Category:

Criminal Court hears separate cases against opposition MPs

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs Imthiyaz Fahmy and Hamid Abdul Ghafoor were brought before the Criminal Court today for separate hearings to face the respective charges of “scandalising” the country’s judiciary and refusing to provide a urine sample to police.

MDP MP Imthiyaz Fahmy ‘Inthi’ has pleaded not guilty to charges of “disobeying orders” for contemptuous comments allegedly made about the country’s Supreme Court earlier this year.

Meanwhile, fellow MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor asked for his Criminal Court case, in which he is charged with refusing to give a urine sample to police, to be thrown out completely.

Ghafoor allegedly failed to provide the urine sample after being arrested on an uninhabited island along with a group of MDP politicians and other senior political figures.  A number of those arrested with Ghafoor were charged with alcohol and drug possession.

However, Ghafoor today told the Criminal Court that police had not asked him to provide a urine sample following his arrest on November 16, 2012, arguing that the case should therefore be dropped.

The Prosecutor General’s (PG) Office had previously told the Criminal Court that it has 11 witnesses testifying against Ghafoor, proving that he was in possession – and under the influence – of alcohol when arrested on the island of Hondaidhoo last November.

Meanwhile, MP Fahmy stands accused of making contemptuous remarks about the country’s judiciary during a television show earlier this year – charges he denied during the opening hearing of his own case today.

The opposition MP added that the court had granted him the right to appoint a lawyer before reconvening. The next hearing is currently scheduled for November 24.

Fahmy argued that as an elected representative in parliament, it was questionable why he could not make comments criticising the country’s judiciary on television when he had made the same accusations during live transmissions broadcast from parliament.

“In a free democratic society, the offensive of scandalising court is not even recognised. It’s dead elsewhere in the world, but still alive here in the Maldives. This is unacceptable,” he said.

Fahmy case background

In April, Fahmy told Minivan News that Police had begun an investigation of a case filed by the Department of Judicial Administration against him, over his allegedly “contemptuous remarks” against the Supreme Court and its judges.

Addressing the allegedly contemptuous remarks made during a program broadcast on Raajje TV, Fahmy argued this week that he had been addressing the concerns of constituents by expressing his belief that the country’s Supreme Court had encroached on the powers of parliament.

He also alleged that the Supreme Court’s judges were not qualified to understand or interpret the country’s democratic constitution, arguing the apex court was the most “undemocratic” institution among the three branches of state.

Fahmy added that his comments were mostly reiterating the conclusions drawn by numerous international legal experts about the Maldives court system in recent years; including the views of UN Special Rapporteur for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul.

Knaul, in a report released earlier this year, expressed “deep concern” over politicisation within the country’s court system.

The special rapporteur stated that there was near unanimous consensus during her visit to the Maldives this year that the composition of watchdog body the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) – which draws members from sources outside the judiciary, such as parliament, the civil service commission and others – was “inadequate and politicised”.

This complaint was first highlighted in a report published by the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) in 2010.

Current presidential candidate of the Jumhoree Party (JP) and former JSC Member MP Gasim Ibrahim later called Knaul’s findings ‘lies and jokes’ at a rally held in February.

“[Gabriela Knaul] claimed that the judges were not appointed transparently, I am sure that is an outright lie. She is lying, she did not even check any document at all nor did she listen to anybody.”

“She is repeating something that was spoon-fed to her by someone else. I am someone who sits in JSC. She claimed there were no regulations or mechanism there. That is a big joke,” Gasim claimed at the time.

Likes(4)Dislikes(0)

First round of new presidential election scheduled for October 19, with one day for re-registration

Additional reporting by Ahmed Nazeer

First-time voters, or eligible voters who wish to vote on Oct 19 somewhere other than their currently-registered location, must re-register.

Voter re-registration is open from 6:00pm-12:00am Wednesday Oct 9, and 9:00am-12:00am Thursday Oct 10. Forms are available at all island council offices, Addu City Council departments, diplomatic missions and at www.elections.gov.mv. In Malé forms will be accepted at the Elections Commission’s registration center on Handhuvaree Hingun.

Check your registration by SMSing 1414 ‘VIS ID#’, or call the hotline on the same number.

With the Elections Commission (EC) rapidly preparing to re-hold the presidential election’s first round October 19 in accordance with the timetable established by the Supreme Court verdict, Maldivians will have only 15 hours for re-registration.

The Supreme Court late Monday night (October 7) annulled the first round of the Maldives presidential election in a 4:3 decision. Citing a secret police report on alleged electoral irregularities, the court ordered fresh elections by October 20 with enhanced police and government involvement.

The Supreme Court verdict was issued despite unanimous positive assessment of the polling by more than a thousand local and international election observers, while the police report on which it was supposedly based has not been made public and was not shown to the EC’s defence lawyers.

In light of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the EC has decided to hold the presidential election on October 19, the commission announced yesterday.

“The commission is concerned and regrets the inconvenience that people might have to face because the election is close to the Eid holidays,” the EC noted.

Meanwhile, the government is preparing to shut down from October 11 until October 19 for the Eid al-Adha holidays.

In order to have the elections in the duration given by the Supreme Court, the EC can provide only one day for re-registration, said the commission.

The EC has appealed to all citizens who wish to re-register to do it as soon as the re-registration process is opened, which the commission announced would begin this evening.

Maldivians can re-register to vote from 6:00pm to 12:00am today and 9:00am to 6:00pm tomorrow, EC Secretary General Asim Abdul Sattar told local media.

Individuals who do not re-register during the allotted period will remain registered to vote in the location finalised in the second round’s voter registration list, said Sattar.

The EC will be accepting grievances and complaints, however they will not be able to provide a specific window of time to do so, he noted.

According to normal procedure the EC is legally required to provide a time-frame for complaints to be lodged prior to the re-registration process, however the commission’s dates are restricted due to the Supreme Court’s verdict, he added.

Re-registration is necessary for those intending to vote at a polling station other than that listed with the Elections Commission, such as a worker based on a resort island or student in Male. Similarly, Maldivians residing abroad are also required to re-register in order to vote in the country of residence.

Presidential candidates

Presidential candidates who ran in the first round of polling September 7 will not be asked to re-file their candidacy and no new candidates will be allowed to compete in the election,  the EC Secretary General told local media.

Since presidential hopefuls cannot withdraw their candidacy, the order candidates will appear on the ballot paper will remain the same for the re-running of the first round.

“The candidates cannot withdraw their names once they are arranged [for the ballot paper],” said Sattar.

President Mohamed Waheed, who received 5.13 percent of votes in the September 7 election, has made no indication of a decision to change his participation in the re-run, Sattar noted. If President Waheed decides to recall his candidacy, the commission will make a decision after consulting with its legal department.

Waheed’s vice presidential running mate, Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, announced yesterday (October 8 ) that he intends to maintain his new alliance with the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) going into the re-scheduled presidential elections.

Thasmeen and his DRP announced their decision to support former President Mohamed Nasheed in the run-off, previously scheduled for September 28, days after Waheed received just five percent of the popular vote.

Repeat first round presidential candidates – in order of their ballot placement – are Gasim Ibrahim, Incumbent President Mohamed Waheed, Abdulla Yameen, and former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Election funds

The Finance Ministry had agreed to provide MVR 30 million (US$1,939,230) to hold the election, EC Secretary General Asim Abdul Sattar told local media.

The commission’s calculations show that it will cost MVR 30 million (US$1,939,230) to print ballot papers, pay the officials and cover other costs, said Sattar.

The Finance Ministry had also agreed to provide MVR 27 million (US$1,747,575) for a second round runoff, if necessary.

The ministry will provide funds for the election as legally mandated, but some state-funded programs will have to be sacrificed to do so, Minister of Finance and Treasury Abdulla Jihad said yesterday.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MNDF deny reports of injured suspect in Raajje TV arson attack being treated at military hospital

The Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) has issued a statement denying reports spreading across social media that a suspect injured in the arson attack on opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) aligned TV station Raajje TV was being treated at the MNDF military hospital.

On October 7, a group of masked men armed with machetes, iron rods and petrol stabbed a security guard, forced open a reinforced door and set fire to the station, destroying its offices and control room as well as cameras, computer systems, broadcasting and transmission equipment.

CCTV footage of the attack showed the masked individual lighting the blaze briefly engulfed in flame, shortly before a fireball blew the door off its hinges.

The MNDF statement said the military hospital treated three firemen who were injured while trying to control the blaze.

”Two of the firemen were treated for burn injuries they received to the skin area near their ear, due to strong heat from the fire,” the MNDF statement said. ”The third fireman was treated for the injuries he received from the strong heat and smoke.”

The MNDF said the third fireman was admitted to Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) after he had breathing problems.

The MNDF also said it was very uncivilised to spread such news without clarification. The statement did not state to whom it was referring to.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned the arson attack and criticised the Maldives Police Services’ failure to defend the station despite repeated requests for police protection.

“This criminal act is a direct blow to freedom of information and we deplore the attitude of the police, who failed to do what was necessary to prevent the attack although the head of TV station requested protection a few hours before it took place,” RSF said in a statement on Monday.

Meanwhile, Raajje TV quoted former president Mohamed Nasheed as alleging that Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb “had a hand” in the arson attack on the station, and called on investigation authorities to obtain a court warrant to gain access to the former’s text messages and phone calls.

Adheeb dismissed the allegations as false.

”I won’t be surprised even if he made bigger allegations,” he said. ”Nasheed is always lying like that.”

Adheeb accused Nasheed of working against him due to his condemnation of the MDP’s calls for a tourism boycott.

Eyewitness to Monday’s attack told Minivan News that the attackers arrived on motorbikes.

”First one motorbike with two persons came, they were covering their faces with masks and one of them were holding an iron bar. We first thought they were getting ready to attack a person but the guy holding the iron bar smashed the glass of the building and the other bikes arrived just as the guy smashed the glass,” said a witness.

”There were three wave motorbikes and one PCX motorbike. The other guys were wearing masks when they arrived, they looked very calm when they entered the place and we did not see what happened inside but we noticed that they were in a rush when they came out of the building,” he said. ”They all left the area on the bikes really fast.”

According to the eyewitness, he saw the bikes coming out to Boduthakurufaanu Magu from Kurangi Goalhi and when they left they went straight towards Henveiru from Boduthakurufaanu Magu.

Speaking at the parliament’s government oversight committee, Raajje TV CEO Akram Kamaluddeen alleged to MPs that the arson attack on Raajje TV was a state organised crime.

Akram Kamaluddeen and Deputy CEO of Raajje TV Abdulla Yameen did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

The security guard who was taken hostage and stabbed told local press that the assailants arrived 10 minutes after the staff of Raajje TV had left the station.

The Bangladeshi national guard told the papers that he was inside the building when the assailants came and they asked him to lead them to the floor Raajje TV was on, but when he refused they tied his hand and took him upstairs with them.

He told the papers that he was stabbed and attacked inside the control room of the Raajje TV station, and that after attacking him they left him inside the burning building with his hands tied.

According to the security guard he was able to escape because the group left the door open. He said he came outside and called his supervisor, before fainting and being admitted to IGMH.

CCTV footage of the attack:

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Dissenting Supreme Court justices challenge court’s jurisdiction to hear annulment case, evidence

The three dissenting justices in the Supreme Court’s verdict to annul the vote have challenged the apex court’s constitutional jurisdiction over the case, and the credibility of the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs.

Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz, Justice Abdulla Areef and Justice Muthasim Adnan in their verdict stated that the High Court has initial jurisdiction over election petitions as per Article 172 (a) of the Constitution.

They also challenged the credibility of statements provided by the Jumhoree Party (JP)’s 14 anonymised witnesses, and dismissed a secret police document submitted by the Attorney General Azima Shakoor as invalid evidence, since the Elections Commission (EC) was not provided a right of response to the document.

The Jumhoree Party asked the SC to annul the vote held on September 7, after its candidate Gasim Ibrahim narrowly placed third with 50,422 votes, behind Yameen Abdul Gayoom of the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) who gained 53,099 votes. Maldivian Democartic Party’s Mohamed Nasheed gained 45.45 percent of the vote with 95,224 votes, while incumbent president Mohamed Waheed received just 5.13 percent.

The Supreme Court delayed the runoff scheduled for September 28 until it issued a verdict in the case, and on Monday four of the seven SC Justices invalidated the first round and ordered a revote by October 20.

The majority decision appears to have drawn on the secret police document, as they cite 5623 irregular votes, whereas Faiz and Areef note only 473 cases of irregular votes – 0.2 percent of total votes polled.

Faiz and Areef depended on a comparison between the EC’s list of those who voted and the Jumhooree Party’s seven lists alleged of dead, underage, and repeated voters, which was conducted by a police team consisting of forensic document examiners, computer forensic analysts and technical staff.

Faiz and Areef also stated that election laws do not allow for annulling the entire election in instances of fraud, but only in ballot boxes in the specific geographic area where fraud was found to have occurred.

Irregular votes

The four judges making the majority decision contended that 5623 irregular votes were cast. According to the verdict, these included:

  • 773 people with discrepancies in their national identification numbers,
  • 18 dead people,
  • 7 minors,
  • 225 people without national identification numbers,
  • three people who voted twice,
  • 2830 people with discrepancies in their addresses,
  • 952 people with discrepancies in their names,
  • 7 people who were not registered in the Department of National Registration’s (DNR) database,
  • 819 people whose national identification numbers had been written down wrong by elections officials at the time of voting

Of the 473 irregular votes noted by Faiz and Areef, 12 were votes cast by minors, 14 cast by dead people, and 207 cast by people without authentic ID cards. According to Faiz and Areef, there were cases of no repeated voting.

“We have not referred to the secret Maldives Police Service document submitted by the Attorney General’s Office as the defendant did not have a right of response,” the judges stated.

Neither did they consider valid the testimony of the 14 anonymised witnesses, “as they were unable to clarify their statements because such questions may have violated the anonymity of the witnesses.”

In his dissenting opinion, Adnan said he did not accept the evidence submitted in the case.

“I do not accept the evidence submitted in this case. A secret document that the defendant could not respond to was submitted. The complainant was not able to submit any credible evidence that allows for the election to be annulled,” he said.

Adnan also said the Elections Commission had followed all procedures laid out in the Constitution and the Elections Act in compiling, publishing and revising the voter registry.

Jurisdiction

The three dissenting judges noted that the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction on initial election complaints, as Article 172 (a) of the Constitution states that a person “may challenge a decision of the Election Commission concerning an election or a public referendum, or may challenge the results of an election, or contest the legality of any other matter related to an election, by means of an election petition presented to the High Court.”

Although the majority bench cites Article 113 of the Constitution which states that the Supreme Court, sitting together in session, shall have sole and final jurisdiction to determine all disputes concerning the qualification or disqualification, election, status, of a presidential candidate or running mate or removal of the President by the People’s Majlis, the three dissenting judges note the JP’s complaint was to do with the electoral registry and should have been submitted to the High Court.

Faiz and Areef also cited Article 65 (a) of the Elections Act, which states that a vote may be annulled only in a certain geographical area in instances of fraud.

“The Majlis has passed a statutory elections law (Act 11/2008) as per Article 172 (b) of the constitution which states the manner for dealing with any challenge shall be provided for in a statute on elections, and as Article 65 (a) of Act 11/2008 with reference to Article 64 states a vote in a specific area may be annulled and a revote ordered in that area if the court decides there is undue influence in an election in that specific area.

“Hence, official results of an election can only be annulled only in the specific area, specific ballot box or boxes, in which undue influence has occurred as per Article 65 of Act 11/2008 (Elections Act), there is no room to annul the votes of the 211,890 people who voted in the 2013 Presidential Election held on 7 September 2013,” they said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Court’s argument for annulling election “materially baseless”: Maldives Democracy Network

The International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and the Maldives Democracy Network (MDN) have issued a joint statement expressing concern over the Supreme Court’s 4:3 decision to annul the first round of the 2013 presidential election.

“The unjustifiable delay and judicially forceful suspension of the second round of the election, due on 28 September, indicates an encroachment of the judiciary over the powers of the Elections Commission, an independent constitutional body answerable to the Parliament of the Maldives,” read the statement.

The statement described the court’s verdict as being founded on “materially baseless arguments”, after the first round was “applauded as a success by the international community.”

“Maldivian authorities must swiftly bring the electoral process to an end, in a free and fair manner”, said FIDH President Karim Lahidji.

The 4:3 verdict hinged on a confidential police report supposedly claiming that 5,600 votes were ineligible due to errors such as address mismatches. The report has not been made public and was not shown to the Election Commission’s defence lawyers.

The court issued the verdict 13 days after it heard the concluding statements, issuing an injunction halting the election and missing the constitutionally-mandated deadline for the run-off.

International reaction

European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton said the EU had noted the verdict, and expressed continued faith in the EC.

“The international community recognised the outcome of the first round on September 7 as inclusive and credible. Under these circumstances, I urge that elections planned for October [19] take place in full compliance with national and international standards and that the Maldives democratic institutions are safeguarded and the will of the people respected,” Ashton stated.

“I urge that elections… take place in full compliance with national and international standards and that the Maldives democratic institutions are safeguarded and the will of the people respected. The EU restates its confidence in the ability of the Election Commission to ensure this [and] remains ready to support a democratically-elected government in confronting the major challenges that the country is facing.”

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon also “noted” the Supreme Court’s decision, in  a statement reiterating calls for a “peaceful, inclusive and credible process” for the re-scheduled vote.

“The first round of the presidential election was widely recognised as a success by international and domestic election observers,” the UN statement read, adding that Ki-moon “acknowledges the continuing efforts by the Elections Commission of the Maldives.”

“The election had been seen as an important step in the country’s democratic transition,” the UN stated, referring to the “contested circumstances” of 2012’s change of government.

UN Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Oscar Fernandez-Taranco last week briefed the UN Security Council on the situation in the Maldives.

Local concern

MDN is the first local NGO to comment upon the verdict, expressing alarm at the conduct of the country’s highest court as well as the escalating tensions in the country.

“We call upon the Supreme Court and the judiciary to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution and the democratic will of Maldivian people, at all times,” said Shahindha Ismail, Executive Director of MDN.

“The elections must absolutely take place as soon as possible, given the arbitrary and unconstitutional deadline set by the Supreme Court, which ruled yesterday that the current government would remain in place should the elections not be held by early November,” she added.

Global criticism accompanied the Supreme Court’s initial decision to to delay polls on September 23, including statements of concern from the UN, Commonwealth, and the EU.

Local NGO Transparency Maldives (TM) – also the group behind the single largest observer mission conducted during the first round – expressed doubts over the integrity of the Supreme Court in late August, urging it to “maintain its actions in such a fashion that the court does not allow further diminishing of its integrity and to be transparent in its functioning and sharing of information to strengthen the public trust towards the institution.”

The Home Ministry this month announced that it would be investigating TM for its challenging of the Supreme Court, prompting the NGO’s international affiliate – Transparency International – to express its concern “grave concern” over potential intimidation of the Maldivian chapter.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldivian-Canadian spat explained by Global News

Canada’s Global News has revealed the story behind the recent war of words between Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird and the Government of Maldives.

The news outlet reports that Baird’s “inappropriate remarks” – later complained about by Waheed in a letter to Canada’s Prime Minister – came as a result of the Maldives’ Acting Foreign Minister accusing Baird of bias during the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) meeting on September 27.

Citing sources familiar with the incident, Global News’s Laura Stone reported that Dr Mariyam Shakeela had brandished an ipad showing photographs of Baird posing with anti-government Maldivian protesters prior to entering the meeting.

Baird was reported to have responded to the accusation by acknowledging that he was indeed biased.

“Biased in favour in of democracy and a free and fair second round of elections.  Biased against the delay and anti-democratic actions of President Waheed who only garnered five per cent in the first round of elections,” Global News’s sources recalled Baird remarking.

The spat subsequently escalated as Waheed wrote to the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper arguing that these comments had “put unnecessary pressure on an otherwise excellent relationship” between the Maldives and Canada

Baird’s office responded to Waheed’s complaint by pointing out “the irony of the Acting Foreign Minister of the Maldives representing that country at CMAG, when her President received five percent of the vote in the first round of the election. Perhaps that is where President Waheed took offence.”

“It might have also been when Minister Baird pointed out to CMAG members that the second round of elections were ‘suspended’ under mysterious circumstances and called on Maldivian officials to proceed with the second round of elections without delay,” said Baird’s Spokesperson Rick Roth, in a statement.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Elections Commission consults with government over re-scheduled presidential election

Elections Commission (EC) members met with the government today in compliance with the Supreme Court’s order to consult relevant authorities within 72 hours of its verdict, regarding the re-scheduling fresh presidential elections by its October 20 deadline.

The Supreme Court late last night annulled the first round of the election in a 4:3 decision. Citing a secret police report on alleged electoral irregularities, the court ordered fresh elections by October 20 with enhanced police and government involvement.

After the Majlis meeting today, Independent Institutions Committee member Hamid Abdul Ghafoor described the verdict as “incomprehensible”, and as “technically and logistically not possible”.

The Supreme Court verdict was issued despite unanimous positive assessment of the polling by more than a thousand local and international election observers, while the police report on which it was supposedly based has not been made public and was not shown to the EC’s defence lawyers.

The EC was forced to postpone the presidential election’s second round, citing a lack of state cooperation that prevented the commission from holding a “free and fair vote without intimidation, aggression, undue influence or corruption” on September 28.

The announcement was made September 27, shortly before the EC secretariat was surrounded by Special Operations police with orders from Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz to take over the building and ballot papers should it proceed with election preparations.

Parliament

EC officials met with parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee at 12:30pm today, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ghafoor told Minivan News today.

Although committee meetings are normally closed to the public, with the EC’s consent the committee agreed to talk to the media openly about today’s proceedings, Ghafoor explained.

“EC officials refused to leave the Supreme Court last night until they were given a copy of the verdict, which wasn’t provided until 1:30am,” said Ghafoor.

“The Supreme Court totally changed the EC’s mandate in their verdict,” he continued. “They have created a mandate that is totally different from what the law requires.”

Ghafoor highlighted some of the inconsistencies and “constitutional contradictions” within the verdict.

“It requires one new staff member to be hired for each ballot box to conduct ‘new functions’, although it’s not clear what those functions will be,” explained Ghafoor. “That’s 470 new people that have to be hired and trained in the next 12 days.”

“Additionally, the constitution stipulates the final voter list is the EC’s responsibility, but the Supreme Court verdict requires that the commission consider the list provided by the Department of National Registration (DNR) as their primary source,” said Ghafoor.

“The problem with the DNR is that because of bad management there are various errors with their list, which is why the EC should be the final arbiter of the voter registry. The sole authority of the list is up to them according to the constitution,” he continued. “The Supreme Court verdict contradicts the constitution.”

By law it is up to the EC to decide election dates, however the constitutionally-mandated timeline “has been squashed”, noted Ghafoor. “The Supreme Court did not consult with the EC about the new timeline prior to issuing the verdict.”

In a previous meeting with the Independent Institutions Committee, the EC had said that the commission would require 19 to 21 days to conduct the election in a matter that was satisfactory and does justice to free and fair elections, Ghafoor explained.

“The more sinister aspect of this forced timeline, is that it opens up the process to corruption and vote rigging,” he highlighted.

The Supreme Court has made “a right royal mess of this”, he lamented.

The EC also told the parliamentary committee that they had requested to meet Supreme Court Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain today, as they wanted to consult all three branches of government, the executive, legislature, and judiciary, Ghafoor explained.

However, the Chief Justice instead agreed to meet the EC at his convenience tomorrow (October 9) at 9:00am.

“They are very professional in their approach, doing it by the book,” said Ghafoor. “We are very happy to have such a strong Elections Commission.”

State-funded programs to be sacrificed for elections

Meanwhile, Minister of Finance and Treasury Abdulla Jihad told local media today that the department was “legally obligated” to provide election funds, despite the lack of these available.

“We will arrange the funds even if it is from the contingency budget. But it will be an extremely difficult process. But we will provide funds for the elections. However, sacrifices will have to be made. We will have to stop some state-funded programs,” said Jihad.

He noted that the EC had not yet discussed the budget needed to re-hold the presidential election with the Finance Ministry.

In a previous interview with Minivan News, when asked what the EC would do if the Supreme Court annulled the first round results, EC Chair Fuwad Thowfeek noted: “The government has spent over MVR30 million (US$1,949,310) on the first round, there is no budget remaining [to hold both rounds again].”

“If it’s difficult for the government to provide the additional budget for the second round, there will be so many difficulties if the [results are annulled and] voting rounds are held again,” said Thowfeek.

The estimated cost of the presidential election was MVR96 million (US$6,213,600) – the now-annulled first round cost MVR69 million (US$4,466,025) and MVR27 million (US$1,747,575) was allotted for the second round, according to local media.

However, re-holding the election has reportedly increased the total estimated cost to over MVR 100million (US$6,472,500).

The government is currently relying on short-term treasury bills (T-bills) to “roll over” debts on a monthly basis to address the budgetary shortfall, as recurrent expenditures for 2013 were exceeded in April.

To supplement the state budget President Dr Mohamed Waheed has been seeking to secure multi-million dollar foreign loans from financial authorities in Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia, India and China.

President’s Office

Thowfeek and EC Vice Chair Ahmed Fayaz met with President Waheed this morning (October 8 ) in the President’s Office. Local media reported that Vice President Mohamed Waheed Deen and Attorney General Azima Shakoor also attended.

During the meeting, President Waheed called upon the EC to carry out the Supreme Court’s order to hold the presidential election’s first round in accordance with the verdict.

Waheed assured the commissioners that the government would “give all its support and cooperation” to the EC, including budgetary, security, human resources and infrastructure assistance as required.

“It is especially important that the integrity of the entire elections process is enhanced and maintained,” Waheed emphasised.

He noted that ensuring the presidential election is held in a smooth and peaceful manner is the government’s priority and that it is important “everyone puts forward national interests ahead of everything else”.

The  government is meanwhile preparing to shut down for the Eid al-Adha holidays, which commence on October 11 through to October 19, a day before the Supreme Court’s election deadline.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Thasmeen to stick with Nasheed in re-scheduled poll

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali has today announced his intention to maintain his new alliance with the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) going into the re-scheduled presidential elections.

After running as the vice-presidential candidate on the ticket of incumbent President Dr Mohamed Waheed, Thasmeen and his DRP announced their decision to support Mohamed Nasheed in the scheduled run-off just days after Waheed received just 5% of the popular vote.

“I believe that it would be an irresponsible and cowardly act to back away from doing what must be done to ensure that democracy is upheld in this country due to some words I might have said in the past. And therefore, tonight I assure all of you that DRP will do everything we possibly can to help Nasheed win these elections,” Thasmeen told an MDP rally one week after the first poll.

Despite the Supreme Court’s decision to annul the first round of voting, Thasmeen told local media today of his intention to continue his MDP alliance.

Waheed has yet to announce if he will run as a candidate in the upcoming election – with the first round to be held by October 20.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Party Island: Sun Island resort employees allege purge of MDP staff

Employees at Sun Island Resort and Spa have accused its management of firing a large number of staff based solely on their political affiliation and suspected support for the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

Sources from the resort allege that over 30 staff members have been fired following the announcement of the results of the first round of the presidential elections, held on September 7.

Sun Island is owned by resort tycoon and Jumhooree Party (JP) leader Gasim Ibrahim, who contested in the first round, finishing third with 24.07 percent of the vote. Gasim subsequently submitted a case to the Supreme Court alleging fraudulent voting, which eventually resulted in the decision to annul the first round on October 7.

According to the results of the ballot box placed on Sun Island in first round, the JP received 206 votes and the MDP 60 votes. Meanwhile, the Progressive Party of Maldives got a total of eight votes while independently contesting incumbent President Dr Mohamed Waheed did not receive any votes.

Staff at Irufushi Beach and Spa resort have also recently expressed concern over a “firing spree” affecting staff members professing to support the MDP.

Yellow T-shirt leads to multiple dismissals

Eighteen year old Zamin Abdul Raheem told Minivan News of the circumstances under which he was dismissed without notice from his post at Sun Island, after almost a year of service.

“We were doing some community cleaning work in the staff area after my duty hours, and I happened to be wearing a yellow T-shirt on the day. While a supervisor and I were having a chat, the general manager (GM) walked up and angrily asked me why I was wearing a T-shirt of this colour and said very angrily and accusingly ‘finally your political views and the candidate you voted for are being revealed’,” Zamin explained.

“I replied, saying the colour of my attire reveals nothing, that I wear various colours. I said I had cast a secret vote, as is in the law, which made the GM angrier. He retorted ‘we’ll see about that’ and stormed off. By 6:00pm that day I got a call from the Human Resources Department (HR) asking me not to report to duty. Three hours later, they called again and informed me that I’d been fired, though they couldn’t specify a reason for it,” he said.

According to multiple sources at the resort, the supervisor was also fired on the same day, after management questioned him as to why he had been “standing so care-freely with a man who dared to wear yellow”.

Two other staff members claimed that they were fired for going to the jetty to see off the dismissed staff, with whom they had worked closely.

“The constitution of the Maldives clearly guarantees us the right to support any political party we prefer. I told the management too that I will not be enslaved by anyone, just because Gasim gave us a job he thinks he is entitled to have the management force us to vote for him and go to his rallies. I’ve seen what he is like. By running for presidency, he is trying to enslave the citizens of this country,” Zamin said.

“Thirty fired, thirty to go”: firing spree worries staff

Mohamed Ali, a cashier who was fired on September 27, says he received a call from HR informing him of his dismissal and ordering him to leave the resort premises on the first available transfer.

“They said it was a staff cut-down as an official reason. I asked them why then they couldn’t follow procedure, and give me due notice, to which the reply was that they ‘Didn’t know, it’s orders from the management’.”

“Another colleague was also fired at the same time, and obviously the whole team from our department got frustrated. We went together to the HR to ask questions, and this resulted in the immediate dismissal of the five others who accompanied us there to raise concerns,” Ali said.

“Although they said we’d be given air transfer as is the norm, at the last minute they tried to pile us into a small supply boat, which would take seven hours to reach Male’. We refused, and ended up having to pay our own airfares.

“We were so afraid of losing our jobs that we had to just agree with whatever political opinions the management voiced. They forced us to do political things to the point where even someone who might have initially supported Gasim would change his mind.”

“The GM himself said the 60 staff members who voted for MDP will be thrown out. They just dismiss whomever they suspect. One guy who worked on the resort’s fishing vessel was among the first dismissed as he is from Kulhudhuhfushi which had lots of support for MDP. Even the official reason they gave was ridiculous: that the guy had refused to cut his hair on time,” Ali alleged.

“The resort has previously taken action against staff who refused to re-register to vote in the resort, and those who refused to vote for Gasim.”

Ahmed Ikram, another dismissed staff member, claimed that workers were forced to sign up for JP, to register to vote in the resort, and that people who complained had action taken against them.

“I wouldn’t call it a tourist resort anymore. It’s nothing but a campaign hub,” Ikram said.

Ahmed Naushad, among the cashiers fired, claimed that between dismissal and transfer out of the resort, the management sent security guards, claiming they were to “watch over the dismissed staff as [they] might damage resort property. Naushad said it was similar to “adding salt to a wound” after they had loyally served the resort for long periods of time.

Naushad further said that they were asked by their employers to attend all JP rallies, adding that some staff had even been given some form of payment in return for attending the large rally held in capital city Male’ on August 16.

Fired for going to the jetty to see off his fired friends, Ahmed Sammahu expressed concerns about how there was no line between what was expected from a person’s job and what the management wanted them to do in the owner’s political interests.

“I’ll be frank. Politically, I support MDP. However, when at Sun Island, they forced me and others to display support to Gasim. We even have to participate in all his campaign activities, or else risk termination. I’ve done all that. And yet, they can’t digest the vote I cast.”

Political threat to the company

Ahmed Sirhan stated that he had handed in his resignation after many of his colleagues working in the same department had been terminated “unfairly and under discrimination based on political views”.

“I resigned as a termination was inevitable, and I wasn’t going to stay around and let them do as they pleased. Do you know the management’s tactics when votes near? We had awesome meals in the staff quarters for exactly three days ahead of elections. There were foods like biryani, sausages and corn flakes – things we’ve never been given in the staff kitchen before.”

“We were even treated to free coffee from the staff coffee shop during these three days. And right after voting day, the food quality went way below even what we were used to before,” said Sirhan, whose allegations were repeated by many of his colleagues.

“I’d liken the management’s actions to having patted us on the back as the vote approached, and then trying to strangle us once the votes had been cast,” Mohamed Ali said.

Another staff member who had submitted his resignation was asked to stop coming to work before the period of notice he had given was up. He was informed that unless he left immediately it would be recorded as a dismissal and not a voluntary resignation.

“When asked for a reason, the management said that there is a difference in political ideologies and that I may prove to be a threat to the company. While my monthly salary of MVR 4000 (US$259) was due, they deducted MVR 3000 (US$195) and claimed it was because I had chosen to resign instead of waiting for dismissal,” he claimed.

Trepidation in the resort

A staff member still employed at the resort – who spoke to Minivan News on condition of anonymity – shared the general feeling amongst other MDP supporting staff members remaining in the resort.

“It’s not easy to find jobs in this sector. Everyone’s scared, not sure which one of us will get fired first. There’s about 30 still left and the GM has said to various colleagues that he will fire all 60 who voted for MDP.”

“No one complains about anything, regardless of how unfair it is. For example, we aren’t even allowed to watch Raajje TV in this resort. And all these dismissals are against the Employment Act, not to mention the individual civic rights guaranteed in the constitution,” he said.

Article 4 of the Employment Act prohibits discrimination against any employee based on their political beliefs or affiliation with any political party.

Article 21(b) of the same Act states that political affiliation is not a reasonable cause for dismissal of an employee.

“No knowledge of such incidents”: HR

Minivan News was unable to get in touch with Sun Island Resort and Spa General Manager Mohamed Saeed.

The front office stated that they are not allowed to share the GM’s number or his assistant’s number, or even pass the call to his extension.

When asked if there was any other staff at the resort who could respond to media queries, the Front Desk Officer replied “I suppose it is only the GM who can respond to those queries, but we aren’t allowed to share his number or pass any calls to him”.

A Human Resources official from the resort – who declined to identify himself – refused to comment on the matter besides saying that he was unaware of politically motivated dismissals, saying he has “no knowledge of such incidents”.

JP leader and Sun Island owner Gasim Ibrahim was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)