In a (failed) attempt by the government to dissuade the four boycotting political societies from gathering signatures for a petition to change the constitution, the government threatened to close those societies using Article 29 of the constitution. The irony is the guy holding this stick is non other than the current Minister of Labour and Social Affairs whose ministry is the regulating body for societies and clubs in Bahrain. The Minister was one of the leaders of the opposition in years gone by. Strange how a position changes a person!
Article 29 of the current constitution says: Any individual can address the public authorities in writing and with his signature. Only duly constituted organizations and corporate bodies shall have the right to address the public authorities collectively.
The objection was that societies were allowed to collect signatures provided that the signatories are members of that particular society. They are not allowed to go out and collect signatures from people not affiliated with these societies.
This was a big issue and it came to a head last week, with the petition organising societies acquiescing to the government’s order but at the same time blind-siding the government completely and making the government play right into their hands. Smart.
The societies immediately threw the membership doors wide open, canceled the stipulated membership fees and brought out a very nice slogan: “sign and sign again” meaning that sign-up as a member to the society of your choice, then immediately sign the petition! They hope to collect 120,000 signatures within 3 to 6 months.
Apart from the societies’ members, they intended to distribute the forms to other independent organisations like Al-Oruba Club and others like it, maybe even have them in supermarkets, and of course, all the religious establishments in the country for people to sign the petitions individually. The government’s response to this has been to intimidate the printing press (either directly or indirectly) who told the societies that they will not print their membership nor petition forms. The response? Photocopies! Great job McDuff, you really put a stop there haven’t you!
Let’s wait for the next government screw-up and the next out-maneuvering of the societies. Quite entertaining.
What’s all this about then? The societies boycotted in the first place because of their objection to the new 2002 constitution which gives equal powers to the elected and appointed assemblies. They want the elected chamber to have more power and by collecting these signatures and presenting it to the King or the King’s Court (if he accepts it that is, he has the right to refuse it) then it’s as solid as a national referendum!
Will all these shenanigans lead somewhere? What’s the point of the government’s objection in the first place? I don’t understand it and hope that someone can explain their point of view. What if the government left them alone to go ahead and collect signatures? Will the sky collapse on us? Let them collect as many signatures as they want as long as it is done peacefully and without any compulsion and if they do, then they’ve demonstrated that one-third of the population demand change and their demands should be respected.
But we haven’t heard anyone from the elected Parliament come out in support or oppose this move. Maybe prompted by this petition they started the ball rolling within the parliament to change the constitution.
Ah, this is possibly it then, the opposition wants to prove that they can influence people and can work outside the parliament while the parliament (and government) insist on working within the framework of the parliament.
And we’re trapped in the middle!
So with these moves, Al-Wefaq grew to double its size in a single day (from 2,400 members to 4,800) and is expected to further increase its membership up to 14,000. They already enjoy immense influence in society, now there’s no stopping them! Thank you Mr. Government for being so blind-sided. What you’ve demonstrated so far is your extreme ineptitude. You need some body like Al-Wefaq to teach you the ropes!
Comments
Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
Mahmoud, Im seriously seriously impressed at your analysis!!
Im happy that you have grasped both sides of the coin and realised the inadequacy and ineptitude of this government and the mentality of those higher up. Its just been a cat and mouse game with this Majeed BIN mohsin labour minister. What a joke.
Last week about 20 students in the UK got together and wrote the following petition, which got translated into english:
[quote]
In the name of Allah the most Gracious, the most Merciful,
WE REJECT ALL ILLEGITIMATE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
In wishing to actively engage in our national issues and in attempting to define our destiny and the destiny of future generations, in acknowledging all the nation’s past sacrifices in times of struggle, in keeping alive the memory of our heroic martyrs, and in carrying out our national and religious responsibilities, we, the Bahraini Students in UK would like to extend our full support of the declarations made at the Constitutional Conference of February 2004. We wholly back the committee established therein to oversee the recommendations made.
As a result of our awareness of the necessity that any changes made to the constitution should be made through the correct legal channels in order to give credibility to any reform process; we commend the popular petition that is due to be launched in April 2004. Such a peaceful and legal initiative only serves as a laudable endeavour to solve the current constitutional crisis that emerged as a result of the illegitimate clandestine amendments made to the constitution by the then  Amir in 14/4/2002. Furthermore, we strongly believe that any constitutional amendments should be made in accordance with the principles stipulated in the 1973 constitution, specifically in Article 104. We also take this opportunity to remind the Amir of his declared promise made in February 2001, during his visit to the residence of Sayed Al-Ghuraifi, that the proposed Charter would only be a means of reactivating the 1973 Constitution rather than replacing it.
As a result of the above, we, the Bahraini Students in the UK would like to champion the demands of our fellow countrymen, summarised in the following points:
1. Reinstitution of the 1973 contractual constitution and abrogation of the 2002 constitution.
2. The abrogation of all institutional and judicial changes based on the 2002 constitution.
3. Any constitutional amendments should be made in accordance to the 1973 constitution (Article 104).
4. Separating the three legislative powers and allowing people’s exercise of their right to sovereignty through participation in decision-making, positions of power and authority as encompassed in the 1973 constitution.
5. Withdrawing the Bahraini citizenship from all who were granted it through channels not in accordance with the relevant articles stipulated in the 1973 constitution.
6. Initiating a true dialogue with the opposition and avoiding any political hurdles to such debate.
We also wish to advise the current regime to uphold the promises and reassurances it made to the Opposition prior to the referendum, because of which the seal of approval was given to the National Charter. We also recommend that the government should initiate a genuine dialogue with the Opposition for the benefit of the nation as a whole.
We encourage all the students inside and outside Bahrain to sign the popular petition in order to make their voices heard to the relevant authority.
We commend the efforts of the organizers of the constitutional conference and the overseeing committee and we reject all beguiling efforts designed to obstruct and delay the popular petition.
We ask God for his protection and mercy.
Students of Bahrain in the United Kingdom
16.4.2004
[/quote]
The ball is rolling now and is firmly in the Opposition’s court. I have no doubt that we will see major changes soon, as the Government is under severe pressure. NO more bull about democracy being ‘gradual’ and that ‘we are not ready’. The Bahraini nation is educated and has been fighting a political struggle with the rulars for over 50 years. It doesnt take a genius to know that democracy is true public participation.
So let us support our fellow countrymen and sign up to the petition!!! End to this fallacy we call a democracy, an end to the lies and deceit and broken promises.
Re: Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
At last I’ve got a hold of the 1973 Constitution and have formatted and put it up here for reference. Now I’m going to go and format and post the 2002 Constitution and try to make some sense of what the differences are, other than the obvious with the powers of the elected and appointed chambers….
Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
“Withdrawing the Bahraini citizenship from all who were granted it
through channels not in accordance with the relevant articles stipulated in the 1973 constitution.”
#5 sounds pretty severe to me. Does it mean that every individual who was granted citizenship not accordance since 1973 would have their Bahraini citizenship revoked? I would think that that is not such a wise move.
– Bassam
Re: Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
The question is, since the dissolution of parliament in 1975 till the reconvening of the new parliament and the new constitution, which rules are legal and which are not?
If a rule is not passed by the parliament and then ratified by the Amir/King, then it’s not legal. This is what the constitutions state, but what happens to all the laws and procedures enacted and worked with since 1975? Is there any legal structure to fall back on to make them legal? Or do they belong to emergency powers in the absense of a legaslative body?
Too many questions which can only be resolved if there is genuine trust between the two powers (legislative and executive) and a judiciary that is completely seperate which both can resort to if there is a difference.
There is a problem with vast numbers of people who have been naturalised. A parliamentary committee declared that there are no extra-legal naturalisations. Within the same committee there were/are decenting voices – the chairman is satisfied, while the vice-chairman is not. There is going to be a debate on this subject during this term of parliament, and as this is a very touchy subject, a lot of people will use the opportunity to incite the public in order to ensure that parliament takes notice, and hope to influence any outcome of the investigation to coencide with their views – even if they are outside the parliamentary circle.
My own view is if a person satisfies the legal requirements to become a Bahraini citizen, then s/he should not be denied it. If the person on other other hand does not, but can contribute greatly to the country or its people in ways of science, technology, investments, creation of jobs then that person deserves the nationality.
If on the other hand the person is an illiterate who has been simply brought to this country to be a simple guard, bolster voting rolls, or be a political pawn, then s/he should never have been given the Bahraini nationality as they are a liability more than benefit.
Still, if my elected parliament investigates and finds no fault, then I’m fine with that.
Re: Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
I have to say something in regard to this letter allegedly written on behalf of the Bahraini students in the UK.
First of all, the views expressed in this letter do not reflect the overall view of the Bahraini students in the UK. It was signed by a minority and it does not represent the overall view of the Bahraini students in the UK. Although i respect the views held by those who signed this letter, it should not have been addressed on behalf of “all” the Bahraini students in the UK.
Points 2 and 5 are too extreme, irrational, and radical. It’s not that easy to erase 2 years from history! Point 3 is partially -if not completely- implemented in the 2002 constitution.
In regards to the petition, I -personally- think that joining a political group just to sign it is absurd. What if I want to “stay” independent from a certain group, does that mean that I would loose my right to participate. I think more thought should have been put on this before asking people to sign and most would do without realizing that they are actually casting a vote of approval to a certain group without knowing. Having said that, most of the people who would consider signing the petition already support that certain group and it wouldn’t make a big difference “statistically”.
The other Bahraini students of the UK
Re(1): Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
ops, i meant to say point 4 is the partially implemented in the 2002 constitution
Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
HI, yes I agree about the importance of naturalising people who will contribute to our culture and society.
Just a point to note, the parliamentary committee set up to look into recent naturalisation is in essence impotent at detecting any misdemeanors since all the cases of naturalisation they have studied (about 400) have had to be compiled/screened by the Ministry of Interior or Ministry of Passports and Immigration in the first place, so no wonder they came out with the conclusion that everything is ok. We are talking about over 50,000 politically naturalised people mostly from Aldowasir tribe who naturalised during the 90s and the begininning of this century. The only people who know the true numbers are the people who printed off the papers!!! Which is hardly a reliable source when investigated the TRUE numbers which they have gone out of their way to hide!!
The Al-Khalifa are sick of being portrayed as the minority ruling the majority, so someone very clever one day woke up with a spark of genius, “lets change the equation round, the only way to do that is to change the demography of this country, at the same time we’ll be doing a great service to humanity, by importing all the poor beggars from the syrian and jordan desarts, with some belushis here and there, oh yes, and lets not forget our very loyal cousins from AlDowasir tribe, and give them Bahraini passports, in the long term, the Baharna will only comprise 50% of the population or less!!” Please not that the only other country that follows such policy is ISRAEL !!
If you dont believe such claims, I suggest you take a short trip to AlDamam, and specifically to AlDowasir district. You will find that a local Bahraini passport office has been set up there to fast-track all applications for Bahraini citizenship, to some people who havent even visited Bahrain !!! Up to 30,000 people there have been given passports there at the lowest estimate.
As for the legal complexities of the issue, yes Mahmood, I too was thinking exactly the same. It gets a little confusing. I will email you a copy of the legal opinion regarding this issue. But logically, all the laws that apply today should be the 1973 constitution, because by definition this is a true CONTRACTUAL relationship between the Amir and his people, which was dissolved in 1975. What happened in 2002 was that the king promised to reinstate it again. This 2002 constitution was cooked up in the back offices of his palace somewhere by a couple of Egyptians, and is NON-CONTRACTUAL by definition as the constitution declared by the Amir on February 14th 2002, was not what we had voted for in the National Charter a year earlier.
Despite some flaws in the 1973 constitution, in principle this is what the Bahraini nation was asking for all these years and who the King in principle agreed to return the rights of his nation after all these years.
Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
Is it any surprise that the most authoritarian member of the government, Majid Al-Alawi, is the former head of the Islamist Bahrain Freedom Movement (the same London based group that no doubt “masterminded” the Students of Bahrain in the UK statement)?
I hope this guy’s the last of these London based BFM types that the government gives a job. If Said Shehabi wants a job/big car/ministerial salary next time round, he can stick it.Tell him once burnt, twice shy.
The amended constitution is far superior to the previous one, for the simple reason that women now have the right to vote – which they couldn’t in 73. I’m not sure whether its funny or sad that there are women out there who’re prepared to sign Al-Wefaq’s petition, thereby voting for their own disenfrachisement. Or perhaps if these women are that stupid they don’t deserve the right to vote?
Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
Its strange to have ‘reform’ in a country where the same traditional structures of power have not been changed, the same corrupt mentalities are still in the same positions, and the same clandestine policies are still in place. Some recent events that happened which will testify to this (MoL: Ministry of Labour):
Conference towards a contractual constitution- February 14th 2004
-Having kept the MoL completely aware of the preparations for the conference upto a month prior to the Conference and had given a list of all local and international participants, MoL decides to write a letter a couple of days before the Conference to say that its commencement is illegal. He didnt state which law should be observed.
– MoL approaching Diplomat Hotel managers ordering them to not allow the use of thier premises
-The banning of over twenty leading international figures from entering Bahrain and returning them to their home country at the point of entry to Bahrain, both airport and causeway. Two distinguished British lawyers were refused admission to Bahrain, and put on the first plane back to the UK. Professor Martin Lau, Chair of the Department of Law at the School of Oriental and African Studies, and Ms Samantha Knights, a barrister in the chambers of Michael Crystal QC, were due to speak at a seminar on the constitution organised by opposition groups.
Others who were also denied admission to Bahrain included Mr Ahmed Sadoon MP, former Chairman of the Kuwait Parliament; Dr Abdulla al-Nibari, Mr Abdul Mohsin Jamal and Mr Sayed Adnan Abdul-Samad, former Members of the Kuwait Parliament; Dr Ali al-Kuwari, political activist from Qatar; Mr Saleh Abdul Karim al-Armooti, ex-Member of the Jordan Parliament, and Mr Mark Pella, Head of the Committee for the Support of Democracy in the Gulf, from Paris.
-A few days prior to F1, information is leaked to the press with orders that it be published, of a leading opposition figure AbdulRaof Alshayib being caught sleeping with an Indonesian maid, clearly an attempt to defame this person, since the names of arrested ppl are not published in the press before conviction is made.
Popular petition 21 April 2003
-MoL threatens to close the societies for 42 days if petition signed by non-members
-MoL goes to the leading cleric in Bahrain and threatens him with bloodshed and return to the era of State Security Law and that leading figures will be jailed.
-MoL threatens to take to court any printing companies who print documents for the societies.
-MoL releases a statement to the press staying that society membership is only activated after 6 months of registration thus rendering the petition invalid.
-MoL states that the Petition should be given to the Parliament to consider and not directly to the King.
-The closure of upto five Bahraini web forums by Batelco with orders from the Ministry of Information prior to the launch of the parliamentary elections and popular petition.
I attach a recent letter of a person with similar opinions:
[quote]
From Lord Avebury P0410044
Tel 020-7274 4617
Fax 020-7738 7864
Email ericavebury@hotmail.com
April 10, 2004
In the Bahrain Brief February-March edition you are quoted as saying, during a visit to Bahrain in February:
“We are delighted to see that progress is being made in the areas of democracy and human rights�.
Following the published intention of the four ‘civic societies’ or proto-parties – National Democratic Action, Islamic Action, Al-Wefaq National Islamic, and National Democratic Coalition – to launch a popular petition calling for legal and political reforms, the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, Mr Majid al-Alawi, wrote to each of them on April 6 threatening them with suspension or dissolution if they collected signatures for demands addressed to the authorities or the King for amendments to the constitution.
The Minister’s action, taken no doubt at the behest of the ruling family which is about as democratic as James I, is contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The four societies, and other non-governmental bodies, have enjoyed very limited freedom of expression, but there are certain topics which are taboo. No criticism of the ruling family is allowed; no discussion of the endemic corruption; no talk of discrimination in certain fields of employment, and no debate on the wholesale grant of Bahraini citizenship to foreign Sunnis.
There are other serious restrictions on the democratic rights of the people of Bahrain, notably of course as the US State Department observes in the 2003 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, that “citizens do not have the right to change their Government or their political system� It goes further than that; they aren’t even allowed to speak about such changes. I appreciate that your Government, like its Tory predecessor, has undeclared reasons for pulling its punches on human rights abuses in Bahrain, but surely this attempt to stop discussion of political reform is inconsistent with the progress you claimed to see in February?
The Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean,
Foreign & Commonwealth Office,
London SW1A 2AH
[/quote]
Re: Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
I’m at a loss here too. Why ban the conference and the people who have been invited to come to it? Okay, the government does not want any foreigners to be involved in what is essentially an internal affair. Fine. But if we have no constitutional experts here, how are we going to discuss and formulate a constitution then? Shouldn’t we depend on these experts and get some ideas from them?
Unless the fear-factor comes into the equation. They say an honest man doesn’t fear anything, so unless the government knew that the 2002 constitution will be exposed as short, then it really shouldn’t have made all the hub-hub about it.
But looking at it from the government’s point of view as well to be fair, the conference was and is a direct challenge to the government. It was organised and attended by the boycotting societies. So the government did a bunk and showed its muscle in order to protect itself.
Shouldn’t the parliament then ask for this conference in the first place? Or are our illustreous MPs too busy demanding to be called “excellency” and over-spend their fattened travel budgets? Do they have anything more important than settling this major issue once and for all?
Fine they’re busy with questioning ministers and postulating, at least put this issue on the agenda so people at least get some hope that their demands will be looked into in a timely fashion.
What MPs have done so far is be completely reactive, rather than pro-active. They have demonstrated that they will only move in spite of the boycotters, rather than lead the way and actively take the boycotters’ thunder away!
I firmly believe in freedoms and of freedom of information in particluar and people expressing their views without fear of persecution. I regard these shenanigans by the Ministry of Labour completely unworthy of a new democratic society.
Re: Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
Well it looks like this site might soon make the Batelco Black-List too! Might as well brush up on my proxying skills!
Constitutional changes
I’ve just read a 55-page document dealing with the differences between the 1973 and 2002 Constitutions. There are points I do not agree with in the 1973 constitution which you touched upon (disenfranchising women) but a lot more in the 2002 constitution which require a whole article or a series of articles to deal with them.
If I do get permission to post that report/study, I am sure it will contribute to the better understanding of the objection points. I hope I get that permission soon.
I have also been looking for the Constitution of 2002 in text format and couldn’t get one. What’s available is only a pdf file which cannot be copied and pasted. Very frustrating.. I don’t much fancy typing it out in full in order to post it here!
Re: Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
While I agree with you that most of the elected MPs should not have been elected in the first place, the question remains that parliament should have all the power it can, with the normal diplomatic checks and balances. As the constitution clearly states (both 1973 and 2002) that power eminates from the People, as the People’s representatives they should have power to over-see the running of the country.
This is clearly not the case with the current constitution, but as the constitution is not sacred text, there is hope that it will evolve for the better in the future.
If you have time, please read the Legal Opinion regarding the Constitution in Bahrain which I have posted today. It is worthwhile and discusses legal aspects of the changes in the 2002 constitution which I personally did not previously classify as grievous.
Smart move Sherlock, now what’re you gonna do?
Please anyone, tell me, what have the elected MP’s done or suggested that warrants giving them more power?
I, personally, have not seen anything constructive from them. When they are not preoccupied with sitting in the front row, censoring television shows and how to spend their undeserved pay they seem to be looking to the past rather than to the future.
Rather than passing legislation that will set checks that will not allow for such mismanagment as we saw in the GOSI case, they are wasting countless hours questioning ministers that regardless will be out of the door soon.
Before any of you advocates of democracy give them more power, please consider another route. Rather than giving them more power and then waiting for them to pass the legislation you want, why don’t you suggest and advocate the legislation you want. For after all, the general public is more aware of the people’s needs and the solutions needed. These MP’s are no longer members of the general public but are now politicans. Politicians that forgot the problems of poverty and unemployment with the BD2000 salary. Politicians that forgot the problem of transportation with the BD500 monthly transportation allowance.
Therefore, all you advocates of democracy, rather than giving more power to these MP’s, consider taking power into your own hands. When you see a solution for a problem that can be translated into legislation, compile a petition promoting that law, gather signatures and present it to the MP’s.
That way, not only will we get the laws we want and need, but we will force these MP’s to serve the general publics demand rather than taking a paid four year vacation wasting time, serving their own interests and doing nothing for the betterment of Bahrain!