I understand completely – from a cultural and traditional points of view – that you shouldn’t demonstrate in front of the King’s court or his residence. He’s the top authority in the kingdom and his person represents not only law and order, but the dignity of this country.
What I can’t understand is why, over the the past couple of weeks, effort have been made to show that the same rule applies to the prime minister’s court and the parliament. By definition, both institutions contain civil servants, and it is our duty as citizens should the need arise, to show them that we do not agree with one or more of their decisions. In fact, demonstrating in front of their offices is the most effective way to get the message across as experience has shown.
On July 4th an unemployment demo was planned in front of the prime minister’s court. That didn’t happen because the whole place was cordoned off and tens (maybe over a hundred) riot police took positions in that location.
Yesterday the unemployed planned to pelt the parliament building with rotten eggs and tomatoes to fulfil their promise that should the parliament not include social insurance in the 2005/2006 budget, but, as you see from the picture, the front of the parliament building and roads around it were again cordoned off by riot police.
The question now is: does Article 28 of the Constitution still stand? Do people have the right to assemble to make their views and demands known? Or is that going to be only under the terms of riot police presence and only in certain places?
Comments
Article 28 still on?
Very good question. Wouldn’t defacing property with eggs and tomatoes be illegal in most places? especially public/government establishments. I doubt authorities in London would allow the public to pelt the houses of parliament with rotten food ?
Article 28 still on?
While protests should be allowed at the PM’s office and the Parliament building, I think the threat of eggs and tomatoes gives the govt a legitimate excuse to deem it illegal.
Actually the unemployment committee has been receiving alot of flak even from within its traditional support base who are opposed to the idea of treating the “gifts of god” (eggs and tomatoes… not the nuwab) in a disrespectful manner.
And I thought the committee planned to hold the protest this coming friday on the 15th… at least, that’s what they announced in their statement last Wednesday.
But I agree with you in general Mahmood. Protests at the PM’s office should be allowed, if nowhere else.
By the way, did anyone read Mansour Jamri’s op-ed a couple weeks ago proposing the idea of something similar to Hyde Park’s Speaker’s Corner? I can’t see it happening in Bahrain anytime soon,… but that is exactly what we need. (But first people need to get used to the idea of tolerating cricism directed towards themselves or their leaders).
Amplification: Article 28 still on?
It isn’t clear in the post, so I must explain here that I do NOT condone throwing food or anything else to express an opinion. It is wiser to use words rather than objects to ensure that your point of view comes across.
The intention of the post however is the seemingly now REGULAR (based on these two incidents) to use paratroopers/riot police etc to ensure that a protest does not take place.
I shudder to think what would actually happen if the protestors defied the ban.. protestors and paratroopers/riot police is an incendiary mix that we in Bahrain absolutely do not need.
Dialogue, is the best way forward.
Both the government, the various protestors (political) and political parties seem to have reached an impasse with every one of them upping the ante, rather than giving a little ground to gain a lot ultimately.
Again, dialogue is the best way forward.