Constitutional Restoration in Bahrain

PART 1

PART 2

PART 3

The Al Khalifa Doctrine: No Country Should Accept the Deportees!

Despots Are Always Undiplomatic

Bahrain’s Foreign Minister visited London last month, he knew he was swimming against the tide. The world was unanimous in rejecting his logic of not allowing other countries to offer refuge to the Bahraini deportees. Why did his government deport them in the first place? Was the common question by sensible people stunned by the events. The British Foreign Secretary was embarrassed by the whole affair. The Bahraini demand was not appropriate, neither diplomatically, nor legally. The demands of the Bahraini people are just and local. The rejection by the Al Khalifa government of the people’s demands for the restoration of the Constitution is neither logical nor constitutional. It was not surprising then that Mr. Douglas Hurd referred the asylum applications to the proper authorities. After all, he represents a government whose democratic heritage and strong adherence to the rule of her own as well as the international laws have given Britain a leading role in world politics. Thus for a small country like Bahrain to blackmail Britain by threatening diplomatic and commercial retribution was a sign of depression and diplomatic affray.

Behind all this lies an indisputable fact; the continuation of the popular uprising in Bahrain is causing enormous embarrassment to the Al Khalifa government. There are protests on daily basis in various parts of the country. Two months after it erupted following the arrest of Sheikh Ali Salman, the uprising is proving hard to be repressed. The government has, so far, failed to contain the popular anger. It has adopted policies that are unlikely to lead to a lasting settlement between the government and the people. The use of live ammunition against unarmed civilians calling for the rule of the Constitution could not be condoned by any government. So far, at least seven people are known to have been killed in the last few weeks. Five of them, Hani Abbas Khamis, Hani Ahmad Al Wasti, Abdul Qader Al Fatlawi, Mohammad Redha Mansoor Ahemd (Al-Hejji) and Hussain Ali Al Safi, were killed by bullets fired by riot police. Hussain Qambar was killed under torture after nails of his fingers and toes were pulled out. Mirza Ali Abdul Redha died as a result of beating by the riot police. There are tens of injured people either in hospitals or at homes. In addition, there are more than 1000 people in detention in various prisons and camps. One of these camps lies at a short distance from Balaj Al Jaza’er, the private beach of the Amir in the south of the country.

Foreign diplomats have been sceptic about the Al Khalifa’s handling of the situation. There has been no voice of support to their action either from local organisations or foreign governments. The minister of information, Tareq Al Mo’ayyad, has been active in the process of forcing some local clubs to publish advertisements in local press supporting the actions of the government against the people. However, these adverts are known to be officially sanctioned and paid for, and are done against the will of the organisations in question. There is a total rejection of the governmental policies against the uprising, and the government has failed to get the approval for her policies even from the ministers. The Amir has ruled the country by decree for the last twenty years, i.e., since the suspension of the Constitution in 1975. Emergency laws are in force and the State Security Law is the tool by which people are rounded up randomly. Children of ages between 12 and 18 are known to be in detention centres and are subjected to the most abusive treatment in the country’s history.

The Al Khalifa government is trying to show a brave face in its crackdown against the people. But the people are now more determined than ever to get their legitimate rights contained in the Constitution regardless of the terror being adopted by the government. The British officer, whose name has recently surfaced in several British and international newspapers, is responsible for the shoot-to-kill policy being adopted against peaceful demonstrators. Although he is in his seventies, he still commands a large team of British officers and local torturers, which is responsible for the countless human rights abuses against the people of Bahrain. For example, Ahmad Zayed, Mariam Al Nedhem, both in their eighties, and Mohammad Ali Al A’araj, 70, of Duraz, were either hit by bullets or beaten up by riot police and are now confined to their beds. Mr. Mohsin Al Fatlawi and one of his sons were beaten up severely while burying his son, Abdul Qader, who had been killed on 12th January.

This heavy-handed treatment of the people could not be condoned by any sensible person. In fact, none of the allies of the Bahraini government, apart from Saudi Arabia, did express support to the policies of the Al Khalifa. Diplomatic contacts with several governments have re-assured the opposition that the Al Khalifa government has embarrassed her own allies by the repressive policies on one hand, and her refusal to abide by the Constitution of the country. The opposition, on the other hand, has commanded a great admiration from governments in many countries for its perseverance, commitment to the rule of law, peaceful means, and logical demands. Whilst the government attempted, foolishly to play down the extent of the people’s disenchantment and the volume of the uprising, the opposition did not exaggerate the facts. Independent observers have admired the restrained figures often given by the opposition sources of the number of deaths, injuries, detentions and exiles. Those figures have often been corroborated by diplomatic sources.

The surprising has demonstrated the dangers befalling the people in the absence of the rule of the Constitution. The twenty year-experience with the unconstitutional regime has made the people more resolute in their demands for the restoration of the Constitution. In those two decades, the Al Khalifa family has usurped its powers and caused enormous suffering to the people of Bahrain. Thousands were exiled in the eighties, tens were killed under torture and hundreds were imprisoned for long periods. Tens of thousands have been unemployed in a country of a tiny population of not more than 600,000. These facts, which are corroborated by international reports and investigations, have made it impossible for the people to accept a return to the same situation that has prevailed prior to the uprising. If the Al Khalifa had treated the people fairly after the suspension of the Constitution, there would have been less enthusiasm for the Constitution. But the bitter experience has enforced the demands for a return to a more civilised way of government. The events of the last two months have demonstrated the need for international pressure to bear on the Al Khalifa family to accept the verdict of the people on the style of leadership it has offered to the people. A return to the Constitution seems to be the only plausible way forward towards more stable and prosperous society in Bahrain.

The Governmetn Has No Option But to Restore the Constitution December Uprising: A New Chapter in Bahrain’s History The total number of people killed by the security forces is still to be confirmed. Many people are believed to have been killed. On 17 December, the security forces using live ammunitions shot two people dead in Sanabis andJedhafs, 3 miles westof thecapital, Manama. They were: (I) Hani Abbas Khamis, 23 years old, Sanabis. A university student in his final academic year; (2) Hani Ahmed Al-Wasti, 22 years old, Jedhafs, an employee at the Ministry of Health who was prepanng for marriage in few days;(3) Haji Mirza Ali Abdul-Redha, 65 years old man from Al-Qadam village. He was killed after police stormed Musharraf Mosque in lidhafs on 20 December. IL is believed that other people may have been murdered but their bodies are yet to be released from Salmanya Hospial, which now incorporates an ‘excluded area’ for those injured during the uprising. Farnily visits are strictly forbidden. There are many people in critical conditionsJ One of them had an operation to remove 5() splinters from his body. Amongst the injured arc Badir Habib Jumaa, 21 years old from Sanabis (suffering from two abullet wounds in he chest abdomen); Riyadh Ashoor, 29 year old from Sanabis is still in intensive care unit; Mansoor Abdul Redha, 18 years old from BaniJamra (suffering from a bullet wound in his knec), Hussain Al-Nashaba, 21 years old from Nuaim (hit by a bullet in the back); Sadeq Khamis, 24 ycars old from Sanabis (shot in his shoulder); Hussain Ramadhan, 15 years old boy, was hit by two bullets in the chest on 19 December in Sanabis. On 18 December, Mrs. Zainab Al-Rashed – from Daih – was hit in the eye by bullet fragment when she resisted the dawn-raiders before they arrested and detained her son. Her eye has now been removed by doctors. Another lady from Jedhafs is also in hospital suffering from bullets wounds. H ussain Abdulla from Dair is Iying in hospital suffering from sever wounds; Ali Mohammed Ismael, 52 years oki m an from B ani J amra had three broken ribs caused by police beating . Thc authorities ordered all doctors to rcport namcs of people requesting Lreatment from bullet wounds. The police used special types of bullets that cxplodc in the body spreading glass[ype sharp particles. many children have suffocatcd from smothering-lype of tear gas. Mass arrests wcre taking place everywhere. For example, on 23 I:)ecember, dawn raids on Sitra resulted in more than 40 people detained, some of them wives and sisters taken hostages LO force their relatives to give themselves up. The authorities ordered the municipality workers not 10 collect rubbish in Sitra A group of people volunteered to clear the mounting refuse, but wcrc arrcsled. In Ras Komman the same thing was happening Mr. Majid Milad’s wife was arrested until her husband gave himself up. Sheikh Mohammcd Ali Al-Ekri (about 60 years old) was arrested after writing a letter to the Emir requesting a meeting about the events. He had spent 5 years in jail during the Eighties and the “Times” newspaper of l 1 January 1983 sponsored him as a “Prisoner of Conscience”. Sheikh Mihammed Al-Tal also disappeared. file last thing the GCC heads of states expected whilst attending their annual summit in Manarna, was to smell tear gas. But they did. Moreover, they witnessed the Bahraini capital and nearby areas engulfed in fire as pro-democracy demonstrators were being shot at by security forces. On 20 and 21 December, demonstrations spread to Bahrain University campuses (both at Sukhair and Madinat Isa) as well as in Sanabis, Manarna and villages along thenorth-westem Budayaa Highway of Bahrain. Around 300 university students were picketing everyday and classes are suspended. Many people were injured and reports speak of many victims on the streets and in hospitals around the country. On 22 December, demonstrations continued in Dair (in Muharraq island) and in several villages in the central and south-western areas of Bahrain. On 13 December, Sheikh Ali Salman (whose arrest on 5 December sparked-off the uprising) was brought before the civil court. Fifteen lawyers volunteered to defend himl amongst them are Ahmed Al-Shamlan, Moharruned Ahmed, Salman Seyadi, Abdulla Hashem, Abdul Shaheed Khalaf, Hasan Bedaiwi, Jalila AlHullaibi, Layla Al-Mahari and others. Thejudge could not prove any charge against Sheikh Salman, givcn the strength of the defense and decided to postpone the trial till 20 December. On 20 December, Sheikh Ali Salman was not present at the court room. But the public prosecutor read a ministerial order announcing that Sheikh Salman is now detained under the provisions of the State Security Law. Sixteen lawyers have consequently demanded that Sheikh Salman must receive an independent medical examination to verify reports that he has been either tortured or killed (since he has not attended the second hearing on 20 December). Iffy 25 December, it was known that three hundred (300) prisoners were detained and held under [he provisions of the State Secunty Law . The latter empowers the interior minister to order the administrative detention of any person for up to 3 years without trial. It is worth noting that it was this law that caused the dissolving of the National Assembly, when all deputies refused to pass the law. Under Bahrain’s constitution, no document can become law unless both the National Assembly and the Amir (head of state) approve the draft. The number of prisoners was reported last by AFP (on 22 December) to be more than 1600 people. The whereabouts of many people are not known, whether in hospitals, detention centres or in hiding. It is reported that the prisoners are held in concentration camps purposefully constructed with barbed wires inside the Qala’a Fort in Manama. A recently released detainee reported that all fonns of torture are being used to force the detainees to sign preprepared papers containing false confessions. He identified two people whose figures were deformed due to torture: Hussain Al-Tattan and Jaffer Al-Sayyah. On 20 December, seventy members of the B ah rain corrLrnunity in London picketed in front of the Bahrain Embassy protesting against the killings and oppression in their country. The ndependent” newspaper quoted eye-witnesss comparing Bahrain with the Palestinian [ntifada. Eye witnesses in the capital, Manama, Jaid they heard bursts of automatic weapon fire Dn 20 December, reported the “Independent” of zl December. A statement was issued on 17 December by Bahraini notables condemning the actions of he government and calling for the immediate -lease of Sheikh Ali Salman and other prison ers. The statement affirmed the aims of the demonstrators by calling for the return of parliamentary life, allowing freedom of press and expression, releasing all political prisoners, topping the violation of civil rights, especially ale right to travel and return back home. In Sanabis, Daih and Jedhafs clashes between demonstrators and police continued until the early hours of Monday moming, 19 December. The National Bank of Bahrain offices in Jedhafs were damaged by police missfire. The University of Bahrain is currently the scene of clashes as students gathered to mourn one of them, Hani Abbas Khamis, who was killed on 17 I)ecember. Funerals were held in many parts of the country, with speeches condemning both the ruling family, Al-Khalifa, and the British security chief, Ian HendersonO Clashes were erupting wherever these funerals had been held. The authorities cut off public utilities (water and electricity) to critical areas. Armoured vehicles were also deployed, and road checkpoints are now common along major roads. Chronology of events started as follows: * The Bahrain’s security forces started their crackdown on pro-democracy movement on 5 December, and have unleashed an oppressive campaign to divert attention from a petition being submitted to the Amir (ruler of Bahrain) demanding for the suspended constitution and the parliament dissolved since 1975 to be reactivated. What enraged the authorities is the fact that the petition, the second in two years
, has been sponsored by all sections and political tendencies in Bahrain including, for the first time, a female university professor, Dr. Moneera Fakhroo, representing women rights. This comprehensive political action has ridiculcd the government’s attempts to drive a wedge between the various religious and national groupings. The fourteen sponsors of the petition represent the Shia and Sunni conununities, secularists, liberals and Islamists. Such a nation-wide consensus has not been seen since the fifties, and this explains the government’s ferocious clamp-down on the pro-democracy movement. * on Monday 5 December at 2.00 am, the security forces carried out a dawn-raid on the residence of Sheikh Ali Salman in Bilad-alQadeem (5 kilometers southwest of Manama). This signaled the start of the latest crackdown. Scores of youth were arrested in similar dawnraids. On Monday morning, crowds started to assemble in a mosque in front of the residence of Sheikh Salman. Similar gatherings took place in other mosques including the grand Khawajah Mosque in the capital Manama where Sheikh Salman leads the daily prayers. Between Tuesday and Friday 6-9 I:)december, security forces were deployed around mosques and other areas in the country. Hundreds of people were arrested and are undergoing interrogalion and torture. The demonstrations by now have spread to most areas in Lhe country. On Saturday 10 December, a delegation of four people arranged for a meeting with the prime minister, Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman AlKhalifa, but were turned away. On 12 December the delegation then met the minister of interior, Sheikh Moharnmed bin Khalifa AlKhalifa, who turned down their plea to release Sheikh Ali Salman and other prisoners. * on Tuesday 13 December, armed security forces attacked the demonstrations in Biladal-Qadeem and Makharqah districtofManama. Barrages of tear gas and rubber bullets rained down on the peaceful gatherings. In Manama, the demonstrators broke away and spread in the old market (souk). Confrontations followed with many injuries an damage to properties. From Wednesday 14 Decemberonwards,dcmonstrations erupted all over the country. In Sitra (the oil island), ment womcn and children demonstrated continuously. The security forces blocked all the roads and used helicopters to Flre rubber bullets. In Duraz, northwest of Bahrain, similar demonstrations took place all days and nights. Then, the marches spread to Bani-lamra, Qadam, Barbar, Abo-Saibaa, Massala, Karrana, Bilad-al-Qadeem, Sitra, Manama, Muharraq, llidd, Dair, Karzakkan, I)cmestan,Jidd-al-Haj, Ras-Romman, Sanabis and other arcas. * Security forces blocked the main Budayya Highway on Friday 16 December, while their helicopters continued raining rubber bullets and tear gas on north-western villages extending from Jidhafs to Duraz. Hundreds of people were arrested on the spot and during dawnraids all over the country. A state of emergency was implemented. The reserve military forces were called up and columns of military vehicles marched from Saudi Arabia across the bridge Imking the two countries. The town and villages of Sitra island were besieged and a major security crack-down resulted in scores of arrests. Fire and smoke together with tear gas wcre: visi ble from far distances in many parts of dlC country. As the Amir celebrated his 33rd enthronement day on 16 December, a complete black-out on news was imposed. News-agencics wcre prevented from reporting the events. * The demands raised by demonstrators were clearly stated in pamphlets and speeches. Thcsc include: (I) Releasing Sheikh Ali Salman and all the others detained since the start of the uprising on 5 December. (2) Formation of an independent commission to investigate who ordered and started shooting and killing demonstrators and punishing them (3) Return of constitutional life and fixing a date for legislative elections (4) Releasing all political prisoners, who were in jail before the uprising (5) Allowing the return of political exiles withoul any preconditions (6) Abolishing the State Sccurity Law of 1974 (7) Expelling the British officer, Ian Henderson j who has masterminded the oppressive campaigns for the last thirty years.

A Police State Can’t Be polite.. Bahrain, as the Economist once described is a polite police-state. Polite in the sense that political physical killing was meant to be kept to a minimum. May be so, if compared to the Death Squads of South America. The British officers running the intelligence department of Bahrain, killed only six people under torture in the Eighties. A similar number of people died under torture in the Seventies. However, Henderson’s men made the maximum number of killing in a month last December. Those tortured to death in the Eighties included: Jamil Al-Ali, Karirn Al-Habshi, Sheikh Jamal Al-Asfoor, Mohammed Hassan Madan, Mahdi Ibrahim and Dr. Hashim AlAlawi. Some others died in mysterious circums tances after being released from cus tody . Looking at the situation differently, from the point of view of human dignity, rights and honour, the killing of even one person under torture is a ruthless crime. Had the government of Bahrain been a different one, that is not being propped-up by US military and UK security officers, the killing and torture would make headlines and the UN might consider serious measures to put an end to violation of human rights. When in 1992, the UN Human Right Commission listed Bahrain under the monitoring scheme, the US representative Mr. Schattock, saved no effort to get B ahrain off the list. The Bahraini authorities and British security officers have prevented Amnesty International from inspecting the conditions of political prisoners. It is now fouryears since Arnnesty was promised a visit~ The same thing happened to Lord Avebury, Chair man of the UK Parliamentary Human Rights Committee. When he was just about set-off to Bahrain in November, the authorities delayed his visit indefinitely. What goes on in Bahrain’s jails is much below the lowest standards that can ever be accepted by civilised people. In fact, the Amir (head of state) and Ian Henderson ahead of intelligence) always compare themselves to Saddam of Iraq and declare that if the prisoners in their hands were in Iraq, they would have been hanged without question. Comparing oneself to the devil or S addam, will always show that there is a long way to go before attaining the highest level of ruthlessness. Indeed, Ian Henderson does not need tobe like Saddam. After all, Bahrain is an island of around half a million people with two points of exitSentry to the country. There is no artny to fear, thanks to the US military presence in the region. But Henderson is certainly capable of being a customised Saddam of Bahrain. To be fair, EBahrainis are not violent in theirnature, and have always resorted to peaceful means . Surely, the like of Henderson would not be able to continue enjoying themselves while creating miseries to others, had they been in a different country. This non-violent nature is not to be regretted. It has saved shedding blood of people, at the time when the unarmed opposition were being killed and tortured to death. May be it is time for the West to stand by their slogans and end the selectivity that characterise their relationship with the oppressive regime in Bahrain.This can be achieved at least by condemning the British officers who are torturing pro-democracy activists. Lord Avebury did the right thing by standing for liberalism.

January 1995

The situation in Bahrain worsened as a result of the iron-fist policy being implemented by the government. More people were killed bringing the total number of people known to have been killed to seven. They were: Hani Abbas Khamis, 25 years old from Sanabis and Hani Ahmed Al-Wasti, 23 years old from Jidhafs (both killed on 17 December), Haji Mirza Ali Abdul Reda, 65 years old from Qadam (died at home on 20 December after receiving severe police beating on the chest by batons), Hussain Qamber, 18 years old from Madinat Isa, died under torture on 4 January, Abdul Qader Al-Fatlawi, 25 years old from Duraz (killed on 12 January), Mohammed Redah Mansoor Ahmed, 30 years old, from Bani Jamra (died on 26 January after lying in coma caused by a bullet rested in his brain on 12 January), and Husain Ali Al-Safi, 21 years old from Sitra (killed on 26 January). The body of Al-Safi was found the next morning with bullet wounds all over his body.

After keeping quite for so long, the information minister started speaking to international media. His statement were embarrassing the regime, and in order to recover, leading member of Al Khalifa commissioned Othman Al-Umair of Asharq Al-Awsat to interview them. All statements were contradicting each other and, luckily, the enemies of pro-democracy were stupid enough to expose themselves with falsified news that were being reported and documented differently by international news organisations. Chronology of events is summarised below:

* Mr. Hussein Qambar, 18 years old, died under torture on 4 January. The police encircled the grave yard at Al- Hoora, and forcibly buried the body in front of his family who were threatened of grave consequences if they called for public gathering to mourn their son.

* The lull in demonstrations was interrupted at 1.45 pm, on 6 January. A group of men and women gathered on the main Budaya Highway, between al Qadam and al Muqshaa villages (in front of the US Ambassador residence) raising placards written in Arabic and English calling for the return of parliament and constitution as well as release of political prisoners. Posters carrying the photos of martyrs were also raised. At 2.35 pm, anti-riot police arrived at the scene. Without any prior warning, the police hailed the demonstrators with tear gas and rubber bullets. The area was encircled for more than 48 hours with door to door arrests. On 7 January, mass demonstrations took to the streets of Duraz. The usual response from police was the use of bullets that explode in the body causing a hundred glass-type particles to spread in the victim.

* On 9 January, pro democracy demonstrators clashed with police in Bilad-al-Qadeem. The main highway (Sheikh Salman Road) was sealed-off. The demonstrators were showered with a white chemical powder that causes skin and eye irritation. On 10 January, the security forces arrested Sheikh Adel Al-Shu’ala. The latter led the prayers at the Grand Al Sadeq Mosque in Duraz. (He was later deported to Syria).

* At 6.30 pm, on 12 January, the biggest protest in the history of Bahrain erupted. At first, Sanabis, Jidhafs, Aali, Sitra and Duraz went out at roughly the same time. Then, most villages in the north west, in the west and in Sitra went out in mass demonstrations. Riot police deployed live ammunition and many forms of poisonous gas and powder that cause vomiting and collapse of affected individuals. In Duraz, Abdul Qader Al-Fatlawi, 25 years old was killed by police. The next day witnessed a major confrontation between the people of Duraz and police. The latter wanted to bury Mr. Al-Fatlawi and prevent mourning gatherings. The clashes resulted in many injuries including people aged over 70. In Bani Jamra, police fired on demonstrators. A bullet penetrated the head of Mohammed Redha Mansoor Ahmed (31 years old and father of three children). He went in coma and died on 26 January.

* In the mean time, the government continued it policy of refusing entry to citizen returning from abroad. For example: Hamid Hassan Al-Madeh, his wife and seven children, Hani al Bannaye, Fuad Mubarak, Ibrahim Ali Al Setri, Ibrahim Al Sanadi, Mahmood Al Ghoreifi and Moneer Abdul Rasool, were refused entry and deported to Dubai and Lebanon. Protest and demonstrations continued in most area between 12 and 15 January.

* On 15 January, the leader of the uprising, Sheikh Ali Salman was forcibly exiled to Dubai. With him were two other leaders: Sheikh Hamza Al-Deiri and Sayed Haider Al-Setri. The latter were arrested in the morning and deported with Sheikh Ali Salman on the same plane. All three were given tickets bound to Damascus. The decision was seemingly taken in rush and since there was no direct plane to Damascus that day, they were deported to Dubai (with a route bound to Damascus). The three leaders changed route and arrived in London on 17 January. In his first comment to BBC Arabic Service, Sheikh Ali Salman stated that “in whatever country I am, I shall respect its laws”. However he confirmed “the determination of the Bahraini opposition to call upon the government of Bahrain to respect the legal agreement which it had signed with the people” referring to the 1973 constitution. Following his deportation, huge demonstrations were reported in Sanabis, Jidhafs and Daih call for his return together with other deported leaders.

* On 18 January, a fourth opposition leader was forcibly deported to Syria. Sheikh Adel Al Shua’la was arrested on 10 January and stayed in jail until his deportation. On 19 January, demonstrations flared up in Duraz, Sanabis and Sitra protesting against the deportation of the four leaders. A spokesman for the ministry of interior was quoted by Asharq Al Awsat (19 January) putting the number of detainees at 400. The actual number is three times as much. Prisoners were held in concentration camps in Mahmeyyat Al-Areen and Belaj Al-Jazayer.

* On 23 January, the Bahrain Foreign Minister announced that he was starting a tour to Paris and London to counter the opposition activities. He declared that his London visit would concentrate on requesting the British Foreign Office to intervene and refuse Sheikh Ali Salman and other two leaders political asylum in Britain. On 24 January, the official daily “Akhbar Al-Khaleej” published an editorial with full anger at those who do not declare their denunciation of the pro democracy movement. This was a message to local businessmen and dignitaries who refused to publish any condemnation.

* On 24 January, the three leaders, Sheikh Ali Salman, Sheikh Hamza Al-Deiri and Sayed Haider Al-Setri, sent a letter to the Bahrain Embassy in London requesting a meeting with the visiting Foreign Minister. The Embassy failed to answer the letter and follow-up phone calls. Also on this day, Sheikh Mohammed Ali Hussain was forcibly deported to Iran on board a ship. Two other people were also deported: Ali Mohammed (a member of the Sunni community) and Mohammed Nasser.

* On 26 January, a day before the scheduled meeting between the Bahrain and British Foreign Ministers, the Bahraini Opposition staged a press conference in the Jubilee Room of the British House of Commons. The press conference was attended by all major news organisations, and Sheikh Ali Salman outlined the approach and demands of the opposition.

* In the press conference it was announced that eighteen British MPs submitted motions No. 457 and 458 to the House of Commons. Motion No. 457 stated “that this House deplores the emergency visit to London by the Foreign Minister of the Bahrain Royal dictatorship Shaikh Mohammed al-Khalifa, who has demanded a meeting with the Foreign Secretary of Her Majesty’s Government to demand the deportation of Bahraini opposition leaders Sheikh Ali-Salman, Sheikh Hamza al-Deiriand Sayed Haider al-Setri, who were illegally expelled by the dictatorships on 15th January, following weeks of rioting in Bahrain in which demonstrators have been shot dead by the British Mercenary led security apparatus, SIS, which, together with Saudi Arabian forces have been employed by the dictatorship to crush demands for human rights and democracy; and calls upon Her Majesty’s Government to stand up to the dictators of Bahrain and inform them that Britain will determine its own decisions on the political asylum to those fleeing persecution in their own countries in accordance with the United Kingdom’s international obligations and its tradition of safe haven for victims of dictatorships”. Motion No 458 concentrated on condemning Ian Henderson who presides over the security apparatus.

* On the same day, 26 January, demonstration broke out in many parts of Bahrain. In sanabis, Abo Saibaa, Daih, Bilad-al-Qadeem and Sitra, live ammunition was used against the demonstrators. A 21 years old youth, Husain Ali Al-Safi was shot dead. The body was found the next morning with bullets penetrating his body in many places.

* The British Foreign Minister informed his Bahrain counterpart that political asylum is dealt with independently by the Home Office.

Bert Mapp: Bahrain Lacks Freedom of Speech

Forcible Deportation Can’t Stop Political Change in Bahrain

Jan 95

The British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, interviewed by the BBC Radio 4 on 27 December 1994, spoke about the prestige Britain had achieved abroad through its military superiority and institutions. He was determined to maintain that influence in the Middle East. At that time, Bahrain had experienced over a number of demonstrations countered by security forces directed by the British Ian Henderson. At least seven deaths, many injuries and hundreds of arrests were reported. In January 1995, three Shia clerics including Sheikh Ali Salman were forcibly deported. They came to London on 17 January 1995.

Forcible expulsion of dissident Arabs from their homeland is a time-honoured custom in Bahrain. In the past, Bombay was a safe haven or open prison for malcontents till India’s independence. Expulsion began in Bahrain soon after Sheikh Ahmed (the conqueror!) Became the first ruler in 1783. For example in 1843, when Muhammed and his uncle Abdulla were joint rulers, Muhammed expelled his uncle who died in Bushihr. During years of warring within the Khalifa family, the British authorities expelled various members to Bombay or Kuwait. In 1938, several people, including Mr. Sa’ad Al-Shamlan were deported to Bombay after quelling a pro-democracy movement. Then, in 1956, needing distant, secure accommodation, the Bahrain authorities found a novel, even bizarre, alternative – St. Helena. This was the tine of Suez, when Abdul Rahman Al Baker, a minor merchant and magazine editor, organised protest demonstrations in Bahrain. It led to rioting and the intervention of British troops, and Al Baker together with Abdul Aziz Al-Shamlan (whose father had been deported to Bombay) and Abd Ali Al-Ulaiwat were detained for allegedly plotting to assassinate the ruler, Sheikh Salman (father of the present Amir), and his advisor Sir Charles Belegrave.

The men, who refused to plead, were tried and convicted by members of the ruler’s family. Al Baker and the other two were sentenced to 14 years on St. Helena. After serving five years and making three appeals, they were released by the British authorities and compensated for wrongful detention. It transpired that they had been handed over to a British warship captain for transportation two hours before authority for this (a British Order in Council) had been promulgated.

Since żBahrain became an independent country, by the authority of the United Nations in 1970, the government has systematically deported its opponents. They may be allowed to return to their homeland and families after years and after accepting humiliating conditions; others fear they may never go home.

Today, expulsion is the government’s alternative to prison. Trials for political dissents are frequently dispensed with. The state security law permits imprisonment of three years (renewable) without trial. I know a Bahraini journalist who was charged for writing about modern slavery, the importation of Filipino housemaids, but when the case was dismissed he was arrested on unspecified evidence and jailed administratively for five years.

According to Amnesty International, torture is practised, but this the government denies. When George Brown MP visited Bahrain’s ex-penal isle, Jedda, to inspect the habitat of two of 1956 uprising, he declared it superior to some non-custodial parts of the Middle East. He never saw, as I did, prisoners kept in leg irons in the Manama (Qala’a) prison.

The government never tires of proclaiming that Bahrain is “liberal and relaxed, and almost crime free” It is true that alcohol is freely available and places of entertainment abound. However, liberal and relaxed are relative terms. One would not recognise the informer in a club. There are taboos. Discussing politics is perilous, a subject avoided even in private. What the country lacks, wrestled over for decades, is free speech and democracy.

“If only Bahrain had been a colony rather than a protectorate of the British, we would have taught them the arts of democratic government”, so mused Sir Bernard Burrows, British political resident in the Gulf in the 1950s. In fact at that time, when Britain was freeing its colonies, British Foreign Office officials went some way with Abdul Rahman Al Baker, Bahrain’s first professional politician, in his aims of introducing trade unions, elections for public bodies and equal opportunities for Sunni and Shia. But Charles Belegrave, the ruler’s right hand man for 30 years, mocked educational standards and argued Bahrain was unfit for democracy. In his time, the ruler was “wise” and the aspirant for public office was “illiterate”.. These terms are still widely used in one for or the other.

Strange to relate, in 1926, the year Belegarve arrived in Bahrain as adviser, a register of electors was compiled (of persons paying house tax) and the ballot box used to elect councillors for Manama municipality, which had been founded in 1919. A Muharraq council was formed. Half of Manama seats were elected, the ruler filling the remainder with representatives of Jewish, Indian and foreign Muslim communities to strike a balance with those elected. Today , all the municipalities’ councils are appointed by the government.

In 1973, a National Assembly was elected only to be dissolved after 18 months when members refused to pass Draconian state security measures. For the past 20 years, absolute control has been exercised by the Amir, Sheikh Isa Al-Khalifa, and close relatives. They occupy the principal offices of the state as well as heading, even if only nominally, boards of commerce and industry, public and private. The Khalifas are believed to number at least 8,000 and besides being a drain on the public purse, for they have to be maintained, those in good jobs frequently block promotion of better qualified citizens.

With free schooling available to all Bahrainis and more than 6,000 places in the university (apart from faculties top heavy with professors and assistant professors!), the pool of talented and qualified young men and women, many with doctorates and masters’ degrees, widens steadily. To educate individuals to high standards and then to stifle their initiatives and deny them the opportunity to express themselves – in every sense of that term – is to foster frustration and court trouble. It is the search for freedom that takes numbers of Bahraini overseas to take up responsible positions in medicine, education, industry and commerce. Still heavily dependent on imported professions and labour, Bahrain has a two-way brain drain.

The real embarrassment is suffered by educated, thinking Bahrain citizens who observe the practice of their dynastic rulers – the patronage, corruption, nepotism, the intrigue and jostling for power. The Amir, aged 61, diminutive and ailing, expects his son Hamad, crown prince and defence chief, to succeed him. The Amir’s younger brother, Khalifa, now prime minister, would like to rule; but if he can’t have the crown, he wants his son, Ali, transport minister, to get it.

In planning for and adjusting to a democratic system, Bahraini opposition leaders would need friends. Considering their vast numbers, I am not optimistic that foreign workers in Bahrain will be helpful. Forty years ago, in the isolated Anglo-American enclave of Awali, I was conscious of a general indifference to Bahrain life and culture by expatriates who were not interested in politics. (A Bapco law said Europeans were forbidden to engage in local politics). We do not know what actions the governments of the United States or Britain would take to support pro-democracy. They seem to choose to support the status-quo. And in the Gulf, the West’s oil interests come first.

Economic problems are global and they affect Bahrain and the Gulf. The recession, budget deficits, the growing gap between rich and poor, rising unemployment among rapidly increasing population and other factors create tensions. The climate suggests that Bahrain and the Gulf should prepare for political change. One must hope it will be a change for good and achieved without violence.

Bert Mapp

Author of “Leave Well Alone” on Bahrain

 

  THE PREDICAMENT OF BAHRAIN Reform v. Despotism Introduction The December 1994 riots in Bahrain have claimed the lives of many civilian protesters. Members of the police and security forces were reported to have been killed too. Eyewitness accounts suggest the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and even live ammunition. The wave of protests was sparked off by the arrest of Sheikh Ali Salman, a Shiite leading member of a growing movement that calls for political reform and demands the restoration of parliamentary life to the island. The movement is said to represent various political, intellectual and trade unionist sectors within the Bahraini society who insist on the return to the 1973 constitution. Since he dissolved the elected assembly in 1975, the Amir has been ruling directly by decree through a cabinet that is dominated by his immediate family. Since then, campaigns for the restoration of democracy and for checking the abuses and violations of human rights by the ruling family and its oppressive security apparatus never ceased. Dr. Abdul Latif El Mahmoud, a sunni University Professor, almost presented a petition signed by more than 25,000 people to the Amir around the middle of last December calling for the restoration of parliamentary life. The move was in response to an overwhelming and grave concern at the harsh treatment suffered by detainees at the hands of the security men in the name of the state of emergency whose Amiri decreed laws grant the security authorities full powers to detain suspects indefinitely. While in detention, prisoners suffer torture and may end up losing their lives as has been reported in a number of known cases. To justify the suspension of democratic life and the crackdown on political activists, the ruling family used the Iranian threat as a pretext. Shiite activists have been accused of serving Iranian interests and of pursuing a plot against Sunnis. Such claims are refuted by Bahraini intellectuals on both sides of the sectarian divide, which has been exploited by the Al Khalifah family to consolidate their rule. The opposition insists that the crisis in Bahrain is far from being simply the result of a sectarian strife between Sunnis and Shiites. The entire population of Bahrain, it is stressed, has for the past two centuries been treated as servants, though – for the sake of convenience – some may have been closer to the ‘masters’ and more favoured by them than others. The policy of divide and rule was well comprehended and implemented by the Al Khalifah dynasty. The recent wave of protests was the culmination of a deep rooted resentment and anger felt by the majority of the people of Bahrain as a result of the injustices they have been suffering for many decades. History The ruling dynasty of al Khalifah came to Bahrain in 1782. Theirs was one of several other small Arab sheikhdoms on the Arabian Gulf. Their position on the Gulf helped guarantee the passage to India, the Jewel in the Crown of the British Empire, and they played an important role in combating piracy. To secure her interests, Britain entered into agreements, similar in terms, with the Arab rulers of the Gulf sheikhdoms, who pledged not to sell, lease, mortgage or give for occupation or any other purpose any portion of territory to the government or subjects of any other power. Britain who already controlled the waters of the Gulf, established in 1861 a land base by signing a treaty with the ruler of Bahrain. Under the terms of this treaty Britain guaranteed the protection of the land and regime of Bahrain from external threats in return for British suzerainty and the exclusion of all other powers. According to the treaties signed in 1882 and 1892, Britain assumed responsibility for the defence and foreign policy of Bahrain. But the independence of India and the nationalisation of the Suez canal signalled the collapse of the great British Empire and made the freeing of Britain from her commitments to her former protectorates inevitable. On 15 August 1971 a new treaty of friendship was signed between Britain and Bahrain to replace the 19th century treaties leading to the declaration of the independence of the state of Bahrain. Area and population The State of Bahrain forms an archipelago of about 33 small islands in the Arabian Gulf, between the peninsula of Qatar and mainland Saudi Arabia. Its total area is about 265.5 square miles (681.75 sq. km). The year 1986 saw the official opening of a causeway linking Bahrain with Saudi Arabia. The population of Bahrain is estimated at around 486,000 (1990) including about 150,000 foreigners. It is estimated that at least 60 per cent of the Muslim population (85% of the total population according to the 1981 census) of Bahrain are Shiites while the rest are Sunnis. Constitution and government In June 1973, almost two years after independence, a Constitution was ratified providing for a National Assembly of 30 members popularly elected for a term of 4 years, together with all members of the Cabinet (appointed by the Amir). Elections took place in December 1973, but the Amir dissolved the Assembly in August 1975, and has since ruled directly through the cabinet. The Amir of Bahrain is Sheikh Isa bin Salman al Khalifah, who was born in 1933 and came to power on 2 November 1961. The Crown Prince is his son Sheikh Hamad bin Isa al Khalifah. The Cabinet, appointed by the Amir, is headed by the Amir’s brother Sheikh Khalifah bin Salman al Khalifah. All important cabinet portfolios – more than half of the total number – are held by members of the Amir’s family. Democracy in Bahrain, a short lived dream! A brief glance at the history of the democratic process in Bahrain would soon reveal how short lived it was and how the ruling family nipped it in the bud. It was never given the chance to grow and flourish. The story of how the parliamentary system came to an abrupt end was, definitely, at the root of Bahrain’s present problems and was the precursor of today’s crisis. At the time of its birth, the state of Bahrain was passing through a critical stage in its history. Some twenty three years ago, it was still in its infancy as a state. External and internal threats were perceived by its ruling family. Britain withdrew its forces from the East of Sues in 1971, the Gulf countries including Bahrain saw the last stages of the withdrawal. The late shah of Iran claimed Bahrain belonged to Iran and he expressed the desire to annex it. An epidemic of Cholera broke out in late 1972, and major fires engulfed huge oil storage tanks in the oil refineries. At the same time, there was a growing popular demand for political change and reform. Not before long, the United States moved in. Its military presence secured the protection against external threats and possible internal attempts against the ruling family. In other words, the United States had filled the power vacuum created by the withdrawal of the British from the region. Following the visit by a United Nations fact finding mission, Bahrain was admitted to the UN as an independent state. The refinery blazes were brought under control and the threat of cholera soon abated thanks to the huge medical effort employed to counter it. The only remaining thorny issue, and seemingly insoluble, was the question of popular demand for political reform. By joining the United Nations as an independent state, the government of Bahrain was expected by its people to proceed toward modernising the system of government. Citizens expected they would gain their legitimate rights and expected the regime to transform itself from a tribal sheikhdom to a modern constitutional government. The Amir of Bahrain, seemingly in pursuit of national unity to confront the claims to Bahrain by the Shah of Iran, gave the go ahead signal for legislative elections to be held. On the first of December 1972, 22 persons were elected to a constituent assembly that also included eight appointed members (by the Amir) and all twelve members of the Cabinet. A draft constitution (based on the Kuwaiti Constitution) was adopted and presented by the government to the constituent assembly. Following a yea
r of debating, the Constitution of the state of Bahrain was announced on 6 December 1972. A year later, on 7 December 1973, elections for the first National Assembly took place. The National Assembly was made up of 30 elected members and 14 (ex-officio) cabinet ministers. Cabinet ministers were granted the same rights as the elected members in both the National and Constituent Assemblies. Measures like these were devised to secure the ruling family’s leverage in the legislative Council. Nevertheless, the elected representatives of the people of Bahrain presented themselves as rather shrewd operators and skilled parliamentarians, despite the very short life of their democracy. The members of the National Assembly managed to stamp their authority on the proceedings in debating the budget and other such important issues and in criticising the policies of the government. The ruling family, so used to having its own way and ruling autocratically for so long, found itself, for the first time since 1782, having to be accountable for its actions. The Al Khalifah just could not live with having to answer to the people or having to share power with them. Questions of budget allocations, for example, were found particularly annoying and irritating to the Amir, who reportedly received one-third of the gross national income. Questioning the repressive measures taken against political activists by the British commanded security service didn’t prove to be popular with the ruling family either. Neither was the people’s demand that the right to form and join popular associations and trade unions be guaranteed. Employer-labour disputes and student demonstrations were high on the agenda too. Honeymoon is over! Without consulting the parliament, the Amir decreed the State Security Law in October 1974. This was a devastating blow to the democratic process in Bahrain. It empowered the Interior Minister to order the administrative detention of political activists on grounds of suspicion for up to three years (extendible to a further period of 3 years) without the due process of a judicial trial. The Prime Minister withdrew from the Assembly, in effect hindering its sessions, and on 24 August 1975, he wrote to his brother the Amir complaining that the members of the Assembly were obstructing the function of the government. The Amir’s response to his brother’s letter was to pass Amiri decree 14/1975 declaring the dissolution of the National Assembly as of 26 August 1975. The curtain was to be drawn to a close, rather prematurely while the play was still in its opening scene. The show was cut short. After all Bahrain is a country, sadly like many others around it in the entire region, where the show of democracy is not permitted to go on. The Amir and his ruling family were at a loss to answer their people’s criticisms and were not prepared to live up to their constitutional and moral responsibilities. The Bahrainis recall with bitterness the statement made by the Amir in December 1973. His decree approving the establishment of the Constituent Assembly and the constitution of the country spoke of “anticipating, with faith and determination, a future based on consultation and justice, rich in participation, in carrying out responsibilities of government and administration, ensuring freedom and equality, as stated in the preamble of the constitution.” Article 65 of the constitution upon which Amiri decree 14/1975 of 26.8.1975 to dissolve the National Assembly was based stipulated that elections for a new Assembly should be held within no more than two months from the date of the dissolution of the old Assembly. Failing to do so, the dissolved Assembly would retain its complete constitutional authority. Article 108 of the Bahraini constitution prohibits the suspension of any of its articles except in the case of a state of emergency and martial law within the limits outlined by the law. The dissolution of the National Assembly did not take place under these conditions. The twenty or so years that followed the dissolution of the National Assembly witnessed a relentless effort on behalf of the people of Bahrain, with all its factions and sects, aimed at the restoration of the Constitution and parliamentary life to the country. In mid-November 1992 a group of the country’s notables and dignitaries signed and presented to the Amir a petition calling on him to enact section 2 of chapter 4 of the constitution and call for the elections of a new National Assembly. A second petition signed by more than 25,000 Bahrainis from all walks of life was prepared by the democracy campaign a few months ago. The petition demanded respect for human rights, an end to detentions without trial, an end to forceful repatriations, an end to torture and ill-treatment of detainees and the immediate release of all political prisoners. Remedy LIBERTY for the Muslim World firmly believes that the only way forward for Bahrain is the restoration of democracy. The ruling family of Bahrain can not go on forever ignoring the will and wishes of the people. The gross violations of human rights, in the form of torture, arbitrary arrest and forcible exile will not restore peace and stability. The wind of change is blowing over the entire region, the Bahraini people have the same rights as everyone else. Ignoring these rights can only enflame the feelings of the people and make reconciliation even more difficult. The world is entering a new century with renewed hope in the future for the coming generations. Will the ruling family of Bahrain still use rubber bullets and tear gas or even live ammunitions to answer its people’s cry for decency in treating their legitimate demands? Are not the youth of Bahrain worthy of more than their blood being spilt on the streets when calling for rights enshrined in the constitution? While article 29 of the constitution of Bahrain states that “every person has the right to communicate with the authorities in writing and with his or her own signature,” the Bahrainis who demonstrated in support of the petition that called for the restoration of the constitution were met with bullets, tear gas and forcible exile. State violence proves, once again, to be the preferable option for despotic governments when asked to respect human rights and recognise their people’s right to have a say in the running of their own affairs. This story is, sadly, not unique to Bahrain. Other countries in the region have demonstrated a total disregard for the inalienable rights of man. The familiar pretext of an “out side conspiracy” or “internal subversive elements” is used to justify the most despicable of all crimes. It is most regrettable that an independent state such as Bahrain should continue to employ mercenaries in order to suppress and persecute its own people. The most well-known mercenary is a British officer called Ian Henderson. From his position as a commander of the security services of Bahrain, Henderson supervises the oppressive and torturous operations undertaken to silence critics and punish opponents. Officers from a variety of foreign countries are said to serve in the Bahraini intelligence services and participate with the full knowledge of their governments in suppressing the Bahraini people. The crisis in Bahrain is quite profound and, as experience has shown, it just cannot be resolved by repression. The only possible remedy is to give back to the people of Bahrain the rights they are entitled to in the constitution. They are entitled to a freely elected parliament that has the power to appoint, supervise or dismiss the government. The Amir’s publicly declared intention of forming a “rubber stamp” consultative assembly, where all members are appointed by him, will Alhadi Khalaf

By Alhadi Khalaf
18 January, 1995

For the past few months several oppositional networks, including shia islamists, sunni islamists, communists, nassersists (and the rest of the rainbow of arab political discourse) have been coordinating their activities to impress the autocratic ruler of bahrain to re-instate the country’s elected parliament, impliment the constitutions and end violations of human rights by the British-led internal security forces in bahrain.

On December 19th, Amnesty International issued an urgent appeal stating that it has ” received reports that Hani ‘Abbas Khamis and Hani Ahmed al-Wasti were killed on 17 December 1994 in circumstances suggesting that they may have been unlawfully killed by the security forces.”

“The two men were taking part in demonstrations in al-Sanabis in Manama when the Bahraini security forces opened fire, killing them and injuring a number of others. The United Nations Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials state that “intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.”

“The demonstrators were calling for, among other things, the release of political detainees arrested in connection with the signing of the petition calling on the Amir of Bahrain to reinstate the parliament. The detainees include al-Shaikh ‘Ali Salman who was arrested on 5 December. Since that date a number of demonstrations have taken place in different parts of Bahrain, some of which turned violent. Scores of people have been arrested”

According to opposition sources at least 1600 persons have detained while the government states that it is “presntly detaining only 200” Most of these will be subject to the notorious “Amiri Decree on Measures Concerning State Security (issued October 22, 1974).

The State Security Decree was issued few days before the end of Bahraini parliament summer session. The government’s made several attempts to make that decree a law, in accordance with the country’s constitution, by having passed by the parliament. All attempt were opposed by a solid block of 29 out of the 30 elected members of the parliament. Having failed to break the overwhelming majority, the Amir of Bahrain issued another decree, dissolving the parliament itself. The same decree (August 1975) abrogated the relevant articles in the constitution which stipulates that new elections must be held within sixty days of dissolution of the parliament.

The government and its British-led security forces, continue to enforce the unconstitutional decree which states in part:

” Article 1: if there is a serious evidence that a person has made statements, committed acts, undertaken activities which are considered as endangering internal or external security of the country, or to the country’s religious or national interests, or to its fundamental structure, or social or economic systems, or incite discord which affects or could affect relations between the people and the government, or between the various institutions of the state, between sectors of the people, those working in establishment and companies, or which aim to assist the commission of acts of sabotage or harmful propaganda, or the dissemination of heretical principles, then the Interior Minister is empowred to order the arrest of the said person, place him in one of Bahrain’s prisons, inspect him, inspect his residence, inspect his work-place and to to take whatever necessary to gather evidence and complete investigations. The period of detention shall not exceed three years….”

“Article 2: Court sessions shall always be held in-camera, and no one is permitted to attend except the defendant, his representative and representative of the Prosecutor-General. …..”

Empowered by this unconstitutional decree, Bahrain’s security forces under the command of the British mercenary Col Ian Henderson have, over the past twenty years, victimized thousands of Bahraini citizens. Some of whom, such as Mr. Muhsin Marhoon a well known lawyer and a member of the dissolved parliament, have detained for five years without trial or charges.

The ferocity of recent clamp down may be related to the GCC summit which convened in Bahrain on December 19. Nothing, even peaceful forms of protest should alloed to disturb the conservative rulers’ parley.

An alliance of local opposition forces have been planning to use the occasion to hand over to the ruler of Bahrain a petition signed by thousands of citizens from all walks of life with a rainbow of political and social backgrounds, demanding an end to the rulers unconstitutional decree which suspended the country s constitution and parliament. The popularity of the petition among the public has surpassed every optimistic forecast. This may have been facilitated by the rising rates of unemployment among the country’s youth; the sharp decline in economic activities in the Island; and the blatant corruption within senior circles of the government and the ruling family, Alkhalifa.

In spite of its independence in 1971, Bahrain continues to rely in matters of internal security on Western support and expertise. The British-led security forces in Bahrain have been particularly ferocious when dealing with opposition activities. Several hundreds of Bahraini citizens have been deported, forced into exile or denied entry to their own country. The twenty years old Security Decree allows the regime to arrest and detain any person for a period of up to three years without charges or trial. Thousands of Bahrainis have been victimized by the security forces indiscriminate use of that notorious decree.

State security charges, ” liasoning with foreign state…” were brough against the young cleric and several others few days before christmas. They were not allowed to be present as they were detained in solitary confinements. Eleven lawyers volunteered to defend them. The lawyers included shias and sunni and represented all political spectrum in the island. Noteworthy is one of them is a woman.

Unfortunately, Bahrain authorities decided to go further. On January 15, Ali Salman and two others were deported from Bahrain to united arab emirates. The group has since moved to London, England, where they are seeking political asylum.

What may be be interesting to the discussion on “political islam” is that in bahrain, the islamists, the sunni as well as the shias, donot abhore or shy away from cooperating with secular opposition forces. Indeed they share a common platform of demands for political reforms which begins with accepting the demands of REAl life. Unlike their counterparts in several arab states, bahraini islamists do not reject their secular co-citizens or condemn them to hell already in this life. Probably there is something worth pondering about or learning from, in the “joint action strategy” which has been undertaken by pro democracy forces the tiny gulf state.

 

BACK TO THE INDEX