One of the most striking features of the recently ratified constitution of Maldives that could pose perhaps one of the most challenging and daunting scenarios in the years ahead, seems to be the conflicting Article on citizenship (Article 9 of Chapter 1-“Maahdhaa” 9 of “Baabu” 1).
It has been widely rumoured that the constitution does not allow the citizenship of Maldives to any body who is not a Muslim. However, due to the existing wordings of Article 9, it is not certain whether a person who is already recognised a Maldivian citizen but has already revoked the Islamic faith could be stripped off the citizenship. Thus, this matter has to be referred to the Constitutional Court (in case of Maldives, it is the future Supreme Court) for clarification in the due process of a court case. However, this Article would definitely prevent non-Muslim children born to a (Muslim or non-Muslim) parent who already holds the citizenship of Maldives under the old constitution from becoming a Maldivian citizen.
This Article (specially clause d -or "raa" of Article 9) perhaps represents the views of at least 90% of the population of the country (perhaps, more).
Thus due to the sensitivity of the issue at hand, almost all the political figures of the country are keeping tight lipped on this issue, afraid of playing with the sentiments of the people thereby potentially losing out in the political battle field.
I wish to explore, albeit slightly, into this issue as it is one of the most critical issues that the country may face in the coming years (due to various reasons).
I believe that aforementioned Article on citizenship may not be a wise decision that the politicians took during the Constitutional amendments process.
First of all if the rationale behind this Article is to protect the Islamic faith of the Maldivian people, I believe that it may prove to do more harm than good in this cause! It may bring more negative effect, which dwarfs that due to the impracticality of implementing this Article or that due to the potential international pressure.
Let’s be frank and think about this (why deny the reality?)…the Maldivian people are relatively uneducated in terms of what Islam is all about and what it teaches and how to follow it properly. A sizeable section of the people are indulging in various un-Islamic acts and practices whilst being ignorant of this, whilst another section of the people are drifting towards the other extreme end, and another significant section of the people, specially from the youth are having doubts about the faith and thus not convinced of it (but afraid to ask questions about it) and a smaller sub-section of this last section have even completely left the religion (for another faith or no faith).
It is this small sub-section of the population that can become bigger and bigger when politicians take such unwise and irresponsible decisions in the parliament. Why? It is because such a clause, which is not really necessary to the religion of Islam can obscure the people from the truth of Islam, thereby enlarging the ever increasing ‘gap’ between the latter section of the population (which is mostly from the youth) and the scholars and the other (older) section of the population, and eventually losing them out of Islam.
There are many such unnecessary ‘features’ in our society, in various aspects of our lives, which is obscuring the truth of the message of Islam from these young minds, minds that do not necessarily operate in the same ‘wavelength’ as that of the scholars and the older generations. We got to work extra hard to create the intellectual space that our youth desperately needs. We have to focus on intellectually reaching out to all these sections of our population and work towards guiding them towards the right path. Because unless we do this, we are losing out, in one way or another, on a number of our fellow Maldivians to drift out of the fold of Islam…an outcome none of us want!
This requirement of extra work is even more important given the extremely irresponsible role played by the government and various political figures in derailing the efforts being put in by an increasing number of educated individuals and groups in educating the public about Islam!
Thus instead of creating such ‘barriers’ why not focus on educating ourselves and the youth in following what Islam really teaches?...How can we possibly protect our Islamic faith (and save a lot of our youth from going astray) without learning it and following it?
This perhaps cannot be done by putting a few clauses in the constitution (which does not even seem to go along with the Islamic teachings)…!
Friday, 8 August 2008
The Constitution and the citizenship paradox...
Posted by muiz at 23:28
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)



10 comments:
this is the real spillover effects of this whole process.When this thing began it was said that the reform process is taking place to fix the problem of the ruler staying in power for too long.
Muizzu,why dont u make your point as harsh as you would to condemn Maumoonu?
The effect of this whole process on people's thinking about Islam is immense due to the manner in which the fake scholars viewed the whole reform process.Their constant u-turns and contradictory statements have given the impression to the masses that Islam is not a stable basis to build thoughts.Sometimes they would say the reform process is not important,but rights of the people are priority.But some other times they meet al-jazeera and give statements how the government is stalling the process.
And the only thing they found problematic about the constitution was those related to women(a mentally they acquired from Saudi Arabia).Like the permission of woman rulers and judges.
dear muizzu, i really do not know what you are trying to say in your article, except that you seem to insist, without complementing it with reasons as to why, the people should be compelled to choose a certain religion in the first place. And are you sure you have the figures right there? You don't quote your reference with your figures...but the language you have used seemed to suggest it is only an assumption.
So if most people are unaware of 'the true Islamic teachings' you mention, how do we know when it is the genuine thing? It is fine to be objective, but what if there alternate versions of the same thing or event, all claiming to be objective?
I think if we Maldivians are smart, which I believe they are, we will find a way to circumvent any shortcomings in the recently adopted constitution. And for this single 'oversight' which we may term your concern, there are other positive clauses. For instance, the 'right to remain silent' during interrogation. So at least, if it comes to the point that so as to determine our citizenship we are interrogated to see how Muslim we are, then we can always remain to choose silent; something we were not allowed in the previous constitution in so many words as the present one. I think history progresses with increments, it might not all be linear but it does make sense in its own way.
I don't think belief is something that can be taken away, just like someone might take my wallet away. We should not be so paranoid about trusting other cultures and other religions too. Even today, many Muslims live with dignity in many countries where the majority are non-Muslims. We should learn to be tolerant.
@heaven: sorry if i have not made myself clear. Let me explain the points you've raised-I didn't mean that everyone has to be compelled to accept a religion at first place, nor did i imply that the 90% is from statistics (i think i have said it perhaps is that much).
Education is the key to learn what is right and what is wrong (or ingenuine). (my view is based on my observations, not any imaginery situation)
Yes the constitution is very much better in many ways compared to the previous one; infact it is a great milestone that we achieved in the journey of change that we are striving hard through.
Yes we should be tolerant towards others. Again, education is very important to make the people understand this and practice it.
hope ive not missed a point, let me know if i have or if i still not have myself clear.
thanks:)
Thanks for posting this article muizzu. We really need an open discussion on this issue. I hope others will follow suit.
Article 9 of the constitution is very confusing. Article 9-Haa-1 basically states that every one who's a citizen at ratification is a citizen by default. However 9-raa states that a non-muslim cannot be a citizen. So the first this that comes to my mind is why did they not frame 9-Haa-1 as "everyone who's a muslim citizen shall be a citizen by default".
Anyway my beef is not with the wording. Since Maldives do not openly allow non-muslims, several of them are closet non-muslims. This inturn has lead to islam-haters.
Its one thing for a christian or a jew or an athiest to attack the Islamic faith, but more damaging is the result when someone who is born to muslim parents and is acting as a mulim and who most of us believe is a true muslim, propagates filth that is intentionally aimed at destroying the islamic faith. Im afraid this is exactly whats happening in our country. There are too many closet christians or closet athiests who are pretending (perhaps because they have to due to law) to be muslims and are purposefully misleading the people (who love their islamic faith) who depend on these folks for guidance.
I am a muslim who loves my religion, however I'd rather they be allowed to declare their true faith, so good god-fearing people are not mislead by the powerful elites.
The question is not about dealing with those silent christians,atheists..etc.The constitution has to deal with the public laws.So in this context does the constitution allow people of other religions to defame Islam? The state apparatus cannot go into the business of digging into people's heart.But that does not mean any individual is allowed to publicly attack Islam
Even during the prophet's period there were hypcorites and he(saw) knew about them,but did not take action against them.But he was severe about anyone attacking Islam or trying to pollute it.
During this so called reform period a new thinking pattern has evolved due to the combined efforts of political parties and the fake sheikhs.These people consistently floated the idea that everything is happening because of maumoonu which resulted people doing all kinds of crimes and still turning the public attention to maumoon and 29 years.Therefore in line with this,there might be individuals who will publicly attack Islam and yet does not receive any condemnation from public.
Saying in the constitution that non Muslims cannot get Maldives citizenship...does it preserve Islamic faith in Maldives? As muizzu said it might create more negative effects...Whether the constitution says that or not, there will be people who fall from the right path....But ofcourse measure can be taken to preserve Islamic faith...many measures...
I would like to point out that the silent non Muslims too need their rights as humans..They should come out to get their rights, rather than stay in hiding..If they are sure they are on the right path, if they are following the right faith, what have they to fear, what have they to lose? The problem is either they are too timid or cowards..
I think the politicians passed the amendment as such because they believed or feared that the reform process will ultimately secularize the government system in the Maldives in the absence of such a clause. I think this was the same sentiment shared by the majority at that time and politicians did that to please them. However, they were careful not to strip off the citizenship from someone who already holds it. To me this best explains the contradictory nature of the article.
@rick: I do not think such a clause can stop secularization of the government system. As for secularization, there are ample clauses in the constitution that deals with ensuring the executive, legislature and the judiciary operates within the realms of Islam and are based on the principles of Islam.
However, these clauses can be/and probably are, subject to inernational scrutiny and pressure. But I do not think these clauses pauses a challenge bigger than that from the article on citizenship.
It is, perhaps, anybody's guess what the outcome of these changes to the consitution will be...
Maldivians have been more affected by the political sloganeering than a law or a constitution.Today a law enacted does not have much effect on people.But rallying behind political figures have paramount effect.An example of these effects is that people find it difficult to condemn political parties even if that party ridicules Islam.Why? because that party is against Maumoonu.As if 'Anti-Maumoonu' has become the aqeeda which determines our way of thinking,determines what we shud do or what we shouldnt do
Post a Comment