Hilath Rasheed, so-called famous blogger is under police custody due to his illegitimate actions of breaching the social harmony of our society. He argued for freedom of religion [?]. I have no idea about it. But I think he will choose gay rights rather than freedom of religion. If I’m not mistaken he’s a sufi-muslim who know nothing about the sect. Here’s my view about the calling for a constitutional amendment and denouncing democracy.
Amend the Constitution
Advocating for any amendments to the constitution, to any law, or policy can be determined as legitimate. One might choose a wall-journal, street paper, TV program, blog, protest to deliver the message. All the instruments of law which requires for the public obedience shall be subjected to public accountability. Parliament members propose their views within their statutory responsibilities. But, the real power, power initiator, has to be more powerful than any MP because of their vulnerability and strange personal recognition.
The press is biased. They no longer advocate our right. They are under full control of the State, and private parties. Government blatantly broadcasting yellow believes values and their holy book; manifesto. Private parties are defending and attacking the Yellow Religion. The fight between them have made us left unattended: meaning, they never bring anything meaningful for the society.
We are guaranteed the rights of our life, property and family. And also, we are deprived of our choice of creed. Why? Are we the barbar-iest society who doesn’t have any sense of humanity? No, Our Constitution has imposed a limit over it. It says the state religion is Islam; therefore, no one can challenge it.
Therefore, we shall believe that any arguments advanced as a call for revision of the constitution cannot be illegitimate, regardless of any limitation in the constitution.
UDHR and Democracy
Miadhu News has accused of Hilath being writing blasphemous articles and publicly calling for the legitimacy of gay marriage in Maldives. Law and morality has strong complexity. The UDHR has guaranteed the rights and freedoms. And now, having a cultural and legal reservation over some articles of UDHR has a meaning. The majority of the people will decide the future and standing of a country. UDHR and other conventions have nothing to play with it. It’s the concept of democracy. Anyone who advocated for the freedom of religion in Maldives is denouncing democracy in Maldives.