Category:

Attorney general challenges Political Parties Act in Supreme Court

The attorney general has filed a case in the Supreme Court requesting a writ of mandamus against the Elections Commission to prevent dissolution of political parties that has failed to maintain the required 10,000 members as stipulated in the Political Parties Act.

The parliament’s overrule of presidential veto on the Political Parties Bill by a majority of 60 votes on Tuesday (March 5) means the bill will automatically came into force without needing ratification from the president.

Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham was reported in local media as stating that enactment of the Political Parties Act meant political parties that do not have the required number of members would be dissolved without any transitional period.

The attorney general, he said, was of the view that dissolution of smaller political parties without a transitional period would compromise the rights of several parties.

The case

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 told local newspaper Haveeru.

He contended that the consequence of ratifying the bill was that smaller political parties would be dissolved in an irresponsible manner without being given the opportunity to attain the required membership.

The attorney general requested the Supreme Court declare who should be held responsible for the debts incurred by a political party dissolved as per the Political Parties Act.

“We have filed the case in two ways. The first asking the Supreme Court to issue a writ declaring that smaller political parties will not be dissolved and the second to invalidate the clause which dictates dissolution of political parties that do not have a membership of 10,000. The bill failed to highlight who should be responsible to the debts incurred by the party and its employees,” an official from the AG’s office stated.

According to the official, the same arguments were reflected in the letter giving reasons for vetoing the bill, which was sent to parliament by President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik before it was forced into law.

“Our concern is that political parties are legal entities, they have made contracts with several parties. If they are dissolved without a transitional period this compromises a lot of rights,” he added.

Passage of the bill

The Political Parties bill was passed on December 2012 however, President Waheed – whose own Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP) is among those set to be dissolved – refused to ratify the bill and sent it back to parliament for reconsideration in January.

However, with unanimous support from both parliament’s minority leader and majority leader, the bill was forced into law by overruling the presidential veto on Tuesday. 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.

The law will provide a three month period for any political party with fewer than 10,000 members to reach the required amount or face being dissolved.

Article 11 of the law states that at least 10,000 signatures would be needed to register a party at the Elections Commission (EC), which would be mandated to ensure that membership does not fall below the figure.

Parties unable to sign 10,000 members would be dissolved.

Immediate dissolution of smaller political parties

However following the ratification, President of Elections Commission Fuad Thaufeeg stated that the commission’s interpretation of the act suggests that political parties that do not have a minimum of 10,000 members could be abolished immediately.

He stated that once the act is gazetted, the commission was of the view that smaller political parties would immediately be dissolved. However, he said that EC’s legal team was currently reviewing the act and would make a decision based on its report.

“Our legal team is currently reviewing the law before it actually is enacted. The bill having passed by such a strong majority means that the commission would make all the necessary arrangements to begin enforcing the law,” he said.

He added that the law gives the Elections Commission additional powers to regulate and discipline political parties and that the law also gives powers to the commission to take action against parties that violate the law.

Despite several parties facing being dissolved, Thaufeeg said that he hoped to see several parties registered under the new law.

Condemnation

Several leaders of smaller political parties including President Waheed have criticised the Act.

During a party rally held in GIP headquarters, President Mohamed Waheed criticised parliament claiming that the legislature was very “stubborn” towards amending the bill.

Meanwhile, his party spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza said on Thursday in a press conference that the political parties act directly violated the constitution and compromised several rights guaranteed by the constitution.

“Fundamental rights can only be abolished through a public referendum. We want parliament members to amend the act,” he said. “Our problem is not just 10,000. The Act is flawed and has several lapses.”

He added that GIP wish to intervene in the case filed in the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Adhaalath Party leaders claimed the legislation was a direct attempt to dissolve the party and in the long run “eradicate” Islamic ideology from Maldivian politics and “defeat” the party’s efforts to oppose alleged attempts to secularise the country.

“This is a big political and legal challenge [they] placed before Adhaalath Party. The way the political sphere in the country is shaped today, it is very important for a political party like Adhaalath Party to exist,” said its leader Sheikh Imran Abdulla at the time.

DQP Leader Hassan Saeed echoed the Adhaalath Party in warning that he would seek to invalidate the bill through the Supreme Court if it was ratified. Latest statistics shows that the DQP’s membership currently stands less than 3,000 members.

“While it is a constitutional right for anybody to form political parties, I do also believe that a right could be limited through legislation. But such a limit should be placed in accordance to principles justified in other free and democratic societies. The current bill demanding a certain membership size in order for a political party to be registered is a big problem,” Saeed was quoted saying in local media.

Of the 16 parties currently in existence, only five parties now have more than 10,000 registered members, including the formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) as well as the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), Business tycoon MP Gasim Ibrahim’s Jumhoree Party (JP) and most recently, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP).

According to EC, tourism magnate Ahmed ‘Sun Travel’ Shiyam’s Maldivian Development Alliance (MDA) have also attained the required number of members.

Political parties were first authorised in the Maldives in May 2005 following an executive decree by then-President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

The regulation required 3,000 members for registration and did not stipulate whether parties with membership numbers falling below the figure would be dissolved.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government appoints attorney general as acting human rights minister

Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor has been appointed as Acting Minister of Gender, Family and Human Rights, the President’s Office has announced.

Shukoor’s appointment comes at a time when the government has committed itself to review laws it has previously claimed discriminate against – and in some cases criminalise –  women and minors believed to be the victims of sexual abuse.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad declined to speculate on the reason for reappointing the role of acting gender minister, stating only that there was “not much time” and limited resources at the government’s disposal to “get its house in order”.

Masood told Minivan News last month that the Maldives had experienced a number of similar criminal cases of late where young women had been victimised and punished by authorities – a situation he said the government was looking to prevent.

“We are reviewing this right now and if we have to go to the extent of changing existing laws then we would look to do this,” he said.

The Gender Ministry and the Ministry of Islamic Affairs were among the state bodies requested to be part of any potential review, Masood has previously claimed.

Such commitments were made as authorities come under intense scrutiny from local and international civil society organisations following global media coverage of the trial and conviction of a 15 year-old girl on the island of Feydhoo in Shaviyani Atoll for fornication.

In a separate criminal case, the same 15 year-old girl has been identified as a victim of child abuse after giving birth to a baby later discovered last year buried in the outdoor shower area of her home.

Her stepfather was later charged with child sexual abuse, possession of pornographic materials and committing premeditated murder.

Azima Shukoor was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Previous ministers

The acting gender minister position has previously been filled by Minister of Environment and Energy Dr Mariyam Shakeela.

Dr Shakeela was appointed as acting minister on November 21 last year as a replacement for Dhiyana Saeed, who was dismissed from the role for acting in a manner the President’s Office has previously said was not suited for a minister.

Dhiyana had strongly criticised President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and his government over the arrest of her husband, Kaashidhoo MP Abdullah Jabir, who was arrested under suspicion of drinking alcohol.

Jabir re-joined the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) following the arrest.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“No reason” to delay trial for just four weeks, says Nasheed

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has requested state institutions consider the Prosecutor General’s statement to the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court during the most recent hearing of his ongoing trial.

During the hearing on Wednesday (March 7), state prosecutors said they did not object to delaying the trial until presidential elections scheduled for later this year are over.

The prosecution told the three-member panel of judges that they “did not have any problem” withholding the trial for four weeks, and “did not object to delaying the election until the end of the scheduled presidential elections in September 2013.”

Nasheed is facing criminal charges over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed during the last days of his presidency.

Speaking during a party rally held on Wednesday evening, President Nasheed stated that the four-week break granted by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court until the next hearing was an opportunity for state institutions to decide on the matter.

“Delaying trial for just four weeks has no meaning. There is no reason for it nor does it help anyone. We want the trial to be delayed till the elections are over. [The prosecution] gave one month and said that they did not object to further delays,” Nasheed told his supporters.

Nasheed said that it was very clear that charge of arresting the judge was not a charge against him alone, but several others as well.

He also warned that if the magistrate court issued a verdict that would bar him from contesting the elections, a lot of people would rise up against the decision and trigger a “very dangerous political insurgency”.

“Can remain straitjacketed for another 40 days”: former president

“[The government] and the prosecutor general knows very well that Nasheed of Galolhu Keneryge can remain straitjacketed for anther 40 days. He can do that. The torture he receives from it will not change anything,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed also criticised the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) stating that the problem with Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was not just the panel of judges. He alleged that the JSC had formulated the bench and have now been forcing administrative staff of the court to do specific things to impact the trial.

Elaborating, Nasheed claimed that the current Cabinet Secretary of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, Abdulla Nazeer – who was a state minister of education – regularly paid visits to the judges and cabinet ministers and regularly contacted the judges to inquire about the progress of the trial.

“Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) presidential hopeful Abdulla Yameen does not talk about the case. Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali does not speak about it. But it is always traitor Waheed who speaks of it,” Nasheed said.

“He will always say it is with the courts. We are seeing today and every other day how much he is trying to influence this trial. It is posing a huge challenge towards a fair and transparent hearing.”

Nasheed further claimed that the current judiciary of the Maldives was being operated for the benefit of a few politicians.

Despite the law stating otherwise, the judiciary was incompetent and inexperienced, and could not guarantee a court room that would deliver justice to the people of the country, Nasheed said.

“They will take us tomorrow. Even then, be courageous. They will take us the day after tomorrow. Even then, be courageous. Next time it would not be just a day, next time it would be 10 days, perhaps a month but still we shall not back down,” he said, as supporters roared in support.

No withdrawal, no objection

Despite Nasheed’s remarks, Prosecutor General Ahmed Muiz stated that he was not withdrawing the charges against Nasheed, and said that he was still sticking by his decision.

He told local newspaper Haveeru that the state prosecutors will be present any time the court wishes to schedule the trial.

“We told [Nasheed’s lawyers] that we have no problem requesting the court delay the hearing for four weeks. We even told the court that,” he said. “I don’t mind even if the court delays the case. But we don’t have an desire to delay the trial. The court can carry out the trial the way they wish. I have no objection to it; we would follow the schedule they give.”

During Wednesday’s hearings, Nasheed’s legal team requested the court delay the trial until the end of the scheduled presidential elections in 2013, and in a separate request, asked the court for a delay in proceedings by four weeks.

However, the judges dismissed the request to delay the trial until the end of the elections, but agreed to withhold it for four weeks, stating that the panel of judges by majority “have decided to proceed with the trial”.

Nasheed’s lawyers subsequently contested the decision, claiming that continuing the trial could compromise the rights of many people, arguing that Nasheed was the presidential candidate of the largest political party in the country, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

However, the court stated that Nasheed’s claim he was the presidential candidate of a political party lacked legal grounds to support it, as presidential candidates were announced by the Elections Commission after it opened the opportunity to file presidential candidates.

Politicised trial

Speaking to Minivan News, the former President’s Spokesperson MP Mariya Ahmed Didi claimed the court’s decision reflected “how politicised” the trial was.

“The prosecution did say that they had no objection to defer the trial after the election. However, the court opted for a four week [delay],” she said. “We do feel that the fact that the PG has said that he did not object but the court to give only four weeks deferment shows how politicised this trial is.”

Didi added that Nasheed’s legal team had not ruled out the option of appeal and said that President Nasheed and senior members of MDP are currently engaged in discussion with the legal team on whether to do so.

Speaking to Minivan News, Kirsty Brimelow QC, one of three UK-based experts on former President Mohamed Nasheed’s legal team, said that there remained a “strong argument” in the case that the prosecution of Nasheed was “not in the public interest”.

“It is a strong argument that a prosecution is not in the public interest. The currently constituted court comprises of judges who may be biased or have the appearance of bias. They should recuse themselves,” she argued.

She also contended that the prosecution of Nasheed’s case before the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court fell “below international standards for fair trial procedure”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police arrest man on suspicion of assaulting Mariya Didi

A 26-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of assaulting Maldivian Democratic Party MP Mariya Ahmed Didi, a year after the alleged assault took place.

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef told local media that the man was arrested on 4 March 2013 in relation to the assault that took place on 7 February 2012.

According to local media, police have been investigating the videos of the unrest that followed the controversial change of power in February 2012.

The police have been criticised by various institutions for a failure to investigate several incidents that took place on February 7 and 8, 2012.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Facebook shuts down anti-government protest page without notice

Facebook has shut down a prominent pro-Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Facebook page, ‘Kula Yellow’, without notice.

The anti-government page was first established in May 2010 and spread by word of mouth, attracting a strong following among Maldivian young people and reaching 23,000 ‘ likes’. Facebook did not contact the administrators before shutting down the popular social media news source, at approximately 6:30pm on Tuesday, March 5.

According to an analysis conducted by Kula Yellow on the site Social Bakers, the youth-run, self-described “name and shame” platform is one of the most popular social media news sources in the Maldives.

Kula Yellow is a reference to MDP’s political party color. The page promises a “source of information against President Mohamed Waheed regime and a tool to mobilise people against continued human rights abuses and police brutality.”

“MDP is fighting for freedom. Kula Yellow facilitates that by providing a platform for them to spread their views, organise protests and events, and it is very helpful if any message needs to be conveyed to supporters instantaneously,” a Kula Yellow co-founder told Minivan News.

“We are updating and uploading media of police and government brutality 24 hours a day. Our posts have revealed many, many, many government secrets and they can’t digest it. Kula Yellow is a threat to them,” he claimed.

“Additionally we have saved many, many, many lives through our social work. For example, if anyone – they don’t have to be an MDP supporter – needs a blood donation we post on the page to find a matching donor,” the co-founder added.

Although the page has never been shut down before, five of the most active administrators have had their personal accounts blocked or shut down since former President Mohamed Nasheed’s controversial resignation February 7, 2012, a Kula Yellow co-founder and administrator told Minivan News.

“Some of the most active administrators’ have been blocked several times following the coup. This was a problem for us on the release date of the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) as well. The current Maldivian government cannot digest anything we are reporting and they are subsequently blocking media freedom,” he contended.

“I’m sure it’s a government act. They are sending continuous complaint reports to Facebook saying Kula Yellow is ‘spreading lies and inciting violence’, but that is not true,” the co-founder stated.

“There are only two or three news media outlets, and newspapers Haveeru and Sun Online back the current government,” he added. “Kula Yellow fills a gap by trying to explain the coup and give a voice to Maldivian people. The government didn’t like what we were posting and cannot come down on us under Maldivian law. Of course they are trying to block us, I’m sure they formally complained to Facebook,” the administrator stated.

“Maldivian intelligence from the Police Services and Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) monitor [telecommunications companies] Dhiraagu and Wataniya calls and text messages. They are always trying to intercept communications,” the Kula Yellow administrator said, matter-of-factly.

A second Kula Yellow administrator explained there were many admins spread throughout the Maldives, and they took down inappropriate content, such as threats or misinformation.

“Kula Yellow is very open because it’s a social media platform for the public, so on the rare occasion someone puts inappropriate content on the ‘wall’ the administrators take it down immediately. We try our best,” he said.

“We are not like the many hate pages that supporters of Waheed’s government have up – all of which are up and running smoothly,” he said.

“We will interfere”: police

Police denied issuing complaints about Kula Yellow to Facebook, but admitted to telecommunications interference.

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News that “so far we haven’t reported anything to Facebook”.

“We will interfere if any social network or internet site is not [run] according to Maldivian law and order,” Haneef added.

The MNDF also denied interfering with the Kula Yellow page, as Spokesperson Colonel Abdul Raheem explained to Minivan News.

“We have not asked anyone to take down Kula Yellow, not to my knowledge. Was it the communications ministry or something like that? They can say anything,” Raheem said.

President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad denied knowledge of Kula Yellow’s existence, as well as any government interference with it being shut down.

“I have never heard about this Kula Yellow thing that you are talking about. We [the government] do not worry about these pages. How do you know Facebook took it down? Facebook is too big to worry about small little pages. The fact that the page has been taken down has nothing to do with the government,” Masood said.

“Maybe they themselves took it down. If their page has been hacked, or shut down maybe the page owners can follow it up with Facebook,” said Masood.

In 2012, administrators of Kula Yellow claimed they had been “threatened” by police over their page’s content. Police officials denied the accusations.

Facebook activism

Kula Yellow contacted Facebook immediately to reinstate the page and say they remain hopeful their page will be restored quickly.

“Yesterday’s action seemed to be a targeted response to the regime’s arbitrary arrest of the Maldives’ first democratically elected president, Mohamed Nasheed,” stated Kula Yellow.

“Kula Yellow is disappointed by the action taken against the page by Facebook and calls for them to immediately reconsider and place their support with the people of the Maldives.”

A Kula Yellow co-founder lamented that the situation in the Maldives was very complex and contend that Facebook “clearly does not understand Kula Yellow.”

“Facebook did not check to verify what the government, or individuals from the government regime, were reporting. They were probably following their company policy to remove the page if they received numerous complaints.

“This happened in Syria also. Then journalists reported the story and helped get the page(s) reinstated,” a Kula Yellow co-founder stated.

Kula Yellow is exhorting diplomats and international actors to “understand that this is a violation of our human rights, particularly freedom of expression, and should support Facebook reinstating the Kula Yellow page immediately”.

“There are already many fake Kula Yellow Facebook pages going up and this will continue to spread like wildfire in the jungle. The government can’t stop us. We don’t give a damn. There are a thousand ways to move forward, so well will just find another way.

“In the interim our Twitter page is active,” a Kula Yellow administrator added.

The Maldives this year plummeted to 103rd in the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) Press Freedom Index, a fall of 30 places and a return to pre-2008 levels.

Additionally, the Maldives is one of two countries to be dropped from Freedom House’s list of electoral democracies, in its annual survey of political rights and civil liberties.

Facebook had not responded to Minivan News at time of press.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

President wanted “credit” for Maamigili Airport lease extension: former transport minister

Former Minister of Transport Dr Ahmed Shamheed has criticised his removal from cabinet last year following the decision to extend the lease of Maamigili Airport by 99 years.

Shamheed has claimed that he was dismissed by President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik following the approval of the airport lease extension because the president wanted to take credit for the decision.  The lease was given at the time to the Chairman of Villa Group, Gasim Ibrahim.

Last month, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) began an investigation into the 99-year lease of the airport. According to the ACC President, Hassan Luthfee, the investigation is still ongoing.

Despite the investigation, President Waheed inaugurated Maamigili Airport last week (February 28).

Shamheed claimed that the decision to extend the airport lease had been made whilst former President Mohamed Nasheed had been in power, and that the decision was not one he had made on his own.

“It was the economic committee who had decided on the lease, I never decided on my own. It was initiated by the committee actually, that is how it started,” Shamheed alleged to Minivan News.

“It do not think it was the 99-year lease that was the problem, I heard from people close to him that he thought he should be the one making the decision. He thought he should take the credit for that.”

Shamheed was nominated to his former ministerial post by the government-aligned Jumhooree Party (JP) – of which Gasim is the party’s president.

Speaking back in November 2012, the former transport minister told local media that the documents to extend the airport lease for 99 years had been sent to the transport ministry by Nasheed’s government.

“The current government delayed the matter. The president government only endorsed the decision. It was decided by the NPC [National Planning Council] during the former government,” he was quoted as saying in local newspaper Haveeru.

President Waheed inaugurated Villa International Airport in Maamigili Island in south Ari Atoll on February 28.

Speaking at the ceremony, Waheed thanked Chairman of Villa Group, Gasim Ibrahim, before stating that he was greatly honoured to inaugurate the airport.

The main objective of making the airport an international airport was to improve the country’s transport system and the tourism industry, Waheed said during the ceremony.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“JSC politicised, trying to eliminate Nasheed and MDP from elections”: JSC Member Shuaib

Judicial Services Commission (JSC) member Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman has spoken out against the judicial watchdog body, declaring it as politicised and attempting to eliminate former President Mohamed Nasheed from the September 7 elections.

The JSC has not only created the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court in which the former President is being tried, but has appointed the three-member panel of judges overhearing the case. The JSC’s membership includes several of Nasheed’s direct political rivals, including Jumhoree Party leader and resort tycoon Gasim Ibrahim, one of Nasheed’s rival presidential candidates.

Sheikh Rahman, the member of the commission appointed by the public, said political influence of the commission had heightened after Gasim had been appointed.

He is the second JSC member to blow the whistle on the Commission, echoing the concerns of JSC member Aisthath Velezinee who was stabbed in the street in early 2011.

Sheikh Rahman made the remarks during a live appearance on local TV channel Raajje TV, just over a week after UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers Gabriela Knaul also aired concerns over the JSC in a statement following a fact finding mission to the Maldives.

Speaking on the show, Sheikh Rahman said the JSC had openly discussed their intent to ensure the elimination of the Maldivian Democratic Party and presidential candidate former President Mohamed Nasheed from the upcoming elections.

Sheikh Rahman alleged that Chair of the Commission, Supreme Court Judge Adam Mohamed, had abused his post and powers as the chair to try and eliminate Nasheed from contesting the elections, and alleged that Adam Mohamed had “used the commission as a political tool”.

“The politics of the majority control the commission, hence the rule of law, due process and due diligence do not exist in the JSC,” Sheikh Rahman stated. “The commission has no amount of respect for constitutional principles.”

“It is common now to hear a lot of MDP and Nasheed bashing in commission meetings. This was not how things usually were before. I believe politically biased comments like this have increased since Gasim joined the JSC as a representative of the parliament,” Sheikh Rahman continued.

“Gasim even went to the point of asking the UN Special Rapporteur Knaul when she held a meeting with us to state in her report that it was MDP who torched the courts. I heard him say exactly that,” Sheikh Rahman said.

JSC Chair abuses power to continue running unlawful Hulhumale’ Court

Sheikh Rahman further revealed that the JSC had “handpicked” magistrates to preside over the case against Nasheed, for his detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

He said that the JSC’s intention in assigning the case at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court to the three specific magistrates was for the explicitly stated purpose of “sentencing Nasheed”.

According to Sheikh Rahman, the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was initially established through misinformation and manipulation of the commission on the part of JSC Chair Adam Mohamed.

“The Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court is actually abolished automatically with the concept of judicial districts coming into effect upon the ratification of Judicature Act on 10 August 2010. And yet, they continue to run the court,” Sheikh Rahman stated.

He went on to say that as the constitution defines Hulhumale’ and Villingili as parts of the capital Male’ city, there was no authorisation to set up separate magistrate courts on these islands.

Sheikh Rahman alleged that despite these facts, JSC Chair Adam Mohamed had invoked the theory that Hulhumale’ and Villingili were separate islands and were therefore qualified to have their own magistrate courts.

Appendix 2 of the Constitution of Maldives which defines administrative divisions, states that Male’ is inclusive of Villin’gili and Hulhumale’.

Sheikh Rahman revealed that he had, as a member of the JSC, submitted a complaint to the commission to review the decision regarding the court on the grounds that it was unlawfully established. He stated that his attempts were in vain as Chair Adam Mohamed had once again abused his powers and refused to schedule the matter during the commission sessions.

Sheikh Rahman stated that he had made multiple requests for a decision on the Hulhumale’ Court, all of which was rejected by the chair. He confirmed that he had not received any written or official responses to the motions he submitted on the matter.

“Another false justification that Adam Mohamed used is that the matter cannot be discussed in the commission as it referred to an ‘ongoing case’,” he said.

UN Special Rapporteur Gabriella Knaul also criticised the ‘arbitrary appointment’ of judges to Nasheed’s case. She also stated that the Hulhumale’ Court did not have the constitutional mandate to oversee the specific case.

Former JSC member Velezinee also repeated her concerns about the politicisation of the JSC at a recent press conference held to share her remarks on the preliminary findings of UN Special Rapporteur Gabriela Knaul.

Incumbent JSC Member Gasim Ibrahim, meanwhile called Knaul’s findings ‘lies and jokes’ at a JP party rally.

The Hulhumale’ Court meanwhile on Wednesday refused to delay Nasheed’s trial until after the elections, despite the prosecution stating they had no objection to such a decision.

Gasim Ibrahim was not responding to calls at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court refuses to delay Nasheed’s trial until elections, despite no objection from PG

The Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has decided to halt the ongoing trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed for four weeks.

The former President is charged with the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed during the last days of his presidency.

During Wednesday’s hearings, Nasheed’s legal team requested the court delay the trial until the end of the scheduled presidential elections in 2013,  and in a separate request, asked the court for a delay in proceedings by four weeks.

The court stated that the request was made in a letter it had been sent by Nasheed’s legal team.

Following the request, the prosecution told the three-member panel of judges that they “did not have any problem” with withholding the trial for four weeks, and they “did not object to delaying the election until the end of the scheduled presidential elections in September 2013.”

Judges repeatedly questioned the prosecution on this statement.

In response, the prosecution repeated the statement, adding that the phrases “not objecting” and “not having a problem” had two different meanings, but did not explain further.

After a short break, the judges dismissed the request to delay the trial until the end of the elections, but agreed to withhold it for four weeks, stating that the panel of judges by majority “had decided to proceed with the trial”.

Nasheed’s lawyers subsequently contested the decision, claiming that continuing the trial could compromise the rights of many people, arguing that Nasheed was the presidential candidate of the largest political party in the country, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

The latest statistics from Elections Commission show the MDP currently holds a membership of more than 46,000 members, in a country with a population of 320,000.

However, the court stated that Nasheed’s claim he was the presidential candidate of a political party lacked legal grounds to support it, as presidential candidates were decided by the Elections Commission after it opened the opportunity to file presidential candidates.

The judges then repeatedly asked the prosecution to state whether they wanted to delay the trial or not. However, the prosecution maintained that it was not their request to delay the trial, but said they would not object to this.

The sitting judges concluded Wednesday’s hearing stating that another hearing would be scheduled after the four week break.

Nasheed’s lawyers after the hearings stated that they would appeal the decision made by the magistrate court in the High Court.

Member of Nasheed’s legal team Abdulla Shairu stated that he was surprised by the decision reached today by the court , as this was the first time it had decided to go on with a trial while both defendants and the prosecution had not objected to a delay.

The hearing was attended by senior members of the MDP, including its parliamentary group members.

Nasheed was also released from police custody as the court order to hold him expired.

Earlier, the former President’s legal team’s appeal to the Criminal Court for a writ of Habeas Corpus demanding his release from custody, however this was rejected by the court without a hearing.

The team made the appeal to the court on Tuesday evening. The Criminal Court subsequently requested police to provide the details of the detention.

In a notice sent to member of Nasheed’s legal team Hisaan Hussain, the Criminal Court stated that former President Nasheed had been arrested as per a court order, therefore could not be released.

Speaking to Minivan News, Kirsty Brimelow QC, one of three UK-based experts on former President Mohamed Nasheed’s legal team said that there remained a “strong argument” in the case that the prosecution of Nasheed was “not in the public interest”.

“It is a strong argument that a prosecution is not in the public interest. The currently constituted court comprises of judges who may be biased or have the appearance of bias. They should recuse themselves,” she argued.

“There has been no review of the original decision to prosecute in the light of the Parliamentary Select Committee’s findings,” she said. “There has been no disclosure of documents which are essential to allow Mohamed Nasheed to properly defend himself,”

She contended that the prosecution of Nasheed’s case before the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court fell “below international standards for fair trial procedure”.

“The arrest and remand in custody of Mohamed Nasheed was heavy handed and unnecessary. Arrangements could easily have been made, at any time, for him to surrender to the court,” Brimelow added.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

Uncertainty over 2011 case of British couple killed in resort quad bike accident

The Criminal Court has said it still requires statements from the parents of a British couple killed in a quad bike accident at Kuredu Island Resort in 2011.

Swedish national Filip Eugen Petre, a son of a shareholder in Kuredu Island Resort, is currently facing trial for his alleged role in crashing a quad bike carrying British nationals Emma and Jonathon Grey at Kuredu on August 6, 2011.

The case is at a stand still as the court awaits responses from the parents of the deceased, regarding the preferred form of punishment for the accused.

However, both police in the UK and the respective families of the deceased have both insisted that the families decision has been submitted and then re-submitted to the court.

Earlier today, Director of the Department of Judicial Administration Ahmed Maajid, contacted the Criminal Court media official on behalf of Minivan News for more information on the case.

“The Criminal Court media official, Mr Manik, told me that the trial hearings are now over. However, the court is currently awaiting statements from all of the family members regarding the preferred form of punishment for the accused. Only then will there be a final verdict,” Maajid claimed.

In October, 2012, Maajid told Minivan News that the court was awaiting a response from only of the victim’s family in regard to the accused’s punishment.

“A Criminal Court media officer tells me that what remains in the case is to obtain the word of the family of one of the victims, as to whether they want a sentence of execution, or blood money or to forgive,” Maajid told Minivan News back in October.

Minivan News attempted to contact the Criminal Court media official today, but he was not responding to calls or text messages throughout the day.

Maajid, when asked to clarify the information in relation to the previous comments made by courts, said that the official from the Criminal Court had later found more information regarding the case.

“Criminal Court has said they have a statement from the mother of the deceased man. But they have not received one from the father of the man, or either of the parents of the deceased woman,” Maajid claimed.

Under Islamic law, the family of the victim is given the option to sentence the accused to execution, blood money or to forgive them.

A relation to the deceased told Minivan News today that their statements had been submitted multiple times on different occasions to the courts.

According to the relation, the last the family had been told by the court was that the final verdict of the charge would be delivered at the next scheduled hearing.

“On the last hearing, which was held on February 27, closing arguments were given by the state and the defense. The judge has stated that the final verdict of the charge would be delivered at the next scheduled hearing.

“Furthermore, in the same hearing the court indicated that, they would contact the families of the deceased if they find there is a need to do so,” the relative said the family had been told.

UK police re-submit family requests

In October 2012, UK police were made to resubmit requests from the relatives regarding the punishment.

A relation of the Grays confirmed to Minivan News in October 2012 that neither victim’s family had received any official notification from the Maldivian courts themselves.

The UK police however, through a family liaison officer, confirmed that their Maldivian counterparts were informed “months ago” of the families’ preferred sentence.

“The police have said that they are going to re-submit the issue to the Maldives police today,” claimed the relation.

“That’s what is holding up the case right now, [the police] do not seem to have forwarded this information to the courts.”

The relative added that while they did wish to see some form of punitive sentence for the driver if he was convicted, they did not want any severe or long-term action to be taken against the defendant.

“He’s just a young guy. We don’t want to see his life ruined,” the relative said.

Jonathan Grey’s mother Cath Davies told UK-based newspaper the Halifax Courier in March 2012 that the prospect of Petre facing the death penalty was “shocking. It’s absolutely horrendous.”

Previous hearings

In previous hearings, the prosecution claimed that the charge of ‘disobedience to order’ Petre stands accused of resulted from his decision to carry people on a vehicle which was not intended for passengers.

The prosecution contended that his criminal action began from the moment he allowed the couple to ride with him on the vehicle.

Presiding Judge Abdul Baary Yousuf declared in court during earlier hearings that Petre’s lawyer had himself confessed during the trial that his client had driven the quad bike carrying Emma and Jonathan Gray as it crashed on the tourist property.

As a result of this confession, the judge said the state did not have to produce any evidence to prove Petre was the driver of the vehicle during the collision.

Representing the prosecution, State Attorney Aishath Fazna also contended that because Petre had “confessed” to driving the quad bike, she did not believe the state had to produce evidence to support this assumption.

However, Petre’s lawyer Areef Ahmed responded at the time that his client had not directly confessed to driving the quad bike and argued that his client continued to deny the charges against him.

Areef additionally claimed that the judge could not declare a verdict regarding the alleged confession said to have been during the previous hearing.

Areef contended that his confession could be withdrawn before the case reached to a conclusion, but the state attorney argued that after confessing in the trial, there was no way it can be withdrawn.

Petre’s lawyer has also contended that his client could not be charged under Islamic Sharia because his client is non-Muslim.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)