Maldives: UN Human Rights Commisioner’s criticism of flogging under Sharia results in Facebook group to see her “slain and driven out of the country”
More fallout and general conspiracy paranoia in connection with this story. “Islamic Minister, MPs, PPM and religious groups condemn UN Human Rights Commissioner,” by Ahmad Naish for Minivan News, November 27 (thanks to Ron):
Statements by visiting UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay calling for a moratorium on flogging as a punishment for fornication and criticising the Muslim-only clause for citizenship in the Maldivian constitution have been widely condemned by religious NGOs, public officials and political parties.
In an address delivered in parliament last Thursday, Pillay said the practice of flogging women found guilty of extra-marital sex “constitutes one of the most inhumane and degrading forms of violence against women, and should have no place in the legal framework of a democratic country.”
The UN human rights chief called for a public debate “on this issue of major concern.” In a press conference later in the day, Pillay called on the judiciary and the executive to issue a moratorium on flogging.
On article 9(d) of the constitution, which states “a non-Muslim may not become a citizen of the Maldives,” Pillay said the provision was “discriminatory and does not comply with international standards.”
Local media widely misreported Pillay as stating during Thursday evening”s press conference that she did not believe the Maldives had a Constitution, which prompted a great deal of public outrage. Her comment, however, was in response to a challenge from Miadhu Editor Gabbe Latheef, who asked “if you believe we have a Constitution, why are you speaking against our Constitution?”
“I don”t believe you have a Constitution, you have a constitution. The constitution conforms in many respects to universally respected human rights. Let me assure you that these human rights conform with Islam,” Pillay said on Minivan News”s recording of the press conference, however her phrasing was widely misinterpreted by the media.
Pleading for hypothetical, coulda-woulda-shoulda, academic-exercise Sharia does not change what Sharia actually is, as this story makes clear.
Shortly after Pillay”s speech in parliament, Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari told local media that “a tenet of Islam cannot be changed” and flogging was a hudud punishment prescribed in the Quran (24:2) and “revealed down to us from seven heavens.”
They said it, they cited the same chapter and verse that we have noted many times. Are they Islamophobes?
Bari noted that article 10 of the constitution established Islam as “the basis of all the laws of the Maldives” and prohibited the enactment of any law “contrary to any tenet of Islam,” adding that the Maldives has acceded to international conventions with reservations on religious matters such as marriage equality.
In his Friday prayer sermon the following day, Bari asserted that “no international institution or foreign nation” had the right to challenge the practice of Islam and adherence to its tenets in the Maldives.
Meanwhile, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party issued a statement on Thursday contending that tenets of Islam and the principles of Shariah were not subject to modification or change through public debate or democratic processes.
Adhaalath Party suggested that senior government officials invited a foreign dignitary to make statements that they supported but were “hesitant to say in public.”
The party called on President Mohamed Nasheed to condemn Pillay”s statements “at least to show to the people that there is no irreligious agenda of President Nasheed and senior government officials behind this.”
The Adhaalath statement also criticised Speaker Abdulla Shahid and MPs in attendance on Thursday for neither informing Pillay that she “could not make such statements” nor making any attempt to stop her or object to the remarks.
The party insisted that Pillay”s statements and the SAARC monuments in Addu City were “not isolated incidents” but part of a “broad scheme” by the government to “pulverize Islam in the Maldives and introduce false religions”.
Later that night, the Civil Society Coalition ““ a network of NGOs that campaigned successfully against regulations to allow sale of alcohol in city hotels to non-Muslims last year ““ announced a nation-wide mass protest on December 23 against the government”s alleged efforts to securalise the country.
Spokesperson Mohamed Didi claimed the current administration was pursuing an agenda to “wipe out the Islamic faith of the Maldivian people” through indoctrination and “plots” to legalize apostasy and allow freedom of religion.
Freedom of religion? Oh, the humanity!
He suggested that “the few people who cannot digest the religion of the people should immediately leave the country.”
The NGO coalition said it expected “over a 100,000 people” to participate in the planned protest.
Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom”s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) announced today that it would join the protest. PPM interim council member and religious scholar MP Dr Afrashim Ali told newspaper Haveeru that Pillay “can”t say that to us” and condemned the statements on behalf of the party.
Afrashim called on the executive, parliament and judiciary to enact a law prohibiting any statements that “opposes the principles of Islam.”
In a statement today, religious NGO Islamic Foundation of Maldives (IFM) strongly condemned Pillay”s remarks and criticised MPs for not objecting at Thursday”s event.
Pillay”s statements in parliament amounted to calling on MPs “to legalize fornication and gay marriage,” IFM contended.
“Therefore, anyone who agrees to this surely becomes an apostate,” the statement reads. “And if this [fornication and homosexuality] is spread anywhere, Almighty God has warned that fire will be rained upon them from the seven heavens.”
Meanwhile, a Facebook group was formed yesterday with members calling for her to be “slain and driven out of the country.” The group currently has 207 members.
One member posted a banner to open a public debate on whether citizens should rise up and either “kill or lynch” those who “deny the Quran, not tolerate Islam and undermine the constitution.”….