Abu Dhabi Police arrest 237 beggars during Ramadan
Abu Dhabi police have arrested 237 individuals during the month of Ramadan in a continued effort to combat begging and related fraudulent activities in the emirate, the authority announced on Friday.
Major Muslim Mohammed Al-Amiri, Deputy Director of the Criminal Security Sector, stated that beggars are increasingly using deceptive stories to gain sympathy and solicit money from unsuspecting residents.
In response, the police have launched continuous campaigns to arrest the beggars, regardless of the methods they use to manipulate and defraud the public.
Al-Amiri urged the public to play an active role in reducing begging by refraining from giving alms and zakat directly to beggars. Instead, he emphasised the importance of donating through official channels, charities, and accredited organisations to ensure that contributions reach those who truly need them.
He further highlighted that by giving money to beggars, well-meaning residents may unintentionally perpetuate the cycle of begging, which in turn encourages fraudulent activities disguised as acts of charity.
The crackdown on begging is not limited to Abu Dhabi alone. Police across the UAE are stepping up their campaigns to combat begging.
In Dubai, police arrested 127 beggars during the first half of Ramadan, seizing more than Dh50,000 in their possession. Sharjah Police also carried out a significant crackdown, arresting 107 individuals and seizing over Dh50,000 from them. The arrested individuals in Sharjah included 87 men and 20 women.
Meanwhile, 51 beggars have been arrested in Ras Al Khaimah since the beginning of Ramadan.
'Fight begging'
Earlier in March, Abu Dhabi Police issued a warning to the public about interacting with beggars during Ramadan, urging residents to donate only through official and approved channels.
A 33-second awareness video shared on X by the Abu Dhabi Police highlighted the dangers of begging, emphasising that it is a phenomenon that poses serious risks to the security and safety of society.
Earlier, Dubai Police too had warned of begging scams during the holy month.
The "Fight Begging" campaign aims to raise awareness of the importance of preserving the country's civilised image by combating and preventing the crime of begging.
Begging is a crime in the UAE punishable by a Dh5,000 fine and three-months imprisonment. Those found operating a gang of beggars or recruiting people from outside the country to seek alms face a six-month jail term and a Dh100,000 fine. Raising funds without a permit is punishable by Dh500,000 fines.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
a day ago
- Middle East Eye
'We don't want them': Trump issues latest iteration of controversial travel ban
US President Donald Trump instituted a long-anticipated travel ban on Thursday, prohibiting US entry to citizens from 12 countries and restricting the entry of citizens from seven others. Trump's proclamation 'fully' restricts nationals from largely African and Muslim countries, including Afghanistan, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and Myanmar from entering the US. It also partially restricts nationals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. In a video he released on social media on Thursday, Trump said the Colorado attack had 'underscored the extreme dangers posed by foreign nationals who are not properly vetted'. The suspect in the attack is alleged to be an Egyptian national who overstayed his visa and previously lived in Kuwait. Rumors had been circulating for months about what countries would be on the list after Trump signed an executive order on 20 January and gave the US State Department 60 days to identify countries for which 'vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a partial or full suspension on the admission of nationals from those countries'. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters According to the Trump administration, the ban is designed to 'protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes'. How does the ban work? The order goes into effect at midnight on 9 June, and both the full and partial bans apply to foreign nationals from the designated countries who are outside the country on 9 June and do not have a valid visa as of that day. The proclamation outlines that no visas issued before that date will be revoked. Citizens from countries facing a complete ban will not be issued any non-immigrant or immigrant visas. Countries facing a partial restriction will see the suspension of entry of all immigrants and the following temporary visas: B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas. The order has made room for exceptions including the following: any lawful permanent resident of the United States; dual nationals; diplomats travelling on valid non-immigrant visas; athletes or members of an athletic team and immediate relatives; travelling for the World Cup, the Olympics or other major sporting event; immediate family immigrant visas; adoptions; Afghan special immigrant visas; special immigrant visas for United States government employees; immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran. 'Unecessary and ideologically motivated' Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Muslim civil rights organisation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said in a statement released on Wednesday that Trump's new travel ban 'is overbroad, unnecessary and ideologically motivated'. 'Are they troublemakers?': Trump questions why Harvard has so many international students Read More » He criticised the targeting of mostly Muslim and African nations and said it raised 'the specter of more vague free speech restrictions'. "Automatically banning students, workers, tourists, and other citizens of these targeted nations from coming to the United States will not make our nation safer." He added that the screening tests being undertaken by the US government were "vague" and could easily be abused to ban immigrants based on religion or political activism. He said the new travel ban risks separating families, deprives students of educational opportunities, blocks patients from accessing unique medical treatment, and would create a chilling effect on travellers. 'Automatically banning anyone based on their nationality or vague allegations of 'hostile attitudes' to American culture or policies undermines our nation's values,' he added. World reacts Like Trump's controversial tariffs, the latest iteration of the travel ban has continued to ruffle feathers and wear leaders down. Venezuela's interior minister, Diosdado Cabello, lambasted the Trump administration as 'bad people' on state television, saying 'they are supremacists who think they own the world and persecute our people for no reason". "The truth is being in the United States is a big risk for anybody, not just for Venezuelans," he added. Meanwhile, the ban prompted Chad's president, Mahamat Deby, to issue a reciprocal ban on US citizens. In a statement, he said, 'Chad has no planes to offer, no billions of dollars to give, but Chad has its dignity and pride'. Republic of Congo government spokesman Thierry Moungalla told a news conference he thought it was 'a misunderstanding'. 'Congo is not a terrorist country, does not harbour any terrorists, is not known to have a terrorist inclination,' he said. The Somali ambassador to the US, Dahir Hassan Abdi, took a more resigned tone. He said in a statement that Mogadishu 'values its longstanding relationship with the United States. [Somalia] stands ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised'. Trump's history with travel bans Six of the countries on the new list were on different iterations of Trump's 2017 predominantly Muslim travel ban list, and continue to remain on the banned list. These countries include Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and Venezuela. Trump upset national sensibilities when he issued a "Muslim" travel ban within a week of taking office during his first term in January 2017. The countries on his original list were seven Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. The order also indefinitely suspended the entry of Syrian refugees This order affected individuals regardless of their immigration status, including green card holders and those with employment-based visas. Travellers with valid visas and permanent residency were denied entry. Following large-scale protests and chaos at airports, courts pushed back on the ban, leading to the first ban being blocked by a temporary restraining order in Washington v. Trump in February 2017. US judge blocks Trump order banning foreign students at Harvard University Read More » Three more iterations of the ban followed, leading to numerous lawsuits being filed in federal court against the Trump administration. One of the most successful lawsuits was Trump v Hawaii, a lawsuit on behalf of the state of Hawaii, where the Muslim Association of Hawaii, Dr Ismail Elshikh, and two John Doe plaintiffs challenged the various iterations of the ban. After Trump issued the second iteration of the ban in March 2017, the Hawaii district court issued a nationwide injunction against the second version of the ban, which was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on 12 June 2017. The Court prohibited the government from enforcing the ban against foreign nationals who possess a 'bona fide relationship' with a person or entity in the US. But the government interpreted that ruling narrowly, issuing new guidance that would still ban 'grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, fiancés, and any other 'extended' family members' on the theory that they are not 'close' family. In July 2017, the Hawaii district court ruled that this definition 'represents the antithesis of common sense' and prevented the government from enforcing it. After a government appeal, the Ninth Circuit largely left the district court's order relating to travel, in place, while staying part of the order relating to refugees. Trump issued a third iteration of the ban in September 2017, and the lawsuit returned to the Hawaii district court. The court ruled that it violated the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Ninth Circuit affirmed, but the Supreme Court permitted Muslim Ban 3.0 to go into effect as appeals progressed. In January 2018, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and eventually reversed the grant of a preliminary injunction after a 5–4 decision. The third iteration of the ban imposed full visa restrictions on citizens from eight nations, six of them predominantly Muslim. These countries included Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and Somalia. Iranian nationals were allowed to enter under valid student (F and M) and exchange visitor (J) visas, although such individuals were subject to 'enhanced screening and vetting requirements'. In January 2020, a fourth travel ban was instituted and included additional countries such as Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan, and Tanzania, which restricted applications to immigrants from those countries but did not restrict entry by non-immigrants.
Al Etihad
2 days ago
- Al Etihad
Abu Dhabi Police and Abu Dhabi Civil Defence Authority issue prevention and safety guidelines for Eid Al Adha holiday
5 June 2025 20:15 ABU DHABI (ALETIHAD)Abu Dhabi Police and Abu Dhabi Civil Defence Authority have issued prevention and safety guidelines for the Eid Al Adha guidelines urge community members to adhere to precautionary measures during the celebrations in support of the continued protection of lives and property in the prevention and safety guidelines call for members of the public to comply with traffic laws and reduce speed when driving, give right of way to emergency response vehicles, and avoid stunts and other reckless guidelines further advise the public to refrain from using or handling fireworks, to ensure that chargers, extension cables, and other electronic devices comply with safety standards, ensure that children do not play near main roads or cross the street without supervision, choose an open and safe barbecue site away from flammables, and extinguish charcoal or firewood well after finishing. In the event of and emergency, the public are to call 999 immediately. Based on international best practices, the guidelines form part of the shared efforts of Abu Dhabi Police and Abu Dhabi Civil Defence Authority to enhance emergency response preparedness and ensure smooth traffic flow and public safety during the Eid Al Adha holiday.
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
Al Ain court obligates a man to pay 51,430 for causing traffic accident
The Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Cases Court has ordered a person to pay Dhs51,430 plus a fine of Dhs5,000 as a compensation to another man for damaging two vehicles while driving. Earlier, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in which he requested that he be obligated to pay Dhs51,430, which was the cost of repair for his damaged car plus Dhs75,000 as the rental of a car of the same type that he had to rent while his car was under repair. He also requested the court to obligate the defendant to pay the incurred charges, expenses and lawyer's fees. The plaintiff pleaded that the defendant caused damage to his vehicle, noting that the defendant was convicted of the charge in a lawsuit that had already been filed against. In support of his lawsuit, the plaintiff attached to his docket a copy of the traffic accident report and a copy of the supervising judge's decision to appoint a technical expert to investigate the issue and assess the cost of repair of the plaintiff's vehicle. The technical expert decided that the total repair costs of Dhs51,430 as incurred by the plaintiff were reasonable and in line with the extent of the damages resulting from the accident, assuming that he had bought original spare parts. As for the plaintiff's request for Dhs75,000 as a compensation for not being able to use his car for approximately 6 months from the date of the accident until the date of the actual repair of the car, the court estimated that a Dhs5,000 compensation for the material harms caused to the plaintiff due to the defendant's error would be sufficient.
