Politics – Page 221 – Minivan News

“The world needs more political leaders like President Nasheed”: 350.org

Global climate justice NGO 350.org has reaffirmed that “urgent action is needed to address the climate crisis” in the Maldives, and that its continued active international leadership is “immensely important”.

In light of the IPCC’s findings and the danger sea level rise poses for the Maldives, 350.org has highlighted the essential international leadership role former President Mohamed Nasheed and the country have played for achieving climate justice.

“The IPCC’s 5th assessment report largely reaffirms what we already knew, and makes it abundantly clear that urgent action is needed the world-over. It is immensely important the Maldives to continue it’s active, leadership stance to go carbon neutral within a decade and advocate for more international action,” Will Bates, Global Campaigns Director and Co-Founder of 350.org told Minivan News.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes’s fifth assessment report emphasised the importance of human influence on the climate change system.

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased,” read the report released last month.

“As the ocean warms, and glaciers and ice sheets reduce, global mean sea level will continue to rise [during the 21st century], but at a faster rate than we have experienced over the past 40 years,” said IPCC Working Group 1 Co-Chair, Qin Dahe.

The IPCC’s report “sounds the alarm for immediate action on climate change,” declared 350.org.

“The report, which is the most authoritative, comprehensive assessment of scientific knowledge on climate change, finds with near certainty that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet and that climate impacts are accelerating… Scientists have upped the certainty that humans are responsible for warming, increasing their confidence to 95%,” highlighted 350.org.

350.org has been building a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis. It has coordinated over 20,000 climate demonstrations in more than 182 countries since the organisation’s founding in 2008.

350 parts per million is what many scientists, climate experts, and progressive national governments are now saying is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere.

“The world needs more political leaders like President Nasheed”: 350.org

Bates noted that former President Nasheed has been an integral figure for the global climate justice movement.

“President Nasheed’s courageous and creative actions to confront the true scale of the climate crisis in 2009 and 2010 were a powerful wake-up call for the world. Hearing from an entire nation about the imminent threat to their future through their democratically elected president, and seeing their actions to address the crisis was an inspiration for the rest of the world to step up our efforts to address the climate crisis,” Bates stated.

“The world needs more political leaders like President Nasheed who understand the severity of the threat, and who speak and act truthfully in response,” he added.

The NGO also believes President Nasheed’s leadership within the Maldives has benefited the nation’s domestic climate justice movement.

“I believe it was in part thanks to the openness and freedom given to civil society in general during his administration that allows young people and NGOs to organize on climate change above and beyond what President Nasheed was working on at the national policy and international levels,” said Bates.

“No doubt his efforts to have the Maldives go carbon neutral in a decade was a powerful act of leadership that more governments around the world should be following as well,” he added.

“We support human rights and a free and fair democratic process in the Maldives,” Bates noted in regard to Nasheed’s ongoing domestic efforts to ensure these values are upheld.

Although he emphasised that 350.org is not directly involved in Nasheed’s political struggles at home, Bates explained how the non-violent direct action strategy 350.org employs can benefit the Maldives in its fight for climate justice as well as democratisation.

“Social movements around the world have proven the power of non-violent direct action as a means of creating change, political and otherwise,” he said.

“President Nasheed’s underwater cabinet meeting in 2009 was a particularly creative form of action, and there are countless ways that different non-violent tactics – from marches and rallies to culture-jamming and online memes – can enhance struggles against climate change as well as for promoting democracy and fair elections,” he continued.

“We’ve seen incredibly creative actions in the Maldives by grassroots activists fighting climate change too and with such international concern for the political situation there, similar tactics could be employed at the current time with great effect,” he added.

Nasheed has often spoken of the close interrelationship between climate change, human rights, and democracy, particularly since his February 7, 2012 controversial transfer of power, and 350.org has echoed this belief.

“Human rights and climate justice are very clearly inextricably linked as the climate crisis infringes on people’s access to food, water, health, and general security. Furthermore, the causes of the climate crisis, such as the extraction and burning of fossil fuels and cutting down forests have immense human rights implications. Meanwhile many the solutions, such as more decentralized renewable energy infrastructure, are in many ways a step towards democratizing more of how our world works,” said Bates.

“Although that is not to say that countries that exist with undemocratic systems of government can’t also enact solutions to achieve greater human rights and climate justice,” he added.

Extreme sea level rise threats

“The rate of sea level rise will very likely exceed that observed during 1971–2010 due to increased ocean warming and increased loss of mass from glaciers and ice sheets,” all prospective scenarios in the IPCC’s report projected.

Sea level is expected to rise between 0.26 metres (0.85 feet) and 0.98 metres (3.22 feet) by 2100, depending on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced this century, it added.

While these projections represent the possible low and high extreme scenarios of sea level rise, small island states – such as the Maldives – are especially vulnerable, the IPCC previously stressed in it’s fourth assessment report.

With over 80 percent of the land area in the Maldives being less than a meter (3.28 feet) above mean sea level, “the slightest rise in sea level will prove extremely threatening,” UNDP Maldives previously declared. “A rise in sea levels by 0.50 meters could see significant portions of the islands being washed away by erosion or being inundated [by the ocean].”

“Even now some islands are seriously affected by loss not only of shoreline but also of houses, schools and other infrastructure,” it continued.

Not only is the Maldives extremely vulnerable to sea level rise, other climate change impacts – including extreme weather events, coral bleaching and acidification – which exacerbate these negative effects, it added.

Earlier this year the World Bank also expressed the urgent need for concerted efforts to support the Maldives in adapting to climate change due to sea level rise projections.

Additionally, the UN’s 2013 global human development report highlighted inequality and climate change vulnerabilities as major concerns for the Maldives, despite the country’s “significant economic growth” in recent years.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Police stopped election illegally, in violation of constitution: Human Rights Commission

Police blocked the Elections Commission (EC) from conducting the re-vote of the presidential election on October 19 in contravention of the constitution, the Police Act, and the Elections Act, the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) has said.

The commission said in a press statement yesterday (October 22) that it had replied to a letter sent by the Maldives Police Service (MPS) seeking to clarify which laws the police had violated and whether its claims on local media that police stopped the election were based on an investigation.

Police said on their website on Monday (October 21) that claims of the police acting outside their law enforcement mandate were “misleading” and were made “without considering the truth of the matter at all.”

The HRCM said in its reply that an investigation had been launched “immediately” upon learning that police had obstructed the EC on the morning of October 19 – an hour before polls were due to open.

The commission’s staff went to the EC offices, made inquiries and sought information from the EC secretary general as well as police officers.

“It was established with certainty through the commission’s inquiries that [police] stopped the Elections Commission from taking anything out [of its office],” HRCM said.

Announcing the cancellation of the polls on October 19, the EC said in a statement that its staff were told by police officers that “no document relating to the election can leave the commission’s offices”.

As HRCM deputy chair, Ahmed Tholal, was unable to contact the police focal point until 11:45am despite repeated calls. The commission’s letter dismissed as “false” the police’s contention that the HRCM’s condemnation in the media was made “without any consideration [of the facts].”

The HRCM also revealed that Acting Home Minister Ahmed Shafeeu told the commission that police had “acted upon an order given to them”.

Moreover, the HRCM noted that “the police stand” was made clear in a press conference by Chief Superintendent Abdulla Nawaz on the morning of October 19, in which he said that the police decided not to provide cooperation to the EC as it had not followed the 16-point guidelines imposed by the Supreme Court judgment that annulled the September 7 election.

Following the HRCM statement, former President Mohamed Nasheed tweeted today that he believes the prosecutor general should prosecute Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz for blocking the re-scheduled vote.

Appearing before the parliamentary Security Services ‘241’ Committee on Monday, Riyaz had however denied that police had blocked the election, insisting that the MPS only refused to provide security and cooperation.

Constitution and laws

The HRCM statement meanwhile listed the articles of the constitution and relevant laws that the police violated by obstructing the EC.

By blocking the election, the police “deprived all Maldivian citizens of the right to vote stated in article 26 of the constitution”.

Police also prevented the EC from carrying out its constitutionally mandated duties specified in article 170, which states that the powers and responsibilities of the commission include conducting, managing, supervising and facilitating all elections and public referendums, ensuring the proper exercise of the right to vote, and ensuring that “all elections and public referendums are conducted freely and fairly, without intimidation, aggression, undue influence or corruption.”

Consequently, the HRCM contended, “the Maldives Police Service on October 19, 2013 robbed the Elections Commission of its legal status”.

The commission noted that article 237 specifies the responsibilities of the security services as protecting the nation’s sovereignty, maintaining its territorial integrity, defending the constitution and democratic institutions, enforcing law and order, and rendering assistance in emergencies.

The HRCM argued that the proper role of the police on election day should be “acting upon the advice and consultation” of the EC to prevent the possible intimidation or aggression referred to in article 170.

Relevant laws, MoUs, and Supreme Court guidelines

The HRCM further contended that police violated article 7 of the Police Act (Dhivehi) by obstructing the election and “blocking the basic right of citizens to vote” as the law states that police must respect and protect the fundamental rights of citizens in the performance of duties.

Moreover, since article 13 of the police law states that police powers and discretions are derived from and restricted by the constitution, relevant laws and regulations, and court orders, the HRCM stated that on October 19 police acted “outside the bounds of the law and without a court order to stop the election”.

While police claimed that security and cooperation was withdrawn because the EC breached point five of the Supreme Court guidelines, “as point five of the guidelines does not definitively order the Maldives Police Service to do or not do anything, this commission believes that the police violated the aforementioned guidelines.”

As the Elections Act does not authorise any institution “to exert influence or power” over the EC’s work, the HRCM letter stated that police obstructed the EC in violation of the election law and “in a way that undermines the independence of the Elections Commission guaranteed by the constitution.”

The HRCM also noted that police breached the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding signed between the MPS and EC on September 3, which specified the role of the police in assisting the EC with election-related security.

As police were asked to maintain security and provide protection to the EC, the MoU “under no circumstances gave the power to police to obstruct the Elections Commission.”

The HRCM also argued that police contravened the Supreme Court guidelines as the first point ordered the EC and all state institutions to ensure that the first round of the presidential election was held by October 20.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

November 9 elections timeline announced

The Elections Commission (EC) has publicized its work plan for the first round of the presidential election scheduled for November 9.

A window to submit complaints on voter registry information was opened up yesterday (Tuesday, Oct 22). The EC will address complaints today and open up the re-registration process tomorrow and Friday (October 24, 25) for newly eligible voters and voters who will be voting in a location other than their home island.

Voters who re-registered for the cancelled October 19 polls and do not wish to change registration status will not have to submit forms.

Forms are available at the Elections Commission Secretariat, Island Council offices and online.

The EC has said it will continue to follow all elections laws and the guidelines delineated by the Supreme Court for the cancelled vote on October 19.

After re-registration is completed, the EC will receive rejected re-registration forms on Saturday (October 26). On the same day, the names of elections day officials will be sent to candidates for vetting as outlined in the SC guidelines.

The EC will be seeking Maldives National Defense Forces (MNDF) help in addition to police support in dispatching ballot boxes and papers to polling stations. An MOU will be signed between the two organizations on October 27.

Elections observers and monitors will be issued permits on October 29.

On November 1 and 2, a draft of the final voter list will be publicized and the EC will continue to receive any complaints regarding the voter lists.

On November 3, re-registration forms will be sent to the Department of National Registration (DNR) for verification of fingerprints – a key demand by two of the three presidential candidates.

The voter registry will be finalized, printed and sent to presidential candidates on November 4. Candidates will be asked to sign the voter lists on November 5 and 6.

Ballot boxes are to be dispatched on November 8, the election will be held on November 9 and the preliminary results will be announced on the same day.

The official results will be announced on November 12, one day after the current presidential term ends.

This is the EC’s fourth attempt to hold presidential polls. A first round of presidential elections was held on September 7 – no candidate gained 50 percent of the vote, and a second round was scheduled for September 28.

However, third placed candidate Gasim Ibrahim of the Jumhooree Party sought to annul the September 7 results, alleging widespread fraud, despite unanimous praise – international and domestic – of a free and fair election process.

With a verdict pending on the eve of scheduled second round, the EC decided to proceed with polls on September 28, but the Supreme Court in a midnight ruling ordered the EC to delay polls and security forces to halt elections preparations.

On October 7, the Supreme Court annulled the first round and ordered a re-vote by October 20.

The apex court also delineated 16 controversial guidelines on conducting polls which the EC have criticized as restrictions and an infringement on the EC’s independence as the guidelines involve state institutions and presidential candidates in electoral process.

Guidelines include compilation of a new voter registry based on the DNR database, re-registration with new fingerprinted forms. The security forces are required to oversee transport of ballot boxes and papers to polling stations, and candidates are required to vet elections officials at polling stations as well as to sign the voter registry.

Two of the three presidential candidates – the JP and the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) – refused to sign the voter registry on the eve of October 19 elections, after which the police refused to dispatch ballot boxes and papers.

Finally, just one hour before polls were to open, the police forcibly stopped elections officials from leaving EC HQ with any election related document.

After several discussions with the executive and presidential candidates, the EC announced new polls for November 9, and a second round on November 16 if necessary.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Supreme Court issues edict insisting all guidelines be followed

The Supreme Court last night issued a ruling ordering the Elections Commission (EC) to continue to abide by the guidelines in its October 7 verdict scuttling the results of the first round in September.

The latest ruling declared that “as the aforementioned presidential election not being held on the dates in the judgment is not a legally justifiable reason for not holding the election in accordance with the guidelines provided in Supreme Court case number 42/SC-C/2013, [the Supreme Court] informs and orders the Elections Commission and all relevant institutions of the Maldivian state to hold the presidential election that must be held in 2013 in accordance with the guidelines provided in Supreme Court number 42/SC-C/2013.”

The guidelines included holding the election before October 20, as well as demanding that all parties sign the voter lists, effectively giving presidential candidates power of veto.

The day before the election candidates Abdulla Yameen and Gasim Ibrahim had still not signed the voter lists and were not responding to phone calls from the EC or officials sent to their homes.

The pair, who received 25.35 percent and 24.07 percent respectively in the annulled first round, subsequently demanded extensive fingerprint verification of the new voters’ registry – another Supreme Court demand, issued at midnight on October 10. The evening before polls were due to open, both sought a Supreme Court ruling demanding that the election be delayed.

Receiving only a brief instruction from the court to follow its guidelines, the EC prioritised the guideline requiring an election before Oct 20 and proceeded with the vote. However, staff attempting to leave the commission’s office with ballot documents and equipment just hours prior to polls opening were obstructed by police.

Following the rescheduling of the election for November 9 – just two days before the end of the presidential term – Elections Commissioner Fuwad Thowfeek labelled the Supreme Court’s guidelines as “restrictions” and expressed concern that they effectively allowed political parties to stop elections from happening.

“We have said that when we get to a certain point, when a certain party doesn’t do what they must do, it should not affect the entire election. If that is the case, we will never be able to hold an election,” Thowfeek said, following meetings with the President, the cabinet and political parties.

“They assured us they will not allow for these kind of obstructions in the upcoming election. Ministers have given us commitment that they will find a solution and facilitate this. That is why we have started work again. If the same thing happened as before, this is not something we must do. We are starting work again because we are confident there will be an election. I am certain we will succeed this time,” he added.

“I hope the government considers these restrictions in the future and finds a solution. Otherwise, holding elections will become impossible and that affects the most fundamental [right] in a democracy,” he said.

Last night’s Supreme Court ruling

“The constitution of the Republic of Maldives obligates the Elections Commission and all relevant state institutions to ensure that the presidential election that must be held in the Maldives in 2013 is one where all Maldivian citizens eligible to vote is able to exercise the right [to vote] freely and without any kind of obstacle,” read the Supreme Court edict, signed by Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain.

“The elections must be held in accordance with the guidelines stated in the Supreme Court case number 42/SC-C/2013 to ensure that elections held in the Maldives are fair and conducted transparently in line with the principles specified in article 170 of the constitution of the Republic of Maldives,” read the edict.

The integrity of the Supreme Court has meanwhile come under increasing criticism, domestically and abroad.

Following the Supreme Court’s indefinite suspension of the first round despite local and international praise of the vote as free, fair and democratic, Transparency Maldives warned “the failure of parliament and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to address alleged integrity issues of the Supreme Court judges have “created avenues for political and other actors to question the conduct, injunctions and verdicts of the Supreme Court”.

Prior to his registration as a presidential candidate Gasim was a member of the JSC, and was responsible for rejecting a recommendation from the JSC’s own subcommittee recommending that Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed be suspended pending an investigation into his leaked sex tapes.

The sex tapes and suspension of the election have resulted in escalating protests targeting the courts, with large pairs of white underpants quickly becoming widely adopted as a protest symbol.

“Expeditious resolution of such allegations and issues is imperative to ease rising tensions in the election environment and prevent the derailment of democratic processes,” said Transparency Maldives in its statement.

“Relevant state institutions, including the Judicial Service Commission and the Parliament of the Maldives must expedite the resolution of these issues and allegations, in a transparent manner free of conflict of interest, to reduce questioning of and allegations of partisan bias in such processes.”

UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, raised concern over the politicisation and impartiality of the Supreme Court as far back as May.

Knaul expressed “shock to hear that many members of the judiciary, including in the Supreme Court, hold memberships in political parties.”

Conflicts of interest and the resulting impact on judges’ impartiality was a concern, noted Knaul.

“It seems that judges, and other actors of the State, do not want to fully acknowledge and understand this concept, leading to the dangerous perception from the public that the justice system is politicised and even corrupted,” she said.

The Supreme Court, she noted, had been “deciding on the constitutionality of laws ex-officio, without following appropriate examination procedures, under the understanding that they are the supreme authority for the interpretation of the Constitution.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Comment: The Maldives, Egypt and the revenge of the deep state

When Mohamed Mursi was ousted in Egypt in June, the Muslim Brotherhood decried it as the revenge of the “deep state.”

They said that in the days of the revolution in January 2011, they had managed to cut off the head of the Mubarak regime, but in the two years that followed they failed to pull out the roots.

And so a loose coalition of politicians, bureaucrats and security forces – the remnants of the old regime – gathered together and slowly hacked away at the new government.

The climax came in June, Mursi flinched and the forces of the deep state took their chance.

Today, Hosni Mubarak is free, Muslim Brotherhood activities are again banned, and the revolution of 2011 appears to be slowly unravelling.

A lot remains unclear. Will scheduled elections actually happen? Will they be free and fair? What will Egypt look like a decade from now?

The Maldives might offer an answer.

An island of chaos

When Mohamed Nasheed was ousted in February 2012, the Maldivian Democratic Party also decried it as the revenge of the “deep state.”

“Dictatorships don’t always die when the dictator leaves office,” Nasheed wrote in the New York Times that week.

Given what we know now, his words were remarkably prescient.

“The wave of revolutions that toppled autocrats in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen last year was certainly cause for hope. But the people of those countries should be aware that, long after the revolutions, powerful networks of regime loyalists can remain behind and can attempt to strangle their nascent democracies.”

This process happened in the Maldives over a year before Mursi was locked up.

Since then, the country has stumbled towards elections, led by a lame-duck president and pulled in two directions by rival clans – one loyal to Mohamed Nasheed and a reformist, democratic ideology and one to the former leader for 30 years, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and a conservative, autocratic government.

Two competing tribes

Educated at Egypt’s Al Azhar University, Gayoom took power in 1978 and continued to govern based on a centralised system of patronage.

Never winning an election by less than 90 per cent, he relied on island chiefs, or ‘khateebs’, to keep control of 200 disparate island-communities. Gayoom’s government appointed them, as well as judges, bureaucrats and the top police and military officers.

Over three decades, he grew the roots of the Maldives’ “deep state.”

But by 2004, with tourism booming and the Maldives modernising, a new, democratic vision emerged under the yellow flag of the Maldivian Democratic Party.

Over the next four years, with the support of the West, Nasheed’s movement slowly forced Gayoom to launch a reform programme, pass a new constitution and hold free elections.

Nasheed won that battle after a second round run-off, but over the next three-and-a-half years, he failed to win the war to deconstruct the “deep state,” most notably the judiciary.

Judging the judiciary

With all the reforms of the last decade, the Maldives got new leaders and new members of parliament, but the judges stayed the same.

Article 285 of the country’s revised constitution envisaged a different judiciary – but it was dismissed as symbolic by a committee dominated by Gayoom’s former appointees.

The decision left the nation saddled with the judges from a former era.

‘They were hand-picked by Gayoom,’ says Maldivian journalist Zaheena Rasheed. “They lack education and some of them even have criminal records.”

The US State Department points out that of the Maldives’ magistrates, “an estimated quarter of the judges had criminal records, and two of the judges had been convicted of sexual assault.”

In again, out again

Having failed to clean up the judiciary by committee, Nasheed confronted them head on.

In a move that many criticised as dictatorial, he ordered the arrest of a politician who had allegedly accused him of carrying out a Christian-Jewish conspiracy in a Muslim country.

But the Criminal Court judge overruled Nasheed, triggering a bizarre series of arrests and releases which caused many to ask who was in control, the judges or the president?

Nasheed then ordered the arrest of the Criminal Court’s Chief Judge, accused of blocking attempts to prosecute former officials charged with corruption.

Three weeks of protests, followed by a mutiny by elements of the police and the military, and it became clear where power lay.

Nasheed fell from power and on February 7, he appeared on television and resigned.

“I have never wanted to rule by force,” he said. “I came to this decision because, in my opinion, I sincerely believe, that if this government is to be maintained, it would require the use of extreme force and cause harm to a lot of citizens.”

The next day he told reporters, “I was forced to resign at gunpoint.”

When an election is not an election

Nasheed’s deputy, Mohamed Waheed Hassan, took over and eventually took the country back to the ballot box on September 7.

Over 200,000 people voted, a turnout of more than 88 per cent. Nasheed fell short of a first-round win but took 45 per cent of the vote.

Gayoom’s half-brother, Abdulla Yameen, came second with 25 per cent.

Around 1,000 observers deemed it “a transparent and fair election”. It was ‘an achievement of which any of the mature democracies would have been proud,’” said J M Lyngdoh, head of the Indian election observer mission.

But then third-placed Qasim Ibrahim, Gayoom’s former finance minister, complained about electoral fraud. Gayoom himself also appeared on television to voice his concerns about the vote and within days, the Supreme Court had annulled the result. It cited a secret police report that claimed over 5,000 ballots were ineligible.

Gayoom was quick to tweet, “I welcome [the] Supreme Court’s historic decision last night because it upholds the Constitution [and] the right of the people to elect their leader in a free, fair, transparent [and] credible election.”

“A tool”

“The Supreme Court is being used as a tool by the people people who brought down Mohamed Nasheed’s government to prevent him returning to power,” says Aishath Velezinee.

She served as Deputy Home Minister under Nasheed and sat on the committee and campaigned to clean up the judiciary, but she was overruled.

The court’s ruling to void the September 7 election also included 16 recommendations on how to run another vote by October 20, narrowing the role of the Elections Commission and raising the involvement of other institutions, including the police.

“[The Supreme Court judges] are writing the law when they should be interpreting it,” says Rasheed.

A former UN worker, who did not want to be identified, goes further. ‘The bottom line is that this situation is ridiculous because the Supreme Court ruling is unconstitutional.’

The country is now waiting nervously to see if a vote can be held ahead of the deadline, and if so, what the result will be and if it will be respected.

Back to Egypt

If Egypt’s “deep state” is now back in control, it is also still considering what to do about elections.

Interim leaders have announced a roadmap which plans for both parliamentary and presidential votes to be completed by spring next year, but there is no guarantee that they will be free or fair, or that the result will be respected.

Egypt’s judiciary may become crucial, being called up on to rule on any disputes.

Is it up to the task?

Thousands of miles away in the Maldives, they know the importance of keeping the judiciary free from political interference.

Failing to clean it up “has been a grave mistake,” says Velezinee. ‘But it was impossible at the time. Everyone assumed the judiciary was untouchable.’

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

China calls for Maldives to “maintain national stability and social development”

China has called for “national stability and social development” to be maintained in the Maldives, in a rare official statement on the country from its Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“The presidential election is the internal affairs of the Maldives. China respects the choice of the Maldivian people and hopes all relevant parties could settle the disputes properly through friendly negotiations. The Chinese side believes that the Maldivian government and people have the wisdom and capacity to resolve relevant issues,” read the statement.

“As a friendly neighbour of the Maldives, China is closely observing the developments in the Maldives and sincerely wishes that national stability and social development can be maintained,” the statement added.

While India has historically been the Maldives’ strongest regional ally, relations have been strained between the two governments partly due to the consistently poor treatment of expatriate Indian workers, and the government’s extra-contractual expropriation of the Maldives’ single largest foreign investment, GMR’s renovation of Male airport.

This has led some overseas observers to speculate that China may seek to increase its own diplomatic efforts in the country, after it recently opened an embassy in the capital Male.

China is also now the single largest tourism market for the Maldives, responsible for almost a quarter of all tourism arrivals as of 2011.

Recent protests and political turmoil over the delayed, cancelled and obstructed elections have been extensively covered by Chinese state media, Xinhua.

A Chinese travel advisory, updated on September 27, noted that while the Maldivian social order “is generally stable”, “partisan conflicts around the presidential elections are intensifying.”

The Chinese Embassy in the Maldives urged Chinese visitors to monitor the local security situation, contact and confirm the hotel booking before departure, and avoid non-essential travel to Male’.

Friday’s protests were also extensively reported by Chinese state-run press agency, Xinhua.

The Chinese statement follows those from the Commonwealth, UK, EU, India, US, UN, Canada and Australia expressing concern over the delayed presidential election and calling for free, fair and inclusive polls.

“The international community has been watching developments in the Maldives with concern ever since the Supreme Court annulled the first round of Presidential Elections on October 7,” read the latest statement from the Australian government, noting the rescheduling of polls for November 9.

“The first round of Presidential Elections on 7 September was judged free and fair by international and domestic observers. Following the annulment, a new first round of Presidential elections was scheduled to be held on 19 October but did not proceed. The Election Commission has now announced that elections will be held on 9 November.

“It is imperative that the elections now be held as scheduled with no further delays. Maldives voters have engaged actively and in good faith with the electoral process and this commitment needs to be honoured,” the statement read.

“As a fellow Indian Ocean country and Commonwealth member Australia stresses the importance of abiding by democratic values and processes, good governance and strong resilient institutions. Australia looks to all state bodies and presidential candidates in the Maldives to work together collaboratively to ensure that the election can take place in a manner that is free, fair and inclusive,” it concluded.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Elections Commission restarts polling preparations

The Elections Commission (EC) has published the eligible voters list and accepted complaints regarding the voter registry, sourced from the Department of National Registration (DNR), from 9am until 6pm today.

Voter details can be checked in the Maldives by sending an SMS to 1414 in the format ‘VIS [ID#]’, or by calling the helpline on the same number. The eligible voter list can also be checked online at www.elections.gov.mv.

The voter registry will also be availabe on every inhabited island and Male’ residents can verify their information at the Elections Commission Voter Registration Section, located in the former Godown building.

Complaints forms can be downloaded from the EC’s website and are also available at the commission’s secretariat, Voter Registration Section, and at all Island Council offices.

The Elections Commission (EC) has begun preparations for the presidential election for the fourth time in two months. The police forcibly brought a Supreme Court-ordered re-vote to a halt on Satyrday (October 19) after previously surrounding the EC to stop the September 28 second round run-off from taking place.

Last night the EC announced the first round of presidential elections will take place November 9 and the second round – if necessary – will be held November 16.

The Supreme Court annulled the first round of presidential polls held on September 7 citing electoral fraud despite unanimous domestic and international praise over a free and fair vote. The apex court delineated 16 guidelines to hold a revote by October 20.

The commission will continue to follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines, but will seek to change them in the future, EC Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek said. In an October 20 interview on Television Maldives (TVM), he described the guidelines as “restrictions”.

The EC said that in the next three weeks it would allow registration for new eligible voters, and re-registration for those voting in a location other than their home island. Voters who re-registered for the October 19 poll will not need to submit re-registration forms again unless they wish to change their voting location.

Candidates signatures

According to the Supreme Court guidelines, the EC must obtain signatures from all candidates on the voter registry. However, the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and Jumhooree Party (JP) last week refused to approve the lists, leading police to stop the election an hour before polling was due to start.

The move has prompted widespread international concern and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) protests.

However, the President, the cabinet and political parties have since assured the EC that “they will not allow for these kind of obstructions in the upcoming election”, explained Thowfeek yesterday.

EC Vice Chair Ahmed Fayaz has noted that candidates will be given a specific time period to sign the voter registry, after which the commission will continue with the election.

Thowfeek confirmed to Minivan News on October 19 that Defense Minister Mohamed Nazim had been appointed as the government’s focal point for anything election-related.

“I believe [his role] is to find agreement on the disputes between all the candidates,” Thowfeek said during an October 20 televised interview.

Voter registration process

Meanwhile, the Maldives’ Department of National Registration (DNR) has recently said there is a possibility that names of deceased people could be included in the electoral register as it “faces difficulties in obtaining information” to maintain a more current database.

However, the Supreme Court guidelines have mandated that the EC disregard its voter registry and use the DNR’s database as the primary source for the voter lists.

For the annulled first round as well as past elections, the EC compiled its voter registry by collecting current data from island council and city council offices, which was cross checked with the DNR database, and then updated after the commission publicly published the list and provided voters with an opportunity to amend any incorrect information.

“It has been very hard work over the last five years to come up with a voter registry of this standard,” Elections Commission Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek explained to Minivan News in a previous interview.

The 17 member Commonwealth election observation team in particular praised the final voter registry, describing it as “accurate and robust”.

Election obstructions

“There are a group of people who want to block this [vote], those who know they may not do well, so they are trying to buy time and make the election difficult. It’s very sad,” Thowfeek noted a week prior to the halted October 19 election.

Both the Jumhooree Party (JP) and the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) filed cases with the Supreme Court on October 18 requesting that the October 19 re-scheduled election not go ahead without all parties having first signed the register.

The parties then refused to sign the registry without fingerprint verification of over 10,500 re-registration forms – PPM demanded a random 10 percent sample of forms verified, while JP wanted five percent.

Once the PPM and JP had submitted their letters to the EC after midnight on October 19, the party leaders then became unreachable, while the police refused to support the election taking place without the candidates’ signatures.

The PPM also requested the apex court order the annulment of the voters’ list used in the first round on September 7, threatening that the party would not accept the result if the existing list was used, according to local media.

This resulted in a midnight ruling from the Supreme Court on October 10, ordering the EC to disregard re-registration efforts for the annulled presidential elections, and restart the entire process with fingerprinted forms for all voters who wish to vote in a location other than their permanent address.

Prior to the first round, the PPM had called on the EC to make the voter registration process “more lenient” and requested access to the commission’s IT section.

“There is no rush”: Gasim

The PPM also sought an order at the Supreme Court on October 11 to block former President Mohamed Nasheed’s candidacy on the grounds of his criticism of the judiciary and his being “irreligious”.

Meanwhile, on October 16 the JP also raised concerns about the voter re-registration process, with the party’s representative on the EC’s National Advisory Committee accusing the MDP of being able to access the commission’s servers and directly register its own candidates – compromising the system.

The JP said it had filed a complaint with police over its allegations, demanding law enforcement officials address the concerns it had raised, according to local media.

Two days later (October 18) – on the same night JP and PPM filed cases to delay the October 19 poll – JP’s presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim stated that the party will “accept elections readily if it is conducted in accordance with the guidelines issued by the SC” and that the party was ready to proceed with voting once it was “absolutely certain that the voter registry satisfactorily meets our standards”.

“There is no rush, it’s not like we are a soul caught in a life or death situation,” added Gasim.

Gasim has since called on President Mohamed Waheed to take action against Elections Commission members for allegedly violating the constitution “even by declaring a state of emergency”.

Meanwhile, an internal inquiry has been launched by the police professional standards command following allegations by EC Chair Thowfeek that Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz obstructed the EC from conducting the presidential election scheduled on October 19.

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) declared on October 19 that the police had no legal mandate to intervene and stop elections this morning, local media has reported.

Riyaz has denied the allegations, insisting that police only refused to provide security as the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court judgment were not followed by the EC.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Court did not share Elections Commission security information, says police

Data and technical information provided by the Supreme Court to a police forensic team during the Jumhooree Party’s case against the Elections Commission (EC) could not have been used to access the commission’s web servers, the Maldives Police Service has said.

Police said in a press release yesterday (October 21) that the forensic team offered technical assistance sought by the court to examine the evidence of alleged electoral fraud.

The police team were provided a printed list of the marked voters register and the access logs for the EC’s ballot progress report system (BPRS), which contained the IP addresses of those who had accessed the server, along with date and time.

“This is not information that could be used to penetrate any web site or web server,” police said, adding that the Supreme Court did not share any data from the EC aside from the BPRS logs.

“As sufficient time was not available to analyse the aforementioned logs and because the Elections Commission did not provide technical information concerning the BPRS, this service’s forensic team was unable to conduct a technical analysis,” the press release stated.

The police statement concluded with an appeal to all state institutions to protect and securely maintain “online systems containing information related to Maldivian citizens” while offering assurances that police would provide any assistance requested to ensure protection of such systems.

The police statement follows remarks by EC Chair Fuwad Thowfeek on state broadcaster Television Maldives (TVM) on Saturday night claiming that the commission’s data was being “destroyed” after technical information and logs were submitted to the Supreme Court.

“Previously, access to the system was very restricted to very few people, not just anybody could access it. But now the system is open. Now we are seeing people accessing and changing our database. No one had the opportunity to access the system in the annulled first round of presidential elections. People are destroying our data,” Thowfeek had said.

“So we cannot give the kind of certainty they [political parties] want, NCIT [National Centre for Information Technology] cannot give that kind of assurance now either. Earlier, they said they could not notice any external access in the annulled first round of election. They have not said anything yet [about the revote]. But I am certain, I know that if they check now, they will find there are ways for people to access the database. Because we see changes that should not take place happening to our data.”

Securing the IT system

The NCIT meanwhile said in a press statement on Sunday (October 20) that the centre’s staff have been working with the EC to secure the commission’s database and IT system following the Supreme Court judgment annulling the September 7 election.

In point 16 of the guidelines imposed on the EC by the Supreme Court verdict on October 7, the EC was ordered to reform their IT system in accordance with the “professional opinion” of the NCIT and other relevant state institutions.

Following consultations with the EC on October 8, the NCIT recommended immediate measures concerning “the most sensitive problems”, which the EC promptly implemented, the press release stated.

As interruptions to the EC systems could occur during the process, NCIT officials were allowed to establish a mechanism ensuring security on October 18 after the voter registry was printed – one day before the re-scheduled vote was due to take place.

The NCIT did note, however, that as the mechanism was set up on October 18, the centre was unable ensure external parties did not access the EC server and database before that date.

The NICT press release stressed that it had not sought any usernames or passwords required to access the EC systems and database during the process of securing the servers, adding that this information was not required to implement the recommended security measures.

“Therefore, if anyone apart from those authorised by Elections [Commission] accessed the system and database, it has to be further investigated,” the NCIT stated.

Following Thowfeek’s remarks on TVM, the press release stated, the NCIT had asked the EC to share relevant information concerning the alleged security breach, but was yet to receive a response.

Anonymous

The police press statement meanwhile revealed that on August 14 it was alerted to information from the Department of National Registration’s (DNR’s) ID card database, along with the names of registered political party members, being published on a website (http://maldives.annonymous.lv).

Police discovered that the information was taken from an EC web server (p.elections.gov.mv) as the server’s home page was hacked, the press release explained.

However, when the security breach was brought to the attention of the EC, police said that the commission allegedly denied the incident took place and refused to provide cooperation to the police investigation.

The site was blocked by the Communication Authority of Maldives (CAM) on August 20 upon request by the police, after which it was taken down with foreign assistance, police revealed.

Moreover, police found out that an automatic virus was downloaded to computers of persons visiting the page on the EC’s website that detailed the number of registered members of political parties.

Following the discovery, police met with EC Chair Thowfeek and other officials on August 19 to discuss the security issues and to share the findings.

“At the meeting, the commission’s technical staff said the Elections Commission’s web servers were constantly attacked and that they were blocking the IP addresses of the attackers,” police said.

While the EC was requested to provide the noted IP addresses, the police statement said that the information has yet to be sent.

Speaking at a press conference last night (October 21), Thowfeek said that NCIT officials were working ceaselessly with the EC IT staff but had not yet completed a full report on the security issues.

The NCIT has offered assurances that the EC servers and database would be secured before preparations were underway for the presidential election scheduled for November 9, Thowfeek said.

“We are proceeding with the assurance of the technical staff,” he said.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

JP and PPM coalitions unite in condemnation of the Elections Commission

“The Supreme Court’s verdict very clearly says the elections commission planned and systematically attempted to commit electoral fraud,” said Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed last night.

Rasheed spoke during a joint press conference held by the three government-aligned parties still contesting in the presidential election.

Representatives of the Jumhooree Party (JP), the Adhaalath Party (AP), the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), and the Maldivian Development Alliance (MDA) also took turns to denounce the Elections Commission (EC).

“If the lawful punishment for these people is a jail sentence, then we will not hesitate to do that. There is no other way but resignation for them,” said JP Deputy Leader Ilham Ahmed.

“I call on the police, the attorney general and the prosecutor general to investigate [EC Chair] Fuwad Thowfeek and his allies and file the case at court through the prosecutor general,” he continued.

The press conference came shortly before the EC revealed the schedule to be adopted for what will be the third attempt at completing the presidential election.

September’s poll – won by opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate Mohamed Nasheed- was later annulled by the Supreme Court which ruled that the preparations of the EC had “broadly facilitated fraud, undue influence and corruption”.

The second attempt to hold the election on October 19 failed after police withdrew their logistical support, informing EC staff that they would be prevented from moving any election-related documents out of the commission’s premises.

The decision to delay the election brought consternation from the international community as well as renewed messages of support for the EC, which has received praise from over 1000 local and international observers for its conduct in the first round.

After consulting with the government and political parties, the EC yesterday announced the decision to hold the first round on November 9, and the run-off – if needed – on November 16.

“We, the two coalitions, remain steadfast”

The police’s decision to obstruct polls – decried by both the Police Integrity Commission and the Human Rights Commission of Maldives – came after the PPM/MDA and JP/AP/DQP candidates had refused to sign the voter registry as mandated in the court’s ruling.

The allied parties yesterday called for the EC to abide by the Supreme Court’s guidelines when holding the re-vote.

“There is only one choice. If some of the points in the guidelines are difficult for them, then there is no other way but to seek to change those points,” Ilham said.

Adhaalath President Sheikh Imran Abdulla called for the EC to resign if it could not act according to the court’s guidelines.

“We, the two coalitions, remain steadfast. God willing, there will be no election in the Maldives at this time unless it is an election that follows the SC guidelines.”

During its own press conference last night, the EC announced it would continue to follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines, but would seek to change them in the future.

Both MDA Deputy Leader Ahmed Amir and PPM MP Ahmed Mahloof expressed doubt that a free and fair election can be held as long as the EC members stay in place.

“Maldivian citizens know there is nothing we will not do for this nation. That we are not divided. This press conference shows we are together. God willing, we will remain like this,” Riyaz said yesterday.

Yesterday’s show of unity comes after relations between the parties and their candidates had appeared at a low ebb.

Following the October 8 decision to re-hold the first round of polling, initial suggestions that the parties might back a single candidate failed to result in consensus.

The PPM subsequently accused Gasim of being overly-influenced by MDP sympathisers within his party, whilst Gasim himself suggested that Yameen’s record during the autocratic rule of his half-brother Maumoon Abdul Gayoom meant that he would never win the popular support of the people.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)