Category:

Political Parties Act was fabricated to destroy GIP: GIP

Minister of State for Finance and Spokesperson for President Mohamed Waheed’s abolished Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP), Abbas Adil Riza, has said that he does not accept that the party has been dissolved despite the Elections Commission saying otherwise.

During a press conference held at Nalahiyaa Hotel on Wednesday, Riza said the elections commission had not informed them of the party’s dissolution.

Following the ratification of Political Parties Act, only five political parties remain registered in the Maldives. Remaining parties include: opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and government-aligned parties Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Jumhoree Party (JP) and Adhaalath Party (AP).

Vice President of Elections Commission (EC) Ahmed Fayaz told Minivan News on Tuesday that a total of 11 political parties had now been removed from its political party registry in accordance to the new Act.

President Waheed’s own party, GIP was among the 11 parties dissolved following the bill’s ratification, despite the president’s claims that it had reached 10,000 members.

EC Vice President Fayaz said that whilst GIP and the Maldives Development Alliance (MDA) had both submitted enough forms to meet the 10,000 minimum, many of those forms were still pending and so could not be counted.

“There are two parties who have submitted close to, or over the 10,000 membership minimum, but just because the parties have 10,000 membership forms submitted, it does not mean they have 10,000 party members,” he said at the time.

It had been previously reported that upon ratification of the bill, political parties with fewer than 10,000 members would have three months to reach the required amount or face dissolution.

When asked about the clause, Fayaz stated it only applied to registered parties in accordance to the bill, and that therefore if a party does not meet the 10,000 limit it cannot be classed as such and is therefore exempt from the three-month clause.

Meanwhile Abbas Adil Riza contended that a high priority was given by parliament members in drafting the Political Parties Bill which became law on Tuesday, claiming that the bill was fabricated to destroy the party.  Riza also accused Parliament Speaker Abdulla Shahid of playing a pivotal role in making sure the bill got passed into law.

Last week, both parliament’s minority leader and majority leader unanimously supported to overrule the vetoed Political Parties bill without any amendments, forcing it through. Out of the 67 members present during the vote, 60 voted in favour of the passage of the bill while six voted against the bill and one MP abstained.

During the press conference, Riza also contended that Maldives’ political party system was “significantly in need of smaller political parties” and that all major political parties had “betrayed the nation” because it had the support base needed to do so.

He also contended that the party would file a petition in Supreme Court challenging the Political Parties Act and the Elections Commission in its decision to abolish the party.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad – who is also a member of GIP – echoed similar remarks earlier, claiming the government had decided to take measures to “rectify” the decision to dissolve all but five of the country’s political parties.

He argued that the dissolution of the parties is seen by the state as an infringement of people’s right to form political bodies which he maintained was a constitutional right.

Masood contended that Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor had on Tuesday afternoon sought to file motions with the country’s Supreme Court raising concerns with the decision to dissolve the parties following the ratification of the Act.

However, it remains unclear as to whether the Supreme Court has accepted the case or not.

Addressing the impact of President Waheed’s own party being dissolved, Masood said the decision would not be a problem for the functioning of the present government.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Transcript: President Waheed’s testimony to the Commission of National Inquiry

This article was first published on Dhivehi Sitee. Republished with permission.

Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, who took oath of office as President of the Maldives on February 7 2012, gave an interview to the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) on May 8 2012. Dhivehi Sitee has seen a copy of the English translation of the interview. Shared here is Dhivehi Sitee’s reading of the document. Some of the questions and responses have been summarised for brevity. Where I have been unable to decipher a coherent meaning from the translation, I have left the text and words as is, marked [sic].

Could you tell us details of how your meeting with the Coalition on 30 January 2012?

Leaders of the Civil Alliance first asked me to meet them on 20 January. By then they had been protesting for several days and nights. It was Adhaalath Party President Imran who called and requested the meeting. I think it was a Friday. I said I could meet him at 4:00 p.m. I informed President Nasheed via an SMS. If you wish, you can send someone from the President’s Office to participate, I told him. There was no response. Circumstances prevented them from coming, so the meeting did not happen.

A few days passed, and he called me again. I think it was the night of 30 January. They would come to meet me after the protests ended for the night.

Usually, the protests ended late. Some nights they went on until 2:00. Some people stayed up watching the protests on television till about 1:00. Me too. I usually stayed up until the end. They did not come at 12:00 as agreed. I received information they were coming to see me after a meeting elsewhere. When they came, there were about fifteen or twelve of them.

There were some leaders, leaders of protests too. This included Imran, Umar Naseer…I can’t recall their names right now…they came. As it was, before this meeting, I happened to have said something about Abdulla Ghaazee’s arrest. First I wrote a blog post saying I did not agree with the decision, and that I wasn’t happy about it.

Later, at a press conference I gave at the President’s Office, I said,

“I still believe he [Abdulla Ghaazee] should be released. But he mustn’t return to the bench until all issues surrounding him were addressed.”

From then on, everyone was ‘indignant’ [sic] with me. At the same time, I was becoming more popular among the protesters. Others, however, were not happy with me for saying that Abdulla Ghaazee should be released though not allowed on the bench.

I thought this was the reason they wanted to meet me. To ask me about what I had said. Considering how they do things, I assumed they were putting it on. It had been a long time since the protests started and, at the time, they were losing momentum. I thought it was just a PR stunt.

I believed, and still do, that Abdulla Ghaazee should have been released.

When they did turn up, I told them why I thought Abdulla Ghaazee should be released.

“He was arrested extra-legally. But, with the problems surrounding him, a judge of a court, he shouldn’t be on the bench,” these were my thoughts.

Even if requested by the judiciary, or acting on his own volition, Abdulla Ghaaze must not return to the bench until all investigations pending against him were completed. That would have been the best for peace and harmony.

“If there is a change in leadership, given how the protests are going, are you ready to take on the responsibilities of the government?” they responded.

“There is no need for a question like that. If, for any reason, the President steps aside, I should take his place. That’s my legal responsibility”, I told them.

“Say you had to carry out the responsibility. What would you do then?” one of them, I don’t know who, asked me.

“I am a member of a small party. This government came to power in a coalition,” I responded. If I were to take on the responsibility, I said, “I will work with everyone.”

“If that’s how you stand, we are with you,” they responded.

“We have a pact now,” one of them said to me as they left.

That was how the meeting went.

**********

There was a cabinet meeting the next morning. The moment I walked in, before I was able to say a word, Sheikh Hussein Rasheed jumped up.

“That was some meeting last night! I will not sit at the same table with someone who’s been in such a meeting!” Sheikh Hussein Rasheed walked out.

Other Ministers wanted to know what I had discussed at the meeting. I got a little upset.

“None of your business. I don’t have to answer to Ministers,” I said. I was really very displeased with them.

“I don’t have to tell you anything,” I said. “It’s not that I am going to keep it from you, it’s just that there’s no need for such questioning.”

The questions came mostly from people like Shifa, Zulfa, Hassan Latheef. The rest had none to ask.

I told them what I have just told you, what happened [at the meeting], what we talked about.

They began asking more questions. The President interrupted.

“The Vice President has explained what happened. That’s the end of it,” he said.

There were no more questions; it was the last time we talked about it. That was during a working meeting. Later that day, in the afternoon, there was an official meeting. No questions were asked.

*********

Did anyone in the Civil Alliance ask you not to resign under any circumstances?

Yes, that’s possible. I am not someone who has ever thought of resigning. I had been given a post…it is possible that if someone had asked me if I planned on resigning, I would have said ‘No, I have no such plan.’

Why should anyone even ask me such a question? I don’t know why I should resign at all.

**********

Why did you make a statement at around 2:30-3:00 on the morning of 7 February asking everyone to act within the law. You also warned the military and police. Why?

Yes. As usual, we were watching the protest. What we saw that night was unusual. We saw the police leaving the place [Artificial Beach] and a fight breaking out. As far as I remember, I do make such statements on occasion. So I gave a statement that night, too, asking everyone to act according to the law.

“If things carry on like this, it may get out of control,” I thought.

No one was asking me anything, no one sought my counsel. As Vice President, I was very concerned with what was happening. That’s why I gave the statement, so everyone could hear.

**********

How much truth is in the statement that President Nasheed called you on the 7th and received no response?

The last time President Nasheed spoke to me was at tea, after the cabinet meeting. I haven’t spoken to him since. If he had called me, there would be a call log, right? His number is still in my phone as HEP. If he had called me, my phone would register a missed call, right? He did not call me. Had he wanted to, there were plenty of options. We are both under the protection of the SPG [security detail]. If he had asked one of the officers to call me, or fetch me, they would have done so. I don’t believe he called me at all.

**********

Did you contact any political leaders of the Civil Alliance during the events of 7 February?

Not even slightly do I recall talking to any political leaders that night.

Is there any truth to President Nasheed’s various, and changing, statements that you were a leader in this mutiny, that deals had been made and other such stories?

I have no such information.

President Maumoon made a statement that night. Did you have any role in that?

I did not talk to President Maumoon. I first talked to Maumoon only after this change was brought.

**********

Why did you not attend the cabinet working session on the morning of 7 February?

As you know, so much was happening in Male’ that day. Huge events. On TV I saw President Nasheed go out to the Republic Square. I saw fighting. I forgot it was a working day, that a cabinet meeting was scheduled for the day. The whole day was so chaotic, I completely forgot about the cabinet meeting. I didn’t think anyone would be going to work that day so I stayed home. We hadn’t slept that night.

In the afternoon, Abdulla Shahid called to say the President was about to resign. This, too, made me sure there wouldn’t be a cabinet meeting that day. Isn’t this to be expected in a situation like this?

The way things were going, it just didn’t occur to me there would be a cabinet meeting that day. I would have been really anxious when I heard the President was to resign. I didn’t hear it from the President, he did not talk to me or call me. Abdulla Shahid did.

“It will only be official when I receive the letter. I haven’t got it yet. I’ll call you when I have it,” Shahid said.

One and a half hours later he rang me again. He had received the letter. Would I come to the People’s Majlis and take the oath?

So, actually, I didn’t know there was a cabinet meeting that day. No one from the President’s Office called to say a Cabinet meeting was on, no one called to invite me.

I forgot. But, surely someone from the President’s Office could have phoned and asked if I were coming? Nobody did. There were cabinet ministers around him when he resigned, I saw it on TV. I only learned later that his resignation had been preceded by a cabinet meeting.

**********

It has been alleged that, during a time of such crisis, you failed to perform your responsibilities as Vice President. How do you respond?

To fulfil my responsibilities, I made a statement. I believed I had to say something, so I made a statement urging obedience to the law. I said I was willing to help in anyway I can with everything. I made the statement because no one in the government was in touch with me.

President Nasheed didn’t call me. He made no attempt to discuss things with me. And, given our relationship at the time, I didn’t want to take the initiative and get involved in things he hadn’t invited me to. He hadn’t called me, so I didn’t know how things were going. But I did call [retired Major General] Moosa Jaleel sometime in the morning, when the police-military confrontation began. He did not answer.

Did President Nasheed ask you then, or at any time, to finish up and go? To ‘retreat’ [sic] or resign?

No. Never. But, back when the whole cabinet resigned, he discussed the possibility of mid-term elections with a lot of people. Mid-term elections could only be held if both of us resigned together. But, even then, he did not ask me to resign. I learned indirectly that he, or others, wanted me to resign.

The British High Commissioner, in a meeting about a year and a half ago, asked me what my plan was.

“How will I know what to do? It’s not been discussed with me. When the time comes, I will do the best for my country,” I replied.

**Dhivehi Sitee Note: What the transcript says next is below in quotation marks. I am not sure of the meaning of the paragraph, so I have left it as it is. **End of Note

Then he asked me what was Plan B, I told him that Plan B was to go according to this within this unrests, then the High Commissioner asked me if so what was Plan C. Nobody replied to that, then the Commissioner told that it is talking to each other. Plan C was not followed later.

**********

How much truth is in the statement that you sent some people to take over TVM before President Nasheed resigned?

My younger brother called me to tell me he was there. But it was after I took my oath. He worked in TVM for a long time, and would go there on other people’s request. I don’t know the details. I told him to remain there until we knew what was going on. He did. I began working on handing over TVM to MBC the next day. Within two days of me becoming President—in less than 48 hours—the board of MBC came to meet me.

“I’ll see what I can do,” I said. I handed over the responsibility of handing over TVM and Radio Maldives to MBC to the Attorney General. It took several days—around two weeks, I think, to make the required changes to the board, transferring assets and such like. As soon as the changes were completed he [brother] left TVM.

Do you believe that the situation got to a level where President Nasheed had to resign?

No, I don’t believe that. Not at all. I was surprised. President Nasheed is not someone who does things that easily. From what I have seen, he never did anything he did not want to do. I believe that things could have been resolved through talking. Why that didn’t happen, I don’t know.

How come people who led things that day have been given such high posts?

‘We all expected it to turn like this’ [sic]. When things changed, and I came to be in charge, my first priority was to maintain law and order. The Attorney General advised me, too, that I should first secure the Police, Home Affairs, and Defence.

So I gathered members of all political parties and continued to do things according to their advice. They suggested those names. They are not people I know.

But then again, I don’t know a lot of people.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

Authorities plan 14-storey court building

A 14-storey building used to house the Maldives’ superior courts is to be designed by Riyan Private Limited for a total of MVR 470,000 (US$30,519).

An official from the Judiciary Media Unit told local media that the Criminal Court, Civil Court, Family Court, Juvenile Court and Drug Court are to be transferred into the building once it is complete.

Riyan Private Limited has 62 days to design the building, which is expected to help alleviate space constraints faced by the courts, local media has reported.

The building is planned to be built on plot number 378, near Aa Sahara Cemetery in Male’.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed appoints new President’s Office, Maldives Polytechnic roles

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik has appointed a new President’s Office under secretary and a chief executive officer at Maldives Polytechnic.

Adnan Haleem was yesterday announced to be taking up a chief executive officer role at Maldives polytechnic, according to the President’s Office. Meanwhile, Ali Hasham has been appointed as under secretary at the President’s Office.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Eleven political parties dissolved after controversial bill ratified by President

Additional reporting by Neil Merrett.

Five political parties remain registered in the Maldives following the ratification of the controversial Political Parties Bill by President Mohamed Waheed.

Vice President of Elections Commission (EC) Ahmed Fayaz told Minivan News today (March 12) that a total of 11 political parties had now been removed from its political party registry in accordance to the new bill.

Out of the 16 parties that had previously existed prior to the ratification of the bill, only the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Jumhoree Party (JP) and Adhaalath Party (AP) remain registered in the Maldives.

The Political Parties Bill, ratified today (March 12), states that parties who do not meet the required 10,000 members will no longer be recognised as such in the Maldives.

President Waheed’s own party, Gaumee Ihthihad Party (GIP) was one of the 11 parties dissolved following the bill’s ratification, despite the president’s claims that it had reached 10,000 members.

EC Vice President Fayaz said that whilst GIP and the Maldives Development Alliance (MDA) had both submitted enough forms to meet the 10,000 minimum, many of those forms were still pending and so could not be counted.

“There are two parties who have submitted close to, or over the 10,000 membership minimum, but just because the parties have 10,000 membership forms submitted, it does not mean they have 10,000 party members.

“We followed procedure in accordance to the [Political Parties] bill. Within that bill there is a clause that clearly states, that when a party that has less than 10,000 members it is to become null and void. The EC acted in accordance to the law,” Fayaz told Minivan News.

It had been previously reported that upon ratification of the bill, political parties with fewer than 10,000 members would have three months to reach the required amount or face dissolution.

When asked about the clause, Fayaz stated it only applied to registered parties in accordance to the bill, and that therefore if a party does not meet the 10,000 limit it cannot be classed as such and is therefore exempt from the three-month clause.

Government takes measures to “rectify” Political Parties Bill

Speaking to Minivan News, President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad said the government had decided to take measures to “rectify” the decision to dissolve all but five of the country’s political parties.

The dissolution of the parties is seen by the state as an infringement of people’s right to form political bodies, according to Masood.

“The constitution does give the right for every citizen to do this,” he added.

Masood contended that Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor had this afternoon sought to file motions with the country’s Supreme Court raising concerns with the decision to dissolve the parties following the ratification of the controversial Political Parties Bill by President Waheed earlier today.

However, at the time of press, he said he was not aware exactly of the nature of documentation submitted to the courts by the attorney general.

Addressing the impact of President Waheed’s own party being dissolved, Masood said the decision would not be a problem for the functioning of the present government.

However, he declined to comment on what implications a lack of party could have on President Waheed’s prospects for re-election.

“There maybe some issues there going forward, but you would need to speak with a spokesperson for the president’s party,” he said. “I would rather not comment on the matter.”

Local media reported that the AG’s Office had submitted both the Political Parties Act and the Privileges and Powers of Parliament Members Act to the Supreme Court today, stating that the bills contain a number of legal discrepancies.

At time of press, Attorney General Azima Shukoor and GIP party spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza were not responding to calls from Minivan News.

President Waheed’s Special Advisor and Leader of the government-aligned Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), Dr Hassan Saeed, and MP Ahmed ‘Sun Travel’ Shiyam, Interim Leader of the recently formed Maldives Development Alliance (MDA), were also not returning calls today.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

NDA talks national drug studies, prevention policies and budget difficulties

The National Drug Agency (NDA) has defended the accuracy of a recent national survey into the scale of narcotics abuse and addiction in the Maldives, claiming the prevalence model used by researchers was the most efficient method presently available.

Some sources who participated in the survey process have expressed serious concerns about the “flawed methodology” of the data collection process, which they claim produced a final report that was inaccurate and had grossly underestimated the extent of drug use in the Maldives. The NDA has previously refuted criticisms over the drug report’s methodology in a letter sent to Minivan News.

NDA Chairperson and State Health Minister Lubna Mohamed Zahir Hussain has since claimed that on the back of a reduced state budget for its prevention and treatment programs in 2013, the findings would play a key role in helping authorities devise its future strategic action plan.

Lubna’s comments followed the publication by the NDA and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) last month of a prevalence survey based partly on primary data obtained from atolls capitals and almost two dozen randomly selected islands across the country. The survey concluded there were a total of 7,496 drug users in the Maldives, with the highest proportion among those aged between 15 and 19 years old.

To gather the findings, the team behind the study said they had used a scientific methodology combining secondary data from the state, such as police and prison services, with survey information gathered from 35 of the country’s inhabited islands.

Representatives from the team involved in compiling the study added that the data provided risked being “skewed” if its researchers had focused specifically on islands with known drug problems, rather than random parts of the country.

The NDA was among one of three key agencies working on the report that also included the (UNODC) and Inova Pvt Ltd – a national research organisation.

Sources who had worked on the report have alleged that the number of drug users identified in the survey was extremely low compared to the number of actual users, claiming that previous studies had estimated that the number of local users ranged between 20,000 and 30,000 people.

The report’s authors contend that there had been little scientific study to confirm such figures beyond anecdotal evidence in the past, with the latest figures better reflecting the scale of the problem in the country.

“Significant drug problem”

Criticisms were also raised by sources involved in the survey process over the scope of testing, which was alleged to have excluded women and the country’s prison population.

The charges were denied by the state organisations and civil society groups behind the report, who added that the latest figures indicated a significant drug problem in the country, with the study providing the first such data of its kind on drug use in the Maldives at a national level.

As part of the methodology used for the report, the survey team told Minivan News that respondents aged between 15 to 64 years of age were questioned across 35 of the country’s inhabited islands.

According to the report’s producers, two islands per atoll were focused on in the study. These included the capital of every atoll and another randomly selected island.

Asked whether such a system could provide an accurate reflection of the number of drug users around the country, the survey team claimed that prevalence studies were favoured by some experts as they allowed for greater control of perceived error limits that might affect the outcome of findings.

A similar methodology used to in the report’s calculations had also used to compile national data for the World Drug Report, according to the research team.

“The methodology [used in the national drug report] is in line with information gathered in the World Drug report. The is the first such information of its kind [for the Maldives],” a member of the team who compiled the report claimed.

“Skewed” figures

A source who has worked in the Maldives NGO sector for the last two years also accused the NDA, UNODC and other stakeholders behind the report of using a methodology that was not relevant to assessing the true scale of drug addiction across the country’s often isolated island communities.

However, a civil society representative involved with the study told Minivan News that the formula used in the report would have been “skewed” if researchers had singled out islands suspected of having more severe levels of drug use and addiction.

Under the same rationing, the survey team claimed that directly including the country’s prison population, 80 percent of whom are claimed to have been imprisoned on suspected drug offences, would again have adversely impacted the formula used to compile its most recent findings.

Rather than omit prison populations entirely, the report’s authors said they had turned to secondary information such as prison data and arrest figures from the police to help “indirectly estimate” the number of drug users using a specially devised methodology.

Researchers behind the survey added that the only other alternative to this model would have been to conduct a census-style test. They claimed such a model would have been too costly for the nation considering the economic challenges facing the country in recent years amidst heightened calls for reduced state spending.

The NDA also added that the study had been independently monitored by the EU and UNODC during the survey period that was conducted across various atolls for a period of two to three months, starting in October 2011. The study period was said to have run for slightly longer in the capital of Male’, according to the research team.

Experimentation

With the findings now released, Afiya Ali, a clinical psychologist working on the study said that the findings had shed new light on the reasons why people were turning to drugs in the country, with young people between 15 to 19 years of age being particularly susceptible.

Afiya said that the findings had indicated that a large number of people turning to drugs in the country found to come from regular backgrounds as opposed to common perceptions of drug takers coming from criminal or troubled backgrounds.

Experimentation was highlighted as a major driver to encouraging young people experiment with alcohol and drugs.

“It is only recently that life skills have been introduced to schools as their has been reluctance from parents and senior figures in the schools to accept these topics,” Afiya explained.

However, she added that that work was being undertaken within the national curriculum, even with young children to indirectly teach them about peer pressure that could lead to such experimentation.

Limitations

The team behind the report told Minivan News that a high level of social stigma among Maldivian females of being associated with drugs had limited the overall effectiveness of understanding narcotics use among women and girls – despite maintaining that users in the country remained predominantly male.

Further study specifically around the amount of females using or addicted to drugs in the Maldives was highlighted by Lubna and the survey team as an area potentially requiring a greater focus in the next few years.

“There will always be limitations to such studies, this include the difficulties in capturing data on females using drugs,” the report authors claimed, adding that similar challenges faced researchers around the world, with drugs widely accepted to be a male-orientated problem.

“There is a social perception that for a guy to be labelled a drug user is less taboo than for a woman. We need to conduct targeted research on women only [concerning drug use].”

Also highlighted among limitations that would impact the final report by the team was the prevalence of drug use among teenagers and children below 15 years of age. However, the NDA claimed that it would be possible to replicate such a study using a similar methodology used in its most recent report.

In terms of the report methodology researchers were sent to 35 of the country’s inhabited islands, where it used four separate questionnaires to try and screen interviewees to ascertain if they may have had experience using drugs

According to researchers these included an initial questionnaire with lighter questions such as whether a respondent knew anyone who had been a drug user. For subjects anticipated of having used drugs, picture cards depicting various drugs available in the country, along with both their English and Dhivehi names, were distributed in order to try to gage familiarity among respondents with the drug scene.

“We had a 90 percent response rate, people wanted to give us information,” said the researchers.

Respondents were also asked to sign a confidentiality agreement and consent form expressing that findings would not be shared with law enforcement authorities, with no individual records said to have been kept.

Future focus

With the report now complete, NDA Chair Lubna Mohamed Zahir Hussain stressed that a heightened focus on corporate social responsibility (CSR) programmes and greater coordination between state and civil society bodies had been highlighted as key aims for its efforts during 2013.

Lubna highlighted “budget difficulties” as a key challenge going forward, particularly in terms of providing placements and work opportunities as part of rehabilitation programmes.

“The budget will be difficult for 2013, so we are looking for possible CSR partners. This is something that we started back in June 2012 with groups like John Keels by providing opportunities in the hospitality sector,” she said.

According to the NDA, thirteen individuals last year undertook the programme, which was based around the food and beverage sector.

Lubna added that authorities were increasingly seeking corporate partners to assist with the programme, not just in terms of providing work experience for recovering addicts, but to also provide potential financial assistance to sponsor placements assisting with the rehabilitation of others.

Providing support to users undergoing Methadone Maintenance Therapy (MMT) was among the key areas where support was being sought, however the state budget was deemed insufficient to do so, according to Lubna.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

IFJ warns that Privileges Act will undermine journalist source protection

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has warned that the Parliamentary Privileges Act pressed into law today (March 12) will undermine the ability of Maldivian journalists to protect their sources.

Journalists in many developed countries, including the UK and Australia, are routinely sentenced to contempt of court extending to imprisonment for declining to reveal sources when asked.

The Maldives is one of the few countries to have so-called ‘shield laws’ protecting journalists from this, with the constitution containing specific provisions concerning freedom of expression in a bid to inspire confidence in potential whistleblowers.

Article 28 of the constitution states – “Everyone has the right to freedom of the press, and other means of communication, including the right to espouse, disseminate and publish news, information, views and ideas. No person shall be compelled to disclose the source of any information that is espoused, disseminated or published by that person.”

However Section 17(a) of the new Parliamentary Privileges Act states: “[Parliament or a Parliamentary Committee has the power to] summon anyone to parliament or one of its committees to give witness or to hand over any information which the parliament wish to seek.”

The Act was passed after a presidential veto was overridden by parliament, in a vote that obtained rare cross-party support. The Act follows the refusal of senior government and police officials to attend committee hearings when summoned, including Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz, and would theoretically criminalise such refusal in future.

The IFJ endorse the the Maldivian Journalist Association (MJA)’s opinion that the new power “is too broad in its provisions and could undermine the constitutional protection that journalists currently enjoy.”

“The IFJ believes that [Article 28 of the Constitution] is a salutary provision of law which makes the Maldives one of the few countries to provide constitutional protection to sources of journalists’ information,” the IFJ said in a statement.

“The IFJ joins the MJA in asking for a reconsideration of provisions in the Parliamentary Privileges Act which may undermine this valuable protection afforded to journalists and all citizens,” it added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed ratifies controversial bills as AG vows to challenge in court

President Mohamed Waheed has ratified the two controversial bills – the Parliament’s Privileges Bill and Political Parties Bill – despite previous claims that the two bills had several lapses and “unconstitutional” elements.

Following the President’s initial vetoing of the two bills, parliament last Tuesday by a house majority overruled the presidential veto and forced the bill into law, giving the president no option but to ratify the bills – one of which would see the dissolution of his own political party.

The bill took a week before it was ratified, with parliamentary group leaders of all major political parties condemning the government for “delaying the ratification of the bill”.

The leaders claimed that Waheed – whose party Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP) is among the first few parties that would be dissolved under the Political Parties Act if it became law – had a personal interest in delaying the bills.

During a ceremony held in President’s office, President Mohamed Waheed after ratifying the bill stated that he did not believe the bill was delayed in ratifying.

According to the President, the bill had been delayed due to certain punctuation errors that needed to be rectified by the parliament before it was ratified.

He stated that the government received the bill on last Thursday but had sent it back as it contained “major punctuation errors”. This, Waheed said, was the cause of delay as the government had only received a ‘punctuation-error free’ version of the bill on Monday.

“I got the corrected bill yesterday after I had sent it to the parliament on Monday. I have to go through the changes before I sign it. Therefore, I do not believe that [the bills] have been delayed to the extent where some parties should go on strike,” he said.

“It is not that we are facing a huge crisis or a world ending. Neither are we facing a medical pandemic here. So I don’t see a reason for me to rush things,” he added.

Waheed contended that the passage of the bill did not concern a financial crisis or the destruction of a person, and argued that he was not purposely delaying the passage of the bills.

Responding to the concerns raised by political party leaders regarding the bill, President Waheed said he respected the parliament, unlike other political leaders, and claimed that on March 4 (Parliament Opening Day) people would know “who did not respect who”.

“I have been working to uphold the law and the constitution from day one. To uphold the rule of law. So what PPM MP Abdulla Yameen said was said very irresponsible,” he said referring specifically to the PPM’s presidential hopeful and half brother of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Waheed added that he was advised by Attorney General Azima Shukoor to ratify the bills despite the legal and constitutional inconsistencies.

In the meantime, Shukoor said that the government had withdrawn its previous case challenging the political parties’ bill, but stated that she would file the case again as soon as the bills are signed into law.

“We will seek a temporary stay order against the Elections Commission to withhold the immediate dissolution of political parties that failed to attain the required numbers in terms of membership,” she said.

Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham earlier told local media that ratification of the Political Parties Bill meant political parties that do not have the required number of members would be dissolved without any transitional period.

According to Usham, the state has requested the Supreme Court issue a writ that would prevent dissolution of the parties prior to a court decision or until a transitional mechanism is set up.

“Referring to the legal principles employed in other democratic societies, dissolution of a political party that is formed in accordance with the law is only given on very exceptional occasions,” he said at time.

Shukoor was on Tuesday quoted in the local media saying that the government had withdrawn a case it had filed challenging the Parliament’s Privileges Bill as well.

However, she did not give any detail as to what clauses in the bill did the government intend to challenge.

The Attorney General said that she had received concerns from Maldives Police Service regarding the privileges bill and would once again challenge the bill as soon as it is signed into law, and this time “include the concerns raised by police”.

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz in an interview given to local media earlier expressed concern over the Parliament’s Privileges bill, claiming the MPs are now “technically immune from the law”

Commissioner Riyaz claimed that the act gives enormous privileges to parliamentarians – privileges that are not even given to former presidents, which he said was “very concerning” and meant there would be no equality before the law.

“The [act] says that no person should indulge in an act that obstructs the work of the parliament. I really don’t comprehend what it is trying to say. I don’t think anybody would know beforehand what the parliament may decide to do. I don’t believe that is possible,” he said

Earlier a joint press statement issued by parliamentary group leaders of all major political parties called on the president to respect the constitution and ratify the two bills without any further delay.

Parliamentary group leaders including Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM)’s MP Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, Jumhoree Party (JP) Leader Gasim Ibrahim and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali had all expressed concern over the delaying of the ratification of the bill.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Teachers forced to work overtime without pay: Teachers Association

The Teachers Association has voiced concern over claims that teachers are being forced to work overtime by certain schools without pay.

President of the Teachers Association, Athif Abdul Hakeen, told local media that teachers are only paid 8 hours worth of overtime regardless of the length of their extra working hours.

In accordance to Article 37 (b) of the Employment Act, Athif told local media that it is mandatory for all employers to pay their staff for the time spent working beyond scheduled working hours.

“I would like to tell all heads of schools to refrain from forcing any staff to work for more than 8 hours.

“If they are to work more than the mentioned 8 hours, they shall be paid for their overtime work, as mentioned by Article 60 of the Civil Service Act,” Athif was quoted as saying in SunOnline.

The Teachers Association president claimed that some schools have threatened teachers who refuse to work overtime, stating that ‘they might have to think twice’ about how they fill out their appraisal forms.

Education Minister Asim Ahmed told local media that claims by the Teachers Association regarding a lack of overtime payment are lies that have no basis.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)