And quite rightly so! But, what was the FIFA doing endorsing a national association's elections over the law of the land?
The situation is highly irregular given that the Maldives Articles of Association categorically accommodate FIFA's requirements. So where did the FIFA go wrong?
Where FIFA went wrong
I have consistently argued that the FIFA backed Interim Transitional Committee was composed outside the remits of Article 17 of the FIFA Statutes.
This is where the FIFA or more aptly, it's executive, AFC Secretary General Dato' Paul went wrong. He has consistently refused to address this accusation.
The closest the good Dato' got to the issue was to admit more clubs must be accommodated. He is totally tight lipped on his seemingly unilateral decision (in the FIFA's name) to get a group of people of his choice on the interim committee.
FIFA Statutes requires even an interim committee to be composed of member clubs, not individuals of the Dato's choice.
Legitimacy
The ongoing domestic court case questions the legitimacy of the 20 July FAM elections.
The present FAM administration quote FIFA's endorsement as a curtain of credibility.
Their is however no guarantee that the illegitimacy of the Dato's interim committee and their complicity in bypassing the legal process can be swept under the carpet.
The question of "why?" will eventually be answered. In the meantime, the case continues.
FAM Defence
The FAM presented their defence Thursday 28 August at the second hearing.
The FAM submitted a letter from the Home Ministry stating that the FAM Statutes have now been approved. The letter was signed by the Registrar. He quotes the "Home Ministry". The law however mandates the Registrar to respond, not the "ministry".
In the meantime, Male' FC is said to have submitted a letter from the same Registrar Ishaq Ahmed who confirmed to the club that the FAM Statutes were not approved at the time of elections. This was immediately following last month's elections.
The issue in court is the contravention of Clause 19 of the Regulations and Clause 18 of the 2003 Articles of Association. The FIFA backed election process by-passed the law.
Ishaq is an appointee of the President.
Damage control
It is ludicrous how both ministries, Home Affairs and the the Sports Ministry get into damage control mode with backdated documentation every time they are cornered. Remember the 2006 episode!
With respect to the Courts, this will be a test of the independence of the judiciary, post-ratification. We are going through the transitional phase with a "pseudo-independent" judiciary of sorts.
Should the Male' FC win, the case is likely to open a hornet's nest.
Behind the facade of autonomy
Observers are already raising interesting questions with reference to the FIFA backed FAM Statutes.
For example Article 10, Admission restricts membership to a tight circle of twenty seven clubs, dominated by a select Male' League. An exclusive cartel of clubs such as the M-27 is not what the Articles of Association of 2003 and the recently ratified National Constitution grants us.
There are over 60 legitimate football clubs unaccounted for. These clubs are scattered among two thirds of the island nations population. They reside among the 200 island communities which make up this unusual island nation.
It is therefore doubtful if in fact the FAM Statutes allow the two "non-member" island based "Zone Champions" Thinadhoo and Khalaidhoo to participate in the 2008 Premier Dhivehi League.
Article 75 Dissolution welcomes the Government Sports Council to underwrite the FAM in case of dissolution. This opens up a whole new discussion on the IOC and FIFA rhetoric of the independence and integrity of sport.
Role of Global NGOs
One wonders how effectively such global NGOs are able to enforce their self declared obligations of curbing external (governmental or otherwise) interference, human rights, non-discrimination, respect for rule of law and Fair Play?
There are times we suspect such practices are in fact encouraged and "institutionalised" by "Officials" as in the case of the Maldives.
We now have a rather suspect cartel of clubs running our affairs with the government sports council underwriting the project.
The project is endorsed by the FIFA's Dato Paul and bankrolled by "hidden officials" of a fledgling government. The FAM executives ranging from the National Team Manager to its new President are seen openly using the FAM as a campaign platform for Gayyoom's re-election for a 7th term!
Maldives, as a nation state must be aware that the international community of sports will not intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.
We must therefore be mindful of individuals with private agendas interfering at all levels of the legal process.
In the case of the FAM it appears this has happened!
What lies ahead?
The situation do not look healthy. The Government is still unable to comprehend that this is a totally new ball game! The law applies, domestically as well as internationally.
We have seen how the Court of Arbitration for Sport recently ruled on the cases Olympic athletes. Sepp Blatter tried to hoodwink National Associations into releasing them for the Beijing Olympics.
It is time we woke up!
We must guard ourselves from manipulations of the law. Sports officials in the civil service must be conversant with the complexity of their professional and legal responsibilities. The FAM executive committee cannot continue to be this irresponsible.
The FIFA will not be pleased at all.
The July elections were crafted, supervised and endorsed by the FIFA through it's trusted officials. One wonders how long the present government and related FA administration could use the FIFA as a weapon to shield themselves from the law?
It is most interesting to note that the AFC Vice President Mr. Manilal Fernando arrived Thursday 28 August on the date of the second hearing of the court case against the FAM. Uncanny coincidence indeed!
Furthermore, eyebrows were raised when suddenly it is no longer the good Dato' who visits to discuss FIFA assistance. Today it is Vice President Mr. Manilal Fernando of Sri Lanka!
What if the FIFA is forced to suspend the FAM? I am afraid the FIFA may need to have a second round of negotiations to clean up the mess the Dato' left behind.
Players and members will not be too pleased either. They will want to know what really happened.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Sports must embrace the reformist spirit.
Incumbent sports officials are finding it difficult to keep pace with the transition in the spirit of the newly amended Constitution. I note two incidents from the last week.
The Beijing Olympics was in full swing and the Maldives Swimming Association decides to host their Nationals. The top two swimmers are away. A couple of the more astute sports journalists politely inquired.
The Swimming Association responded by saying they could not find an alternative date. The Athletics President Maizan Ali Maniku observed that Olympic sports, of which swimming is a mandatory event, will be aware of the dates of the Beijing Olympics from seven years back!
Jazeera pursued the issue with the Sports Council. Abdul Razzaq, Director General, Training and Research, at the Sports Ministry responded. Razzaq maintained that hosting the Nationals without the top swimmers leaves the top spots open for lesser swimmers who will in turn be motivated to compete! An appealing logic at the expense of a sport ethic.
The newly sworn Sports Minister Madam Aishath Shiham, the 7th and possibly the last of Gayyoom's sports ministers, was not any less bizarre in her observations.
When asked to comment on the currant court case, Minister Shiham confirmed that these elections will not be annulled. The problem is that this is not an issue within her mandate.
She could have been more tactful by redirecting the journalist to the Registrar of Clubs and Societies at the Ministry of Home Affairs. That's what the law says.
What we are witnessing here is a serious lack of awareness on the part of senior sports executives on issues ranging from ideology to the rule of law.
This definitely is not good news for the Maldivian sports community.
The Beijing Olympics was in full swing and the Maldives Swimming Association decides to host their Nationals. The top two swimmers are away. A couple of the more astute sports journalists politely inquired.
The Swimming Association responded by saying they could not find an alternative date. The Athletics President Maizan Ali Maniku observed that Olympic sports, of which swimming is a mandatory event, will be aware of the dates of the Beijing Olympics from seven years back!
Jazeera pursued the issue with the Sports Council. Abdul Razzaq, Director General, Training and Research, at the Sports Ministry responded. Razzaq maintained that hosting the Nationals without the top swimmers leaves the top spots open for lesser swimmers who will in turn be motivated to compete! An appealing logic at the expense of a sport ethic.
The newly sworn Sports Minister Madam Aishath Shiham, the 7th and possibly the last of Gayyoom's sports ministers, was not any less bizarre in her observations.
When asked to comment on the currant court case, Minister Shiham confirmed that these elections will not be annulled. The problem is that this is not an issue within her mandate.
She could have been more tactful by redirecting the journalist to the Registrar of Clubs and Societies at the Ministry of Home Affairs. That's what the law says.
What we are witnessing here is a serious lack of awareness on the part of senior sports executives on issues ranging from ideology to the rule of law.
This definitely is not good news for the Maldivian sports community.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Football Association of Maldives challenged in court for the second time
The Male' Football Club, have challenged the legitimacy of the recent FAM elections. The elections were conducted, supervised and endorsed by the FIFA. This is the second time the FAM have been challenged in this manner. The first was in 2006.
Speaking to journalists after last month's FAM elections, the FIFA Representative Dato' Paul of the AFC claimed he hoped more clubs will be allowed to vote next time around! He was responding to the criticism that over two thirds of member clubs were excluded from voting. The FIFA somehow claimed 11 voting members were enough to legitimise the process.
The FAM was managed by a FIFA appointed interim transitional committee at the time. I have claimed the FIFA committee was in breach of it's Article 17 which required "members" rather than selected "individuals" to comprise this committee.
In this latest challenge to the legitimacy of the FAM, Male' FC claimed in court the legal requirement that the Ministry of Sports, as the founder, failed to get approval for it's amended statutes prior to the association's elections. The law requires the Registrar of Clubs and Societies' to approve the proposed statutes prior to the elections.
Male' FC's claims have sent jitters through the "beneficiaries" of the these rogue elections. More specifically those of the FAM.
The architects (FIFA Official Dato' Paul and the subsequent Interim Committee) and the beneficiaries, the newly "elected" President and Executive Committee (financed by Gayyoom's fledgling autocracy) appear silent. The case had it's first hearing Tuesday 19 August.
While the FAM is maintaining an eerie silence on the issue, the Sports Council is reported to have been unavailable for comment. The government ministry which hosts the Registrar of Clubs and Societies have however blundered as usual!
Wednesday's Haveeru Daily reported the Ministry of Home Affairs as saying the statutes have "now" been approved. But the elections were held almost a month ago. The Ministry went on to make the feeble claim that there was nothing in the law that specified elections conducted prior to the Registrar's approval of the statutes were not valid.
The Registrar himself have however been silent. He had earlier confirmed to Male' FC in writing, that the statutes were not approved by him prior to the elections.
Amateur football player and lawyer, Shameem challenged the legality of this shaky sport institution for the first time in 2006. He was representing ex-national captain Kuda Heena at the time.
Kuda Heena's case originated from claims made in court to re-gain lost salaries and re-claim his coaching job. The FAM Disciplinary Committee had refused his salary and prohibited further employment as a football coach after accusing Heena of inciting dissent in a league match that year.
The strategy adopted by lawyer Shameem at the time was to question the legitimacy of the unelected government appointed FAM to hand down such a sentence on coach Kuda Heena. Shameem questioned the legal foundation of the association. He proved the association was not constituted in line with the new Articles of Association of 2003 which gave voting rights to all FAM members.
The court ruled in favour of the FAM!
Maldives courts of law were firmly controlled by the executive in 2006. Judge Ali Sameer will be quite aware of his ruling.
At the time, the court claimed the legal status of the FAM was in jeopardy due to the negligence of the Registrar rather than the FAM.
The Registrar was caught dragging his feet past the transitional 12 months stipulated in the amended Articles of Association.
Judge Ali Sameer maintained in 2006 that the FAM can hold elections only after the Registrar approves the statutes. This is exactly what Male' FC Lawyers, Shahudhee and Riffath is arguing for. It should be interesting to see what the present Judge Ibrahim Mahir comes up with this time.
The Gayyoom appointed FAM and the Gayyoom appointed Registrar were sent home with a slap on the wrist and a stern warning to follow the law by the Gayyoom appointed Judge.
FAM settled out of court. Kuda Heena was paid his dues and allowed to return to his coaching job. The public pressure for reform forced the FAM to relent.
Kuda Heena's case set a precedent the court is sure to consider when dealing with this new case.
At the time, the Registrar escaped the wrath of the civil court on a requirement of the Articles of Association that stated the FAM can go ahead with elections only after the Registrar have approved the amended statutes.
The court ruled that no time frame was imposed by the law on the Registrar to approve the proposed statutes in spite of the fact that the law required existing clubs and societies to to hold fresh elections within 12 months from the date the law was passed. The deadline expired in May 2004.
Today, it is "post-ratification"! An amended national constitution that separated the judiciary from the executive was ratified only two weeks ago on the 7th of this month.
It is poetic justice that this time around, Shameem is arguing that the rather undemocratic "technicality" on which he lost his previous case in 2006 is exactly why the FAM should loose it's case this time "post ratification". The Registrar is again at the heart of the controversy.
The government appointed Registrar protected the government appointed FAM in 2006. The government appointed Registrar is now singing a different tune "post-ratification". We will find out how the newly independent judiciary performs this time.
The Minister of Home Affairs who hosts the Registrar's office is livid! The Minister appears to be overriding the Registrar with his recent comments to Haveeru Daily. The Registrar have been quiet on the issue after admitting he had not approved the FAM Statutes.
The next hearing is scheduled for Thursday 28 August.
Speaking to journalists after last month's FAM elections, the FIFA Representative Dato' Paul of the AFC claimed he hoped more clubs will be allowed to vote next time around! He was responding to the criticism that over two thirds of member clubs were excluded from voting. The FIFA somehow claimed 11 voting members were enough to legitimise the process.
The FAM was managed by a FIFA appointed interim transitional committee at the time. I have claimed the FIFA committee was in breach of it's Article 17 which required "members" rather than selected "individuals" to comprise this committee.
In this latest challenge to the legitimacy of the FAM, Male' FC claimed in court the legal requirement that the Ministry of Sports, as the founder, failed to get approval for it's amended statutes prior to the association's elections. The law requires the Registrar of Clubs and Societies' to approve the proposed statutes prior to the elections.
Male' FC's claims have sent jitters through the "beneficiaries" of the these rogue elections. More specifically those of the FAM.
The architects (FIFA Official Dato' Paul and the subsequent Interim Committee) and the beneficiaries, the newly "elected" President and Executive Committee (financed by Gayyoom's fledgling autocracy) appear silent. The case had it's first hearing Tuesday 19 August.
While the FAM is maintaining an eerie silence on the issue, the Sports Council is reported to have been unavailable for comment. The government ministry which hosts the Registrar of Clubs and Societies have however blundered as usual!
Wednesday's Haveeru Daily reported the Ministry of Home Affairs as saying the statutes have "now" been approved. But the elections were held almost a month ago. The Ministry went on to make the feeble claim that there was nothing in the law that specified elections conducted prior to the Registrar's approval of the statutes were not valid.
The Registrar himself have however been silent. He had earlier confirmed to Male' FC in writing, that the statutes were not approved by him prior to the elections.
Amateur football player and lawyer, Shameem challenged the legality of this shaky sport institution for the first time in 2006. He was representing ex-national captain Kuda Heena at the time.
Kuda Heena's case originated from claims made in court to re-gain lost salaries and re-claim his coaching job. The FAM Disciplinary Committee had refused his salary and prohibited further employment as a football coach after accusing Heena of inciting dissent in a league match that year.
The strategy adopted by lawyer Shameem at the time was to question the legitimacy of the unelected government appointed FAM to hand down such a sentence on coach Kuda Heena. Shameem questioned the legal foundation of the association. He proved the association was not constituted in line with the new Articles of Association of 2003 which gave voting rights to all FAM members.
The court ruled in favour of the FAM!
Maldives courts of law were firmly controlled by the executive in 2006. Judge Ali Sameer will be quite aware of his ruling.
At the time, the court claimed the legal status of the FAM was in jeopardy due to the negligence of the Registrar rather than the FAM.
The Registrar was caught dragging his feet past the transitional 12 months stipulated in the amended Articles of Association.
Judge Ali Sameer maintained in 2006 that the FAM can hold elections only after the Registrar approves the statutes. This is exactly what Male' FC Lawyers, Shahudhee and Riffath is arguing for. It should be interesting to see what the present Judge Ibrahim Mahir comes up with this time.
The Gayyoom appointed FAM and the Gayyoom appointed Registrar were sent home with a slap on the wrist and a stern warning to follow the law by the Gayyoom appointed Judge.
FAM settled out of court. Kuda Heena was paid his dues and allowed to return to his coaching job. The public pressure for reform forced the FAM to relent.
Kuda Heena's case set a precedent the court is sure to consider when dealing with this new case.
At the time, the Registrar escaped the wrath of the civil court on a requirement of the Articles of Association that stated the FAM can go ahead with elections only after the Registrar have approved the amended statutes.
The court ruled that no time frame was imposed by the law on the Registrar to approve the proposed statutes in spite of the fact that the law required existing clubs and societies to to hold fresh elections within 12 months from the date the law was passed. The deadline expired in May 2004.
Today, it is "post-ratification"! An amended national constitution that separated the judiciary from the executive was ratified only two weeks ago on the 7th of this month.
It is poetic justice that this time around, Shameem is arguing that the rather undemocratic "technicality" on which he lost his previous case in 2006 is exactly why the FAM should loose it's case this time "post ratification". The Registrar is again at the heart of the controversy.
The government appointed Registrar protected the government appointed FAM in 2006. The government appointed Registrar is now singing a different tune "post-ratification". We will find out how the newly independent judiciary performs this time.
The Minister of Home Affairs who hosts the Registrar's office is livid! The Minister appears to be overriding the Registrar with his recent comments to Haveeru Daily. The Registrar have been quiet on the issue after admitting he had not approved the FAM Statutes.
The next hearing is scheduled for Thursday 28 August.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
DRP drags Sport into the National political spotlight.
Manager Hanim and “Maumoon 2008” continue to attract comment.
President Gayyoom kicked off his campaign with a grand claim that even the Maldives National Football Team was behind his rather suspect 7th bid for the Presidency. When the DRP Zaeem chose to openly abuse sports for his political survival, active members of all parties democratic took serious note.
Most agreed that Manager Hanim’s action clearly amounted to abuse of sport when he claimed his Gold Medal team backed incumbent President Gayyoom’s campaign. I believe it is not practical for sport to entangle itself in politics. It alienates fans.
In a valiant effort to wriggle out of this trap, someone raised the question of “individual right”.
The problem with "individual right" is that Manager Hanim does not have any in this instance! How would one justify that “individual right” can override the larger "collective right" of the FAM and the National Team.
The commentator conveniently ignore two basic facts to enable him to maintain this position.
Fact number one is that the team was introduced by the DRP as the National Football Team. Manager Hanim had no “individual right” to say what he pleased when displaying himself as the Manager of the National Team. He is bound by his associations statutes.
Finally, adding insult to injury, Manager Hanim clearly stated on record that the National Team was there to support President Gayyoom’s bid for power.
So now we know what the National Team was doing on the DRP Campaign stage!
The National Civil Service Commission has already taken swift action on finding out that Manager Hanim was also Civil Servant Hanim. They questioned CS Hanim’s actions and demoted him from his post of Director General to the post of a mere Director, quite a few rungs down the ladder!
Therefore it now appears that the hat fits. It is wrong for a civil servant to take a political stage.
Referring back to the comment in defense of Manager Hanim, what I am hearing now is a version that totally ignores that Manager Hanim ever indicated the National Team (FAM) backed the Candidate (DRP).
It is now claimed, Manager Hanim is supposed to have said this solely in his individual capacity! But where then does he get the right to represent the National Team or the FAM in his individual capacity?
FAM owns all rights to the Maldives National Football Team. Not Manager Hanim! He is not authorised to represent views contravening it's statutes. Article 3 - Neutrality and non-discrimination, clause 2 prohibits such comment. They are deemed "...prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion".
The FAM Executive Committee is therefore obliged to rule in favour of it's own statutes.
The FAM, FIFA and IOC Charter prohibits Manager Hanim's actions. These regulations severely prohibit national association ruling that it is acceptable for a National Team to support a Presidential bid representing a specific political party.
Manager Hanim cannot therefore make such a stark announcement without the express approval of the FAM Executive Committee. The new DRP version chose to override the FAM's right to neutrality. The issue has been “ sanitized” by the DRP spin machine and is now being promoted out of context.
The newly invented, supposedly “politically correct” version of the story plugged by “state media” is that Manager Hanim has the right to his belief (that the National Team should support President Gayyoom's bid for power).
Holding a belief, how bizarre it may be, is one thing, but going public with it is another. Fantasies may not be publicised!
There are internationally bound and nationally practiced codes of conduct that categorically prohibit such actions. I am sure Manager Hanim must be aware of these regulations.
So what is the consequence for a Sport Manager who abuse sport in cahoots with a political party?
The FAM Executive Committee decision on the issue will be a test of it's credibility. They appear to be on track so far. A statement condemning Manager Hanim's action was issued the next day. Will there be a credible reaction from the National Sports Council and or the Olympic Committee?
Unfortunately, while the DRP's "sanitized" version is being played out, the FAM surely will not be hoping that they could possibly forget this whole incident. There have been no further action since the 9th August statement The Civil Service Commission demonstrated better leadership.
President Gayyoom kicked off his campaign with a grand claim that even the Maldives National Football Team was behind his rather suspect 7th bid for the Presidency. When the DRP Zaeem chose to openly abuse sports for his political survival, active members of all parties democratic took serious note.
Most agreed that Manager Hanim’s action clearly amounted to abuse of sport when he claimed his Gold Medal team backed incumbent President Gayyoom’s campaign. I believe it is not practical for sport to entangle itself in politics. It alienates fans.
In a valiant effort to wriggle out of this trap, someone raised the question of “individual right”.
The problem with "individual right" is that Manager Hanim does not have any in this instance! How would one justify that “individual right” can override the larger "collective right" of the FAM and the National Team.
The commentator conveniently ignore two basic facts to enable him to maintain this position.
Fact number one is that the team was introduced by the DRP as the National Football Team. Manager Hanim had no “individual right” to say what he pleased when displaying himself as the Manager of the National Team. He is bound by his associations statutes.
Finally, adding insult to injury, Manager Hanim clearly stated on record that the National Team was there to support President Gayyoom’s bid for power.
So now we know what the National Team was doing on the DRP Campaign stage!
The National Civil Service Commission has already taken swift action on finding out that Manager Hanim was also Civil Servant Hanim. They questioned CS Hanim’s actions and demoted him from his post of Director General to the post of a mere Director, quite a few rungs down the ladder!
Therefore it now appears that the hat fits. It is wrong for a civil servant to take a political stage.
Referring back to the comment in defense of Manager Hanim, what I am hearing now is a version that totally ignores that Manager Hanim ever indicated the National Team (FAM) backed the Candidate (DRP).
It is now claimed, Manager Hanim is supposed to have said this solely in his individual capacity! But where then does he get the right to represent the National Team or the FAM in his individual capacity?
FAM owns all rights to the Maldives National Football Team. Not Manager Hanim! He is not authorised to represent views contravening it's statutes. Article 3 - Neutrality and non-discrimination, clause 2 prohibits such comment. They are deemed "...prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion".
The FAM Executive Committee is therefore obliged to rule in favour of it's own statutes.
The FAM, FIFA and IOC Charter prohibits Manager Hanim's actions. These regulations severely prohibit national association ruling that it is acceptable for a National Team to support a Presidential bid representing a specific political party.
Manager Hanim cannot therefore make such a stark announcement without the express approval of the FAM Executive Committee. The new DRP version chose to override the FAM's right to neutrality. The issue has been “ sanitized” by the DRP spin machine and is now being promoted out of context.
The newly invented, supposedly “politically correct” version of the story plugged by “state media” is that Manager Hanim has the right to his belief (that the National Team should support President Gayyoom's bid for power).
Holding a belief, how bizarre it may be, is one thing, but going public with it is another. Fantasies may not be publicised!
There are internationally bound and nationally practiced codes of conduct that categorically prohibit such actions. I am sure Manager Hanim must be aware of these regulations.
So what is the consequence for a Sport Manager who abuse sport in cahoots with a political party?
The FAM Executive Committee decision on the issue will be a test of it's credibility. They appear to be on track so far. A statement condemning Manager Hanim's action was issued the next day. Will there be a credible reaction from the National Sports Council and or the Olympic Committee?
Unfortunately, while the DRP's "sanitized" version is being played out, the FAM surely will not be hoping that they could possibly forget this whole incident. There have been no further action since the 9th August statement The Civil Service Commission demonstrated better leadership.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Maldives National Football Team supports the Political Party, DRP!
The Manager of our recently successful regional football gold medal team declared Friday that the team was firmly behind the DRP’s Presidential bid “Maumoon 2008”.
He declared this at the campaign’s special launching ceremony that night. He had, on the stage with him, a handful of players including the team captain.
There was immediate uproar that even shocked the football fans who already detested this blatant politicization of sport.
Saturday morning, the FAM came out with a statement indicating the seriousness of the offence. There has been no news from the FAM since. Popular media have however continued to hold the story. Such is the interest of a public enjoying new found freedoms of expression after the historic ratification Thursday of a democratic constitution.
If one cares to delve deeper into the passionate outburst of this party faithful, Hanim’s comments unearths a hornet’s nest.
Article 3, clause 2 of the newly adopted statutes state that “Discrimination of any kind against ….a group of people on account of ethnic origin, gender, language, religion, politics or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion”
Article 33, clause (m) mandates the Executive Committee to “…dismiss a person or body or suspend a Member of the FAM provisionally until the next Congress”. The next Congress is in 2012!
Should the Executive Committee “suspend or expel” Manager Hanim, I am inclined to believe the DRP will back their faithful senior member in an appeal process including in a court of Law.
The DRP, who was the “sly architect” of the newly re-invented FAM will be caught on the back foot if the FAM Executive Committee goes ahead with a fair decision as per their Statutes. It would be preposterous to believe that the FAM Executive Committee will let Manager Hanim off with a soft slap on the wrist and a demand for a public apology. I would however not put this past certain members in the Executive Committee.
We must not forget that this Executive Committee ignored the blatant use of the SAFF Cup for political purposes. Over 20 island communities have so far accused the tour as unfair use of sport for President Gayyoom’s re-election for a 7th term.
These island communities did not allow the SAFF Cup to land on their islands. The Executive Committee looked on. No action was taken!
It appears the FAM has firmly lodged itself between a rock and a hard place with Manager Hanim as the sandwich meat.
He declared this at the campaign’s special launching ceremony that night. He had, on the stage with him, a handful of players including the team captain.
There was immediate uproar that even shocked the football fans who already detested this blatant politicization of sport.
Saturday morning, the FAM came out with a statement indicating the seriousness of the offence. There has been no news from the FAM since. Popular media have however continued to hold the story. Such is the interest of a public enjoying new found freedoms of expression after the historic ratification Thursday of a democratic constitution.
If one cares to delve deeper into the passionate outburst of this party faithful, Hanim’s comments unearths a hornet’s nest.
Article 3, clause 2 of the newly adopted statutes state that “Discrimination of any kind against ….a group of people on account of ethnic origin, gender, language, religion, politics or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion”
Article 33, clause (m) mandates the Executive Committee to “…dismiss a person or body or suspend a Member of the FAM provisionally until the next Congress”. The next Congress is in 2012!
Should the Executive Committee “suspend or expel” Manager Hanim, I am inclined to believe the DRP will back their faithful senior member in an appeal process including in a court of Law.
The DRP, who was the “sly architect” of the newly re-invented FAM will be caught on the back foot if the FAM Executive Committee goes ahead with a fair decision as per their Statutes. It would be preposterous to believe that the FAM Executive Committee will let Manager Hanim off with a soft slap on the wrist and a demand for a public apology. I would however not put this past certain members in the Executive Committee.
We must not forget that this Executive Committee ignored the blatant use of the SAFF Cup for political purposes. Over 20 island communities have so far accused the tour as unfair use of sport for President Gayyoom’s re-election for a 7th term.
These island communities did not allow the SAFF Cup to land on their islands. The Executive Committee looked on. No action was taken!
It appears the FAM has firmly lodged itself between a rock and a hard place with Manager Hanim as the sandwich meat.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
China and IOC: Blocking Access to Information and Free Speech
Here is what Article 19 have to say about the status of freedom of expression in China as the Olympics loom ahead. The Chinese President in the meantime is appealing to the World not to politicise the Olympics!
PRESS RELEASE - 31 July 2008
As the countdown to the Beijing Olympics reaches a crescendo, reports are mounting that China is reneging on its commitments to free speech and access to information, and that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has failed to ensure that China’s commitments be fully implemented. The last violation to be reported is that of internet censorship: foreign journalists covering the Olympics found they could not access human rights websites and news.
“Through its continued silence, the IOC is condoning the repeated violations by China of fundamental human rights and of the commitments it made to be awarded the 2008 Olympics.” says Dr. Agnès Callamard, ARTICLE 19 Executive Director.
“The actions of the Chinese authorities will surprise very few. But the greatest mockery to the Olympic spirit must be that orchestrated by the IOC itself – the international committee responsible on paper for holding to the highest level the value of fair play and human rights.”
ARTICLE 19 calls on governments and National Olympic Committees to demand that the IOC stands up for the Olympic spirit. In particular, the IOC must protest clearly and transparently to the Chinese authorities for relegating on its promises and abusing freedom of the press and the free flow of information, and request as a matter of urgency that access to all censored websites be immediately established.
Background
Journalists from around the world have arrived in Beijing only to find out that their internet connection is censored by the Chinese government – a violation of the commitments China made in winning the Olympics.
Recent reports, denied by the IOC, have stated that IOC officials acquiesced and agreed to China’s demands for maintaining controls over access to information and the continued blocking of sites from ARTICLE 19, Reporters Without Borders, Amnesty International, BBC, and many others.
Despite these apparent reversals by China, IOC President Jacques Rogge recently commented that “For the first time, foreign media will be able to report freely and publish their work freely in China. There will be no censorship on the Internet.”
The head of the IOC Press Commission Kevan Gosper is said to have stated that he would be surprised if Rogge did not know that China had no intention of allowing free speech. Chief spokesman for the Beijing Olympic organising committee Sun Weide also conceded that censorship would not stop, “It has been our policy to provide the media with convenient and sufficient access to the Internet” (emphasis added).
PRESS RELEASE - 31 July 2008
As the countdown to the Beijing Olympics reaches a crescendo, reports are mounting that China is reneging on its commitments to free speech and access to information, and that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has failed to ensure that China’s commitments be fully implemented. The last violation to be reported is that of internet censorship: foreign journalists covering the Olympics found they could not access human rights websites and news.
“Through its continued silence, the IOC is condoning the repeated violations by China of fundamental human rights and of the commitments it made to be awarded the 2008 Olympics.” says Dr. Agnès Callamard, ARTICLE 19 Executive Director.
“The actions of the Chinese authorities will surprise very few. But the greatest mockery to the Olympic spirit must be that orchestrated by the IOC itself – the international committee responsible on paper for holding to the highest level the value of fair play and human rights.”
ARTICLE 19 calls on governments and National Olympic Committees to demand that the IOC stands up for the Olympic spirit. In particular, the IOC must protest clearly and transparently to the Chinese authorities for relegating on its promises and abusing freedom of the press and the free flow of information, and request as a matter of urgency that access to all censored websites be immediately established.
Background
Journalists from around the world have arrived in Beijing only to find out that their internet connection is censored by the Chinese government – a violation of the commitments China made in winning the Olympics.
Recent reports, denied by the IOC, have stated that IOC officials acquiesced and agreed to China’s demands for maintaining controls over access to information and the continued blocking of sites from ARTICLE 19, Reporters Without Borders, Amnesty International, BBC, and many others.
Despite these apparent reversals by China, IOC President Jacques Rogge recently commented that “For the first time, foreign media will be able to report freely and publish their work freely in China. There will be no censorship on the Internet.”
The head of the IOC Press Commission Kevan Gosper is said to have stated that he would be surprised if Rogge did not know that China had no intention of allowing free speech. Chief spokesman for the Beijing Olympic organising committee Sun Weide also conceded that censorship would not stop, “It has been our policy to provide the media with convenient and sufficient access to the Internet” (emphasis added).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)