Day: September 11, 2012

India grants further US$25million to Maldives

India has granted a further US$25million to the Maldives as part of the $US100million standby credit facility agreed during last November’s official visit from Prime Minister Manmoham Singh.

Indian High Commissioner D M Mulay signed the agreement with Minister of Finance and Treasury Abdulla Jihad at the Indian High Commission, local media reported.

Mulay, who was not responding to calls at the time of press, said that the deal represented the third instalment of the credit facility, with the previous two instalments having amounted to US$50million.

The previous tranche of US$30 million was released following President Waheed’s first official visit to India in May.

Mulay is also reported to have said that the rest of the promised credit will soon be handed to the Maldivian government:  “The paperwork on the agreement is being processed now, the amount will soon be awarded to the Maldives,” Haveeru quoted Mulay.

A standby line of credit is normally forwarded to countries which have reached macroeconomic sustainability but experience short term financing issues.

The release of this credit comes just days after Waheed completed his first official state visit to China.

During this trip, Waheed finalised agreements for a US$500 million Chinese loan with the assurance of more aid available when needed.

The loans, equal to nearly one quarter of the Maldives’ GDP, are said to include $150 million (MVR2.3billion) for housing and infrastructure, with another $350million (MVR5.4billion) from the Export-Import Bank of China, reported Reuters.

Jihad told Minivan News last week that, despite securing this money from China, the government would still be considering austerity measures which are being considered in order to reduce the state’s budget deficit.

With income lower and expenditure higher than predicted, this year’s budget deficit had been forecast to reach MVR9.1billion (US$590million), equivalent to around 28 percent of nominal GDP.

India has traditionally enjoyed close ties with the Maldives, although there have been increasingly strong links between the Maldives and China, largely due to the number of Chinese tourists visiting the Indian Ocean nation.

A Chinese embassy opened in Male’ in time for the opening of the SAARC summit last November, reciprocating the opening of a Maldivian mission in Beijing in 2007.

Indian officials were reported at the time as having concern that the move was part of China’s “string of pearls” policy which supposedly involves Chinese attempts at naval expansion into the Indian Ocean.

After the awarding of the Chinese loan, however, former Foreign Minister and current UN Special Rapporteur to Iran, Dr Ahmed Shaheed was keen to play down any suggestions that the Maldives was about to significantly change its foreign policy priorities.

“This is very much in keeping with past policy. The lines so far drawn have demonstrated that the Maldives remains primarily SAARC focused, followed by trading partners in the EU and Singapore. China has moved into this second category,” he added.

“Nothing will change the fact that we are only 200 miles from Trivandrum,” said Shaheed.

When asked upon his recent return from Sri Lanka what the Maldives’ policy was regarding Sino-Indian competition in the region, President Waheed is said to have responded that the policy of a small nation like the Maldives ought to be to avoid too great an involvement in geopolitics.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Failure of judiciary, JSC and parliament justified detention of Abdulla Mohamed, contends Velezinee in new book

Former President’s Member on the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) Aishath Velezinee has written a book extensively documenting the watchdog body’s undermining of judicial independence, and complicity in sabotaging the separation of powers.

Over 80 pages, backed up with documents, evidence and letters, The Failed Silent Coup: in Defeat They Reached for the Gun recounts the experience of the outspoken whistleblower as she attempted to stop the commission from re-appointing unqualified and ethically-suspect judges loyal to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, after it dismissed the professional and ethical standards demanded by Article 285 of the constitution as “symbolic”.

That moment at the conclusion of the constitutional interim period marked the collapse of the new constitution and resulted in the appointment of a illegitimate judiciary, Velezinee contends, and set in motion a chain of events that ultimately led to President Mohamed Nasheed’s arrest of Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed two years later.

Nasheed resigned on February 7 after mutinying police and military officers joined forces with opposition demonstrators, who had been accusing Nasheed of interfering with the ‘independent’ judiciary in his arrest of the judge, and demanding not to be given ‘unlawful orders’.

The Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) report found that there was no evidence to support Nasheed’s claim that he was ousted in a coup d’état, and that his resignation was under duress and the events of the day were self-inflicted.

“The inquiry is based on a false premise, the assumption that Abdulla Mohamed is a constitutionally appointed judge, which is a political creation and ignores all evidence refuting this,” Velezinee stated.

“Judge Abdulla Mohamed is at the centre of this story. I believe it is the State’s duty to remove him from the judiciary. He may have the legal knowledge required of a judge; but, as the State knows full well, he has failed to reach the ethical standards equally essential for a seat on the bench.

“A judge without ethics is a judge open to influence. Such a figure on the bench obstructs justice, and taints the judiciary. These are the reasons why the Constitution links a judge’s professional qualifications with his or her moral standards,” she states.

The JSC itself had investigated Abdulla Mohamed but stopped short of releasing a report into his ethical misconduct after the Civil Court awarded the judge an injunction against his further investigation by the judicial watchdog.

“There is no legal way in which the Civil Court can rule that the Judicial Service Commission cannot take action against Abdulla Mohamed. This decision says judges are above even the Constitution. Where, with what protection, does that leave the people?” Velezinee asks.

“The Judicial Service Commission bears the responsibility for removing Abdulla Mohamed from the bench. Stories about him have circulated in the media and among the general public since 2009, but the Commission took no notice. It was blind to Abdulla Mohamed’s frequent forays outside of the ethical standards required of a judge. It ignored his politically charged rulings and media appearances.

“Abdulla Mohamed is a man who had a criminal conviction even when he was first appointed to the bench during President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s time. Several complaints of alleged judicial misconduct are pending against him. The Judicial Service Commission has ignored them all. What it did, instead, is grant him tenure – a lifetime on the bench for a man such as Abdulla Mohamed. In doing so, the Judicial Service Commission clearly failed to carry out its constitutional responsibilities. It violated the Constitution and rendered it powerless. Where do we go from there?”

Parliament, Velezinee states, was the body responsible for holding the JSC accountable.

“The Majlis knew the threat Abdulla Mohamed posed to national security and social harmony. The Majlis was also aware of the Judicial Service Commission’s failure to carry out its constitutional responsibilities and its efforts to nullify constitutional requirements.

“Concern had been shared with the Majlis that the Judicial Service Commission had committed the ultimate betrayal and hijacked judicial independence. The Majlis failed its Constitutional responsibility to hold the Judicial Service Commission accountable for any of these actions. The Majlis had violated the Constitution and rendered it powerless. Where to from there?”

Ultimate responsibility for upholding the constitution fell to the President, Velezinee states.

“Democratic governance can only function if the entire system is working as an integral whole; it is impossible if the three separated powers are failing in their respective duties.

“Under the circumstances – once it was clear that Abdulla Mohamed was an obstruction to justice and a threat to national security, and once it became apparent that neither the Judicial Service Commission nor the Parliament was willing to hold him accountable – the only authority left to take control of the situation was the Head of State.”

With the return to power of Gayoom’s autocratic government behind President Mohamed Waheed’s “fig leaf of legitimacy”, the judiciary continued to be subject to influence, Velezinee writes.

“The judiciary we have today is under the control of a few,” she wrote.

“This was an end reached by using the Judicial Service Commission as a means. Most members of the Judicial Service Commission betrayed the Constitution, the country, and the people. They broke their oath. There is no room for free and fair hearings. And most judges do not even know how to hold such a hearing.”

“For democracy and rule of law to be established in the Maldives, and for the right to govern themselves to be returned to the people, they must have an elected leader. And the judiciary, currently being held hostage, must be freed.

“Article 285 of the Constitution must be fully upheld, judges reappointed, and an independent judiciary established,” she concludes.

Download The Failed Silent Coup (English translation by Dr Azra Naseem)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Maldives backtracking on democracy”: International Federation for Human Rights

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) yesterday released its report into human rights in the Maldives, titled “From Sunrise to Sunset: Maldives backtracking on democracy”.

In a statement accompanying the report’s release, the group stated that it had witnessed a deterioration in the freedom of assembly and the freedom of the press as well as the “influence of radical groups detrimental to women’s rights”.

“The appointment of close allies of the former dictator Gayoom the new administration these past months, is another worrying sign that questions the respect for democratic principles and the rule of law in the country,” read the statement.

FIDH arranged a fact finding mission to the Maldives at the end of July, meeting with politicians, activists, civil society members and journalists.

The Paris-based group’s President Souhayr Belhassen called on the government to respect democratic gains made in the country, particularly implementing the recommendations of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) and strengthening independent institutions.

The CNI’s final report, whilst absolving the current government of any wrong-doing during February’s transfer of power, acknowledged that the police had been guilty of acts of brutality on February 8 which must be investigated.

The FIDH report describes how the past decade’s democratic reforms have stalled owing to political polarisation and institutional inertia.

“The 2008 constitution guarantees most of Maldives’ human rights obligations; however these have so far failed to be translated into domestic law,” it says.

It also suggests that the failure of the Nasheed administration to prosecute past human rights offenders has contributed to a “culture of impunity for perpetrators of past human rights violations.”

Civil society that was “flourishing and vocal during the democratic struggle became less visible during the presidency of Mohamed Nasheed”, says the report, arguing that it had become another casualty of the polarised environment.

The report detials the difficulties the country has had with separating the powers of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary which had previously been dominated by former President Gayoom.

“Tensions with the judiciary and the opposition-dominated parliament, led [Nasheed] to take unilateral decisions that exceeded his prerogatives, such as ordering the arrest of opposition leaders and a judge without following due process, or by declaring the Supreme Court defunct. Since Mohamed Waheed took over power, executive interference has continued,” read the report.

Regarding the state of the judiciary, FIDH argues that testimonies gathered from its members show that, “under the successive administrations, no political party has actually ever shown any willingness to establish an independent judiciary since each seems to benefit from the existing system.”

FIDH also notes that the government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan has been accused of a wide range of human right violations, including violent harassment of street protesters, torture and harassment of pro-opposition media as wells as legal and physical harassment of the opposition.

“Practices to silence political dissent that had disappeared in the course of Nasheed’s presidency, have once again become prevalent under Mohamed Waheed’s presidency,” said FIDH.

The report highlights what it sees as impartial investigations of crimes, citing in particular the attempted murder of blogger Ismail ‘Hilath’ Rasheed.

The issue of the use of religion for political gains is criticised in the report: “The exploitation of religion for political gains has posed a threat to the drafting of new legislations by potentially limiting existing human rights.”

FIDH also expressed its concerns that tentative gains in women’s rights, as typified by the recent domestic violence bill, could be reversed if government aligned religious groups push for full implementation of Sharia law.

The report also criticises the apparent enthusiasm amongst politicians for implementation of the death penalty, saying: “With the current state of the judiciary and the incapacity of the police to properly investigate crimes, analysts fear judicial errors would result in the death of innocent people.”

In its recommendations to the Maldives government, FIDH urges the Maldives to remove from the domestic legal framework provisions that restrict individual right based on “race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other statu” to conform with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Amongst its other recommendations, the report urges the government to strengthen independent institutions, to enact relevant legislation which will enable the country to fulfil its human rights obligations  and to order a thorough investigation into the attack on ‘Hilath’ Rasheed.

“The situation remains at the time of release of this report relatively confused and uncertain,” concludes the report, “however, the coming weeks will be crucial to test the Government’s ability and willingness to prevent further acts of police brutality and, in general, a deterioration of the human rights situation.”

FIDH’s report follows the release of an Amnesty International report last week which highlighted a number of politically motivated attacks by police on February 8.

Following the government’s claims that Amnesty had produced a one-sided report without seeking comment from the government, an Amnesty spokesperson stressed that the organisation was without political affiliation and had not been the only group to highlight human rights violations in the Maldives this year.

“In compiling our report we talked at length with government and police officials in Malé and Addu during our visit to the country in late February and early March. On the occasions they responded we have included their comments in our documents,” said the spokesperson.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

How to plan the perfect coup: Huffington Post

In 2006, in the Pacific island nation of Fiji, troops overran the capital city, threatened the Prime Minister, forced his resignation, placed him under house arrest, imposed censorship on the media, and the coup leader, in the form of the head of the army, went on television to declare himself the new ruler of the country, writes former President Mohamed Nasheed for the Huffington Post.

In 2012, in my country, the Indian Ocean island nation of the Maldives, mutinying police and soldiers overran the capital city, gave me, the President, an ultimatum to resign within the hour or face bloodshed, placed me under effective house arrest, raided the headquarters of the national broadcaster, and the coup leader, in the form of the Vice President, went on television to declare himself the new ruler of the country.

In the case of Fiji, the international community swiftly condemned the coup, blackballed Fiji from the club of civilized nations and suspended it from the Commonwealth. In the case of the Maldives, a report drafted by a Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) which was dominated by hand-picked appointees of the coup-installed government, and endorsed by the Commonwealth, has just whitewashed the coup, declaring it a perfectly legitimate and constitutional transfer of power.

Fiji and the Maldives’ contrasting experiences provide useful tips for coup-plotters everywhere. When planning your coup, remember that first impressions count – so don’t dress like an obvious coup leader. The man who takes over from the democratically elected leader should not wear military fatigues, as Commodore Frank Bainimarama did in Fiji; instead wear a lounge suit, as former Vice President Waheed Hassan did in the Maldives.

Secondly, get your messaging right: never, as in Fiji, publicly state you are overthrowing an elected government; instead, as in the Maldives, announce that the President’s resignation is a run-of-the-mill and Constitutional transfer of power.

Finally, have patience: if you follow steps 1 and 2, sooner or later the international community will tire of political upheaval and accept the new, coup-led political order, regardless of outward commitments to democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)