone, in their offices, or often at their homes in person, round the clock. I can safely say that MPs, generally speaking, would be the people with the least bit of privacy or own time.
Until the revision of MPs’ benefits in August this year, an MP’s salary was Rf7000, housing allowance of Rf 5000, a telephone allowance of Rf1500, an office allowance of Rf 3000, a staff allowance of Rf 1500 and committee allowance of Rf 300 per sitting, and a maximum of Rf 12000 per annum on transportation costs for travel to constituencies. Travel costs were paid directly by Majlis to service provider (or reimbursement on presentation of bills) and not to MPs.
Ever since I was elected to the Special Majlis in 2004, I have maintained a rented office and a paid secretary to attend to my constituents and to assist me in Parliamentary work (Office rent Rf 5000, phone and electricity about Rf 3000, staff salary Rf 4,000). As per government rules at the time, I was not entitled to housing allowance (because I am from Male’) or transportation allowances (because I was Male’ MP).
Work wise, in addition to Majlis jalsa and the 4 committees I was serving on, I also spend considerable time daily, to meet constituents, listen to their troubles, take follow up action with relevant government offices to solve their problems. Normally, I don’t get home before 10 or 11 pm. Often, I eat dinner with a constituent when I get home, because he or she would have been waiting in my house for me to return because of an urgent problem that just can’t wait until the next morning. And then I will usually spend another 2 or 3 hours going through bills for the next day, or preparing for committee work for the next day. If I am lucky, I will get to bed by about 1 am, and if I am extremely lucky I will not be woken up by someone calling me on my phone at 2 or 3 am. If I really put an effort and pull myself out of bed by 6 am, I might get a glimpse of my kids before they go off to school. The weekend Friday I have the luxury of sleeping-in until Prayer time, and after lunch I have the relaxing work of going through research and preparing the next question for some Minister or drafting a new bill or a motion or a resolution which will hopefully ease the suffering of some citizens, if passed by the Majlis.
And the long recesses! Another myth. Even though Majlis jalsa breaks in May, September, January and February, committees still go on. Most MPs travel to their constituencies. Others engage in research and bill preparation etc.
In fact, the past four years was almost without a break. With Majlis members having to work in both Majlis and Special Majlis, the demand on time was immense. As Chair of the Drafting Committee, I often worked late into the night with my team of draftsmen and the consultant, getting ready for the next day’s committee meeting.
The privileged and luxurious life of any conscientious MP is such.
But why did I vote for increase in pay for MP’s? There is a story behind this. Up until then, MPs were lowly paid people who couldn’t make ends meet. Every so often they would have to either go to the Government or some rich businessman for assistance in basic survival. MPs depended on their government jobs to simply make ends meet. They were forever fearful of either losing their jobs, or displeasing the friendly businessman or the government in case they may reject his appeal for assistance for that lifesaving surgery for his son. The result was seen in Parliament voting patterns. The difference was seen after the change in remuneration.
A more compelling reason for me was to try and make the next Majlis more independent. We had to devise a way of attracting educated, young professionals to the Majlis. People who would understand the democratic process. We had to devise a way for them to be in Majlis with confidence and not kow-tow to The Powers. Of course, nothing is fool proof in this game. But at least, people can look forward to a dignified life as an MP now. Again the result is being seen with the number of people, particularly independent candidates, who are coming forward to contest elections this time.
Therefore, it saddens me when people harp on about Majlis remuneration everytime they want to have a go at an MP. They compare MP remuneration to civil servants. But this is not comparable. Civil servants are tenured, MPs are not. Their responsibility is limited to a specific task or tasks. MPs responsibilities are different, and varied. Civil servants have no fear of political reprisal. MPs live through it everyday. Civil servants are protected by the Civil Service Act and the Labour Law. MPs are not. Civil Servants can go home at knock-off time and work by the clock. MPs can’t. Civil servants report to one boss. MPs are accountable to the entire public. MPs don’t have an enviable life, I can tell you. If critics really want to better the country, it might do well for them to focus on performances of MPs rather talk about their remuneration.
I decided to write this post because there still are people who are either misguided or very venomous and vengeful, and the venom spreads. When attacks are made, it is also often at those of us who at least keep communication channels open. Those MPs who are actually betraying the people don’t get to hear those comments, neither could they be bothered. Why? Because they know, come election time, they will still get away with it, because they have the money, or some big party will back them, and they will get re-elected. The result? It is only the sincere people who will get fed up with the vengeful public and leave them to their woes and pursue things which give them more happiness and less ridicule. I believe, in the end, it is only the public who will lose, and not those people.
I did not write this to talk about my busy life. I thought that just as people know about our remuneration, they should also be shown the other side of the coin.
So, readers of my blog. Should I run for Parliament again, or not? Please tick the “Mainly Agree” box for Yes, or “Mainly Disagree” box for No.
All I know is that there is nothing more that my wife and children would want than for me to quit politics and start taking care of them again. After all, charity begins at home.
Happy New Year to all.
Ever so often, whenever anyone wants to bash an MP or the Majlis, they talk about this. With time, the benefits also keeps growing exponentially in the public mind. I have largely remained silent about the issue. But I believe the time has come now for me to disclose details of Majlis remuneration and benefits and why I voted for it at the time.
Firstly Majlis remuneration and benefits. It is as follows:
Each Member of the Majlis is entitled to :
Rf 42,500/- as salary
Rf 20,000 as allowance
*Medical insurance for the MP, spouse and children
A Diplomatic passport
Use of VIP lounges at airports (both national and international, domestic and overseas)
Immunity from arrest on their way to and back from Parliament
Assistance (non-monetary) from government offices across the country, should they visit the offices or any island.
*Medical insurance has still not been issued.
These are (excepting salary and allowance) standard benefits to MPs in most democratic countries. Honour is accorded to them because they are charged with making decisions on behalf of the entire nation, and more importantly, the people honoured them by electing them to be their representatives.
The salary is equivalent to that of Cabinet Ministers. Cabinet Ministers at that time had many other perks of office, and unlimited medical expenses from the government accounts.
In return for these benefits and honour, MPs are expected to work without specified hours in the Majlis. The sittings (jalsa) of the Majlis is only one aspect of an MPs work. Most MPs work in 2 or three committees (sometimes more). On average, an MP often spends time at the Majlis from 9 in the morning through to 10 in the evening, with breaks in between, depending on timings of committees, working through most weekends as well. In addition, most conscientious MPs are available to their constituents either by phone, in their offices, or often at their homes in person, round the clock. I can safely say that MPs, generally speaking, would be the people with the least bit of privacy or own time.
Until the revision of MPs’ benefits in August this year, an MP’s salary was Rf7000, housing allowance of Rf 5000, a telephone allowance of Rf1500, an office allowance of Rf 3000, a staff allowance of Rf 1500 and committee allowance of Rf 300 per sitting, and a maximum of Rf 12000 per annum on transportation costs for travel to constituencies. Travel costs were paid directly by Majlis to service provider (or reimbursement on presentation of bills) and not to MPs.
Ever since I was elected to the Special Majlis in 2004, I have maintained a rented office and a paid secretary to attend to my constituents and to assist me in Parliamentary work (Office rent Rf 5000, phone and electricity about Rf 3000, staff salary Rf 4,000). As per government rules at the time, I was not entitled to housing allowance (because I am from Male’) or transportation allowances (because I was Male’ MP).
Work wise, in addition to Majlis jalsa and the 4 committees I was serving on, I also spend considerable time daily, to meet constituents, listen to their troubles, take follow up action with relevant government offices to solve their problems. Normally, I don’t get home before 10 or 11 pm. Often, I eat dinner with a constituent when I get home, because he or she would have been waiting in my house for me to return because of an urgent problem that just can’t wait until the next morning. And then I will usually spend another 2 or 3 hours going through bills for the next day, or preparing for committee work for the next day. If I am lucky, I will get to bed by about 1 am, and if I am extremely lucky I will not be woken up by someone calling me on my phone at 2 or 3 am. If I really put an effort and pull myself out of bed by 6 am, I might get a glimpse of my kids before they go off to school. The weekend Friday I have the luxury of sleeping-in until Prayer time, and after lunch I have the relaxing work of going through research and preparing the next question for some Minister or drafting a new bill or a motion or a resolution which will hopefully ease the suffering of some citizens, if passed by the Majlis.
And the long recesses! Another myth. Even though Majlis jalsa breaks in May, September, January and February, committees still go on. Most MPs travel to their constituencies. Others engage in research and bill preparation etc.
In fact, the past four years was almost without a break. With Majlis members having to work in both Majlis and Special Majlis, the demand on time was immense. As Chair of the Drafting Committee, I often worked late into the night with my team of draftsmen and the consultant, getting ready for the next day’s committee meeting.
The privileged and luxurious life of any conscientious MP is such.
But why did I vote for increase in pay for MP’s? There is a story behind this. Up until then, MPs were lowly paid people who couldn’t make ends meet. Every so often they would have to either go to the Government or some rich businessman for assistance in basic survival. MPs depended on their government jobs to simply make ends meet. They were forever fearful of either losing their jobs, or displeasing the friendly businessman or the government in case they may reject his appeal for assistance for that lifesaving surgery for his son. The result was seen in Parliament voting patterns. The difference was seen after the change in remuneration.
A more compelling reason for me was to try and make the next Majlis more independent. We had to devise a way of attracting educated, young professionals to the Majlis. People who would understand the democratic process. We had to devise a way for them to be in Majlis with confidence and not kow-tow to The Powers. Of course, nothing is fool proof in this game. But at least, people can look forward to a dignified life as an MP now. Again the result is being seen with the number of people, particularly independent candidates, who are coming forward to contest elections this time.
Therefore, it saddens me when people harp on about Majlis remuneration everytime they want to have a go at an MP. They compare MP remuneration to civil servants. But this is not comparable. Civil servants are tenured, MPs are not. Their responsibility is limited to a specific task or tasks. MPs responsibilities are different, and varied. Civil servants have no fear of political reprisal. MPs live through it everyday. Civil servants are protected by the Civil Service Act and the Labour Law. MPs are not. Civil Servants can go home at knock-off time and work by the clock. MPs can’t. Civil servants report to one boss. MPs are accountable to the entire public. MPs don’t have an enviable life, I can tell you. If critics really want to better the country, it might do well for them to focus on performances of MPs rather talk about their remuneration.
I decided to write this post because there still are people who are either misguided or very venomous and vengeful, and the venom spreads. When attacks are made, it is also often at those of us who at least keep communication channels open. Those MPs who are actually betraying the people don’t get to hear those comments, neither could they be bothered. Why? Because they know, come election time, they will still get away with it, because they have the money, or some big party will back them, and they will get re-elected. The result? It is only the sincere people who will get fed up with the vengeful public and leave them to their woes and pursue things which give them more happiness and less ridicule. I believe, in the end, it is only the public who will lose, and not those people.
I did not write this to talk about my busy life. I thought that just as people know about our remuneration, they should also be shown the other side of the coin.
So, readers of my blog. Should I run for Parliament again, or not? Please tick the “Mainly Agree” box for Yes, or “Mainly Disagree” box for No.
All I know is that there is nothing more that my wife and children would want than for me to quit politics and start taking care of them again. After all, charity begins at home.
Happy New Year to all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)