Budget of MVR16.4 billion for 2014 submitted to parliament

An estimated budget of MVR16.4 billion (US$1 billion) for 2014 was submitted to parliament today by Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad, with a projected deficit of 2.5 percent of GDP.

Presenting the budget this morning, Jihad said the forecast for government revenue in 2014 was MVR13.9 billion (US$901 million), with income from taxation projected at MVR10.2 billion (US$661 million) and non-tax revenue of MVR3.5 billion (US$226 million).

In addition, MVR2.3 billion (US$149 million) was expected from new revenue raising measures.

As government expenditure in 2014 was estimated to be MVR14.9 billion (US$966 million), Jihad said, the resulting budget deficit would be MVR988 million (US$64 million).

The fiscal deficit would be plugged by foreign assistance, loans and domestic sources of finance, Jihad said.

The total budget reaches MVR16.4 billion including loans and foreign aid, Jihad explained, which was not included in total expenditure.

While the economy grew by 3.7 percent in 2013, economic growth is estimated to be 4.5 percent next year, he said.

Similar to previous years, Jihad observed, recurrent expenditure (MVR12 billion) accounts for 73 percent of the total budget, with almost half spent on salaries and allowances for state employees in addition to administrative costs, interest payments and subsidies.

A total of MVR2.2 billion (US$142 million) was allocated for social security and welfare spending, Jihad said, which covers the government health insurance scheme ‘Aasandha,’ electricity subsidies, pensions for the elderly and expenditure on price controls.

While MVR2.4 billion (US$155 million) was allocated for the Public Sector Investment Programme (PSIP), Jihad said MVR1.9 billion (US$123 million) of it would be spent on infrastructure projects in the atolls such as construction of harbours and establishing sewerage systems.

The finance minister revealed that government revenue was expected to reach MVR11.5 billion (US$745 million) by the end of 2013.

The original forecast in the 2013 budget was however MVR12.9 billion (US$836 million).

The 2013 fiscal deficit, projected at MVR1.4 billion (US$90 million), would stand at MVR1.7 billion (US$110 million) by the end of the year, Jihad said.

Following a budget debate next month, the proposed budget would be sent to the Budget Review Committee, consisting of all the members of the economic affairs and public finance oversight committees, for scrutiny and possible amendments.

In December 2012, the Budget Review Committee deducted more than MVR1 billion (US$64.8 million) from the MVR16.9 billion (US$1 billion) budget submitted by Finance Minister Jihad before parliament passed the a MVR15.3 billion (US$992 million) budget for 2013.

Revenue raising measures

In its latest Quarterly Economic Bulletin, the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) observed that government finances had “further deteriorated in the first six months of 2013” due to a sizeable shortfall in expected revenue coupled with a marked increase in recurrent expenditure.

The central bank’s economic bulletin explained that around 15 percent of total revenue budgeted for 2013 – MVR1.8 billion (US$116.7 million ) – was to be raised from new revenue measures, “which so far have not materialised.”

The revenue raising measures proposed in the 2013 budget included hiking Tourism Goods and Services Tax (T-GST) to 15 percent from July 2013 onward, raising airport service charge to US$30, leasing 14 islands for resort development, raising tariffs on oil, introducing GST for telecom services, and “selectively” reversing import duty reductions.

In April, parliament rejected government-sponsored legislation to raise the departure tax on outgoing passengers, prompting Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad to seek parliamentary approval to divert MVR 650 million (US$42 million) allocated for infrastructure projects in the budget to cover recurrent expenditure.

The move followed a cabinet decision to delay implementation of new development projects financed out of the budget due to shortfalls in revenue.

The economic bulletin also revealed that the total government expenditure of MVR6.7 billion (US$435 million) in the first half of 2013 was eight percent higher than the same period in 2012.

The growth of government spending was “entirely due to the 21 percent (MVR965.3 million) growth in recurrent expenditure, which was partly offffset by the 26 percent (MVR440.6 million) decline in capital expenditure during the period.”

Presenting the 2014 budget today, Jihad said the government proposes six new revenue measures to be implemented next year pending parliamentary approval,

  • Hiking T-GST to 12 percent from 8 percent at present
  • Revising import duties
  • Delaying abolishing the tourism bed tax for one more year
  • Raising airport departure charge from foreign passengers from US$18 to US$25
  • Leasing 12 islands for resort development
  • Introducing GST for telecommunication services (currently exempt from the tax)

Austerity

Jihad also advised implementing a raft of austerity measures, contending that the “expensive” public management model adopted in the Maldives was inappropriate for a small island state.

Almost 50 percent of government income was spent on employees, Jihad noted, advising revision of the state pension system and reduction of the numbers of island and atoll councillors as well as members of independent institutions and boards of government-owned companies.

As “the basis of increasing state expenditure is having to provide all facilities to small populations in separate islands,” Jihad said prompt implementation of a population consolidation policy was necessary for a long-term solution.

The current model of more than 1,000 elected councillors established by the Decentralisation Act passed in 2010 by the then-opposition majority parliament was branded “economic sabotage” by the ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) government, which had proposed limiting the number of councillors to “no more than 220.”

In March 2011, former chair of parliament’s Finance Committee, MP Ahmed Nazim, told Minivan News that the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) had been too “heavy handed” in working with government.

“I was advocating that even now, we will work with the MDP to reduce the number of [island] councillors in small areas from five to three posts.  There is simply not enough work for all of them to do. Some opposition took a heavy handed approach meaning there was no need for compromise,” the current Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP said, despite having voted for the bill framed by the opposition.

Meanwhile, in its professional opinion on the 2013 budget, the Auditor General’s Office stated that a policy of population consolidation together with effective measures to reduce the public sector wage bill was necessary to rein in the continuing fiscal deficits.

Moreover, in November 2012, a team from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) advised that strengthening government finances was “the most pressing macroeconomic priority for Maldives”.

Jihad said today that a National Pay Review Board had begun reviewing the pay scale of state employees, which was among the recommendation’s of the IMF mission.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Chief Justice threatens action against dissemination of “invalid information”

Legal action will be taken against media organisations or journalists who disseminate false or inauthentic information concerning the judiciary, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain has warned.

Speaking at a swearing-in ceremony yesterday (October 27) for seven new judges to the superior courts, the Chief Justice warned of measures against those who report “invalid information, if it relates to courts or judges.”

“Citizens need valid information. Freedom of expression means expressing valid or authentic information. Whether it is information relating to individuals or state institutions, the information conveyed should be valid, there should be no error or deceit in the information,” he said.

“If the court is held in contempt, action will be taken,” he asserted. “I will not allow the court to be [held in] contempt through deception. If the court is [held in] contempt, I will do what I can within the bounds of the law,” Faiz added.

The Chief Justice’s remarks came after the Supreme Court last week ordered police to investigate opposition-aligned private broadcaster Raajje TV for airing a report on October 19 criticising the judiciary.

Raajje TV News Department Head Ibrahim ‘Asward’ Waheed was summoned to the police headquarters last night concerning the investigation of the report, which raised issues surrounding the leaked sex tape of Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed.

Following the police interrogation, Asward told local media that he was accused of contempt of court over the Raajje TV report criticising the apex court.

Asward said he exercised the right to remain silent in protest of the police taking over the mandate of the Maldives Media Council (MMC) and the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) – the institutions legally empowered to investigate complaints regarding the content of media outlets.

Both the MCC and MBC have expressed concern with the court ordered investigation of Raajje TV, contending that it threatens press freedom and encroaches on the mandate of the media watchdog bodies.

Appealing to the apex court to withdraw the order to investigate, Mohamed Shaheeb from the MBC told local media yesterday that he was informed by Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz that the police were obliged to obey the Supreme Court’s order.

Following an arson attack that destroyed the headquarters of Raajje TV on October 7, Reporters Without Borders criticised the police’s failure to defend the station despite repeated requests for protection.

Moreover, Asward was attacked with an iron bar in February this year while Raajje TV’s offices were vandalised in 2012, with cables severed in the station’s control room.

Judicial reform

Faiz meanwhile contended that altering the composition of the 10-member Judicial Service Commission (JSC) –  consisting of three representatives each from the executive, legislature and judiciary as well as a lawyer elected by licensed practitioners – was necessary to strengthen the judiciary.

In a comprehensive report on the Maldivian judiciary released in May, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges, Gabriela Knaul, stated that there was near unanimous consensus during her visit that the composition of the JSC was “inadequate and politicised.”

The issue was also highlighted in a report by the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) in 2010.

“Because of this politicisation, the commission has allegedly been subjected to all sorts of external influence and has consequently been unable to function properly,” said Knaul.

While the composition of the JSC in the Maldivian constitution was based on the South African model, Faiz said in his speech yesterday that he was told by a retired South African judge that the model had “failed” in his country.

“A lot of people believe that every fault of the JSC is reflected in the judiciary,” Faiz said, adding that proper functioning of the oversight body would benefit the judiciary.

The JSC should work together with the courts following extensive consultation to implement changes to strengthen the judiciary, Faiz suggested.

The JSC should also expedite investigations of complaints concerning judges and “free” them from the allegations to ensure public confidence in the “integrity of judges,” he said.

“If not, the issues we are facing now, what is being said [about the judiciary] now will continue in the same vein,” Faiz said.

However, he added, criticism of the judiciary or “a complaint against a judge” does not warrant disregarding court judgments.

“If the decisions of the courthouse are not enforced, rule of law will not be maintained in this country. The courthouse has been entrusted with upholding rule of law. So the decisions of courts should be and will be enforced in this country,” Faiz asserted.

Under no circumstances could the enforcement of a court decision be delayed or ignored, he stressed.

Faiz revealed that he had spoken to the speaker of parliament regarding a recent Supreme Court judgment, referring to the apex court disqualifying two MPs over an alleged decreed debt.

“I told him that the Supreme Court’s decision must be enforced. There is no question about it. Who will determine if the Supreme Court’s decision is legitimate? Who will determine if the Supreme Court decision was made in accordance with the procedures? It will still be determined by the Supreme Court,” Faiz said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament approves MDP proposal for speaker to assume presidency after November 11

Parliament today approved a proposal by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) parliamentary group leader Ibrahim Mohamed Solih for the speaker of parliament to assume the presidency in the absence of a president-elect by midnight on November 10.

Today’s sitting was held in response to a letter to Speaker Abdulla Shahid from President Dr Mohamed Waheed requesting parliament “to take initiative in finding a solution to any legal issues that will arise if a new president is not elected by the end of the current term [on November 11].”

As a possible second round of the presidential election has been scheduled by the Elections Commission (EC) for November 16, President Waheed’s letter (Dhivehi) noted that “there is a possibility there might not be a president elected in accordance with article 111 of the constitution.”

Solih’s proposal, seconded by MDP Chairperson and Hulhuhenveiru MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik, was passed with 39 votes in favour and one abstention. MPs of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and Jumhooree Party (JP) did not participate in the vote, claiming that the proposal was unconstitutional.

In the event that a new president is not elected by November 11, the motion states, “The Speaker of Parliament shall carry out the duties of the President until a person can be elected to the office.”

As interim president, the speaker “shall have all powers granted to the President by the constitution.”

The motion added that if the speaker cannot assume the office, the duties shall pass to the deputy speaker. If both are unable, a member of parliament elected by a resolution shall assume the presidency.

Moreover, the motion stipulates that a presidential election and, if necessary, a second round run-off election should take place within 21 days of the speaker assuming the role of caretaker president.

The new president-elect and vice president-elect must take the oath of office no more than 18 hours after the EC announces the official results of the election.

A second motion proposed by MDP MP Ali Waheed to grant authority and discretion to the speaker to expedite decisions required by parliament “to prepare for  the interim period” was passed with 37 votes in favour, two against and one abstention.

Speaker Shahid joined the MDP in April.

“State of necessity”

Article 124(b) of the constitution states, “In the event of the permanent incapacity, resignation, removal or death of both the President or the Vice President, and both offices becoming vacant at the same time, leading to an incapacity to carry out the duties of the President, until such time as a President and a Vice President shall be elected, the duties of both offices shall temporarily be carried out, in order of priority, by the Speaker of the People’s Majlis, or by the Deputy Speaker of the People’s Majlis, or by a member of the People’s Majlis elected by a resolution of the People’s Majlis, until successors in office are chosen.”

During today’s parliamentary debate, PPM MPs contended that the Speaker cannot assume the presidency without amending the constitution as there was no constitutional provision for the state of affairs in the absence of a president-elect after the expiry of the five-year presidential term.

Dhivehi Qaumee Party MP Riyaz Rasheed said if parliament passed the MDP’s proposal, he would file a case at the Supreme Court to invalidate it.

JP MP Ilham Ahmed meanwhile proposed that the military should take over if presidential elections are not concluded by November 11.

As the constitution states that the security services are established “to enable all Maldivians to live in peace, security and freedom,” Ilham said he believed executive powers should be handed to the security services, consisting of the police and military.

The JP deputy leader added that he could see “as clear as broad daylight” an impending takeover “by the benevolence of Allah.”

PPM MP Ahmed Shareef recommended referring the matter to the Supreme Court for legal advice, while MP Ali Arif declared the PPM’s support for President Waheed remaining in the post after November 11.

Speaking at a rally on Friday night, PPM presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen reportedly said it would be “irresponsible” for President Waheed to resign before a new president was elected.

The PPM parliamentary group leader called on President Waheed to remain in the post and cease making statements about resigning, adding that it was the PPM that “maintained your government.”

MP Arif noted that the Supreme Court stated in its judgment annulling the September 7 election that the current president could remain in the absence of a president-elect.

“If extra time beyond that given by the constitution is needed, under the principle of necessity, to complete a specific task as specified in the constitution, it does not necessitate the end of a legal government in place. That such a government will continue to exist under the doctrines of ‘state of necessity’ and ‘continuity of legal government’ under such circumstances is recognised by both constitutional and legal jurisprudence,” the Supreme Court stated in the case summary of its judgment.

Independent MP for Kulhudhufushi Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed said that the current administration could not continue after November 11, suggesting that a constitutional amendment was necessary to specify a process to be followed in the absence of a president-elect.

Nasheed cautioned that any motion or resolution passed by parliament in lieu of a constitutional amendment could be overruled by the Supreme Court. The independent MP abstained in both votes today.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Media Council expresses concern with court ordered police investigation of Raajje TV

The Maldives Media Council (MMC) has expressed concern with the Supreme Court asking police to investigate a report aired by opposition-aligned private broadcaster Raajje TV.

The MMC noted in a press release yesterday (October 25) that attending complaints concerning the content of Maldivian media outlets and taking measures was within the legal mandate of the media council and the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC).

“The Maldives Media Council Act states that it is the media council that should investigate issues concerning press freedom and take measures. And a police investigation of such a case would be an obstruction of the press freedom established in the Maldives as well as an act that would instil fear in the hearts of journalists,” the statement read.

The MMC statement concluded by urging all state institutions to submit complaints regarding the media to the council and to “respect the laws and the bounds of the constitution.”

According to local media reports, the Supreme Court asked both the police and the broadcasting commission to investigate the Raajje TV report.

Mohamed Shaheeb from the broadcasting commission told newspaper Haveeru that the Supreme Court ordered the commission to share the findings of its investigation within 10 days.

Shaheeb noted that the law gave the commission 60 days to investigate complaints, adding that it had to provide sufficient time to the accused media outlet to respond to the charges.

The offending programme on Raajje TV reportedly compared the state of the Maldivian judiciary to the injustice of ancient Sodom.

Following an arson attack that destroyed the headquarters of Raajje TV on October 7, Reporters Without Borders criticised the police’s failure to defend the station despite repeated requests for police protection.

“Contempt of court”

The Supreme Court has previously asked the police to investigate lawyers and MPs for alleged contempt of court for publicly criticising the judiciary.

In February 2013, the Supreme Court suspended lawyer Abdulla Haseen after he criticised the judiciary in an appearance on Raajje TV.

Haseen was barred from advocating in any court in the country while the Supreme Court asked police to investigate him for contempt of court.

The Prosecutor General’s Office however decided not to prosecute Haseen after police concluded its investigation.

However, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party MPs Imthiyaz Fahmy and Alhan Fahmy have been charged with contempt of court after allegedly defaming the Supreme Court.

In a comprehensive report on the Maldivian judiciary released in May, United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges, Gabriela Knaul, expressed concern over “the case of a lawyer who had been indefinitely suspended by the Supreme Court for allegedly criticizing one of its judgements in public”.

“Such a suspension leaves no avenue for appeal and review and it represents a violation of the rights of the lawyer. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned about reports regarding threats of contempt of court used to muzzle the freedom of expression of lawyers,” the report stated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Defence Ministry alerted to possible threat to former President Nasheed’s life

The Ministry of Defence and National Security has been alerted by the Office of President Mohamed Nasheed to possible dangers to the life of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate.

“According to sources, two Al-Qaeda agents have been employed for an attack on President Nasheed and are currently in Male’. The Office has requested the Ministry of Defense and National Security’s Intelligence to launch an investigation into the matter and to share findings with this office,” read a press statement from the former president’s office.

Following the request for an investigation, the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) issued a press release yesterday (October 25) stating that it was making inquiries and working with the Maldives Police Service (MPS) to investigate the matter.

“And President Mohamed Nasheed’s security has been strengthened better than before,” the MNDF said.

The press release added that providing security for high-level officials of the state was the responsibility of the MNDF and was therefore treated as “a high priority.”

Article 128 of the constitution entitles former presidents to “the highest honour, dignity, protection, financial privileges and other privileges entitled to a person who has served in the highest office of the land.”

Head of Security for the former president, Ameen Faisal, told Minivan News that they had been made aware of the threat on Thursday (October 24).

“We have been hearing of this threat many times…Last night we heard about it and thought we can’t make it a joke, we have to take it seriously now,” the former defence minister and national security advisor said.

Former Head of Police Intelligence Chief Superintendent ‘MC’ Mohamed Hameed told the parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee in January this year that the police had received information about two separate assassination plots against former President Nasheed.

Speaking in the same committee in January, former military intelligence head Brigadier General Ahmed Nilam claimed to have received information about an assassination attempt planned to have been carried out during an MNDF live-fire event.

Former Minister of Human Rights under the current administration, Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed, last year also alleged assassination plans against Nasheed by local politicians.

Nasheed reacted to Dhiyana’s claims by acknowledging them as credible, commenting that he had received information from government intelligence sources of plots to assassinate him.

“I did get information from the Ministry of Defence that the intelligence got reports of planned assassination attempts. I had knowledge of this before,” said Nasheed.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Opposition MPs “purged” as Supreme Court strips Ali Azim, Mohamed Nashiz of parliament seats

The Supreme Court in a 4-3 judgment today stripped Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Azim and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Mohamed Nashiz of their parliament seats over a decreed debt.

The verdict was delivered in absentia after the pair dismissed their lawyer and a new one was not appointed in time for the re-scheduled session at 5:00pm.

The majority was formed by Justices Abdulla Saeed, Adam Mohamed Abdulla, Ali Hameed Mohamed and Dr Ahmed Abdulla Didi, the same four judge majority which annulled the results of September 7 election following a petition from third-placed candidate Gasim Ibrahim.

Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain and Justice Abdulla Areef issued dissenting opinions ruling that there were no grounds to disqualify the MPs while Justice Muthasim Adnan reportedly refused to issue a ruling stating that he did not have sufficient time to study the case as he received the testimonies and statements yesterday.

Ali Azim, former MP for mid-Henveiru, joined the MDP from the government-aligned DRP in June this year.

Nashiz, former MP for Raa Alifushi, is a half-brother of DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and husband of the party’s deputy leader MP Rozaina Adam. Following the annulled first round of the presidential election on September 7, the DRP decided to back MDP presidential candidate and former President Mohamed Nasheed.

With the provisional support of 10 DRP MPs, the MDP had gained a majority of the 77-member parliament. The opposition party had 34 seats.

The Supreme Court case was filed in November 2012 by Mohamed Haleem, a member of the Jumhooree Party’s (JP’s) legal committee. The last hearing of the case took place almost a year ago.

Haleem contended that the MPs should be removed from parliament following a Civil Court judgment in February 2010 involving non-payment of five credit facilities worth MVR117 million (US$9 million) issued to Funadoo Tuna Products by the Bank of Maldives (BML), for which the pair had signed as loan guarantors.

As the lower court judgment was subsequently upheld by the High Court, the Civil Court in 2012 authorised BML to seize the assets mortgaged for the loans, which included Funadoo island, a yacht, and the Reethi Beach Resort.

While the majority verdict held that mortgaged assets was not cause for disregarding a judgment to settle the debt, Chief Justice Faiz ruled that the guarantors would only have to bear responsibility if the debt could not be settled by selling the mortgaged assets.

The case was submitted to the Supreme Court with reference to article 73(c)(1) of the constitution, which states that a member of the People’s Majlis immediately becomes disqualified if the MP has “a decreed debt which is not being paid as provided in the judgment.”

Article 74 states, “Any question concerning the qualifications or removal, or vacating of seats, of a member of the People’s Majlis shall be determined by the Supreme Court.”

The Supreme Court verdict comes days before voting on a no-confidence motion against Attorney General Azima Shukoor scheduled for October 28.

Moreover, an MDP-sponsored bill on transitional arrangements that require President Dr Mohamed Waheed to step down if an election is not held by November 10 was submitted yesterday (October 23).

“Purge” of MPs

The MDP released a statement on MPs being “purged” today, condemning “the continued harassment and intimidation” of its members through “politically-motivated” court cases.

The party noted that Azim and Nashiz’s case was “fast-tracked a day after a crucial vote in parliament, which saw the MDP and its allies win a parliamentary vote by 43 votes to appoint an MDP member to the independent judicial oversight committee, the Judicial Service Commission.”

“Thus the MDP believes the sudden scheduling of the Supreme Court case against MPs Azim and Nashiz is a deliberate attempt to disqualify them from parliament. The MDP notes that while this case has suddenly been taken up enthusiastically by the Maldivian justice system, corruption charges against government-leaning MPs have been dropped,” the statement read.

The statement also noted that the Criminal Court yesterday issued an arrest warrant for MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor “in violation of the Parliamentary Privileges Act, during a session of the parliament, while Hamid had in writing informed the court he was unable to attend due to his parliamentary duties.”

Hamid remains in the parliament building at the time of press.

Hamid along with MDP MP Abdulla Jabir is being prosecuted for alleged alcohol and drug use as well as refusal to provide a urine sample to police. The pair were arrested in November 2012 following a police raid on an uninhabited picnic island in Haa Dhaal atoll.

The Supreme Court has lost all credibility in the eyes of Maldivians and the watching world. The judges are working with political leaders of MDPs opponents to further their wishes. These judges are closely linked to the former dictatorship and continuously work to disrupt the democratic process. After invalidating, delaying and obstructing elections, they are now after an MDP parliamentary majority, who have publicly pledged to reform the judiciary,” said MDP Deputy Chairperson Ali Shiyam.

The MDP statement listed the cases of 10 MPs who currently face “politically-motivated charges that threaten their parliament seats.”

The party also noted that its former MP for Thaa Thimarafushi, Mohamed Musthafa, was stripped of his seat over a disputed decreed debt, two weeks after the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7, 2012.

Police have meanwhile sent cases against MDP MPs Imthiyaz Fahmy, Mohamed Rasheed and Alhan Fahmy to the Prosecutor General’s Office for alleged contempt of court for publicly criticising the Supreme Court.

A Criminal Court case is also ongoing against MDP parliamentary group deputy leader Ali Waheed for allegedly crossing a police barricade in 2010.

The government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) meanwhile declared last month that it would seek the removal of MPs through the Supreme Court for challenging rulings of the apex court.

“There is a dispute on whether [MPs] have lost their seats in parliament due to speaking out against Maldives’ Supreme Court’s order and defaming the Supreme Court, and other court’s judges. I would like to inform you we will file this case at the Supreme Court,” PPM legal advisor Mohamed Waheed Ibrahim told the press on September 29.

Maldivian judiciary

The MDP statement noted that a 2004 report on the Maldivian criminal justice system by Professor Paul Robinson, prepared at the request of the then-Attorney General, concluded that “the Maldivian criminal justice system systematically fails to do justice and regularly does injustice”.

The party also referred to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) expressing concern in February 2011 with “the apparent failure of the JSC to fulfil its constitutional mandate of properly vetting and reappointing judges” as well as the “judicialisation of politics”.

Moreover, the MDP noted that in July 2012, the United Nations Human Rights Committee stated that it was “deeply concerned about the state of the judiciary in the Maldives.”

The MDP statement also referred to concerns raised by UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges, Gabriela Knaul, in a report on the Maldivian judiciary in May this year.

“Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done, and judges must not only be actually impartial they have to appear impartial to the public,” the party statement quoted Knaul as stating.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Constitution and laws

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

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

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

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

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

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

Relevant laws, MoUs, and Supreme Court guidelines

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Consolidating democracy

“A truth that many political parties active in the Maldives accept is that the MDP is unmatched when it comes to election campaigns,” declared a Haveeru report or op-ed published on April 21, 2013. The high praise was surprising coming from a publication that is not known to favour the Maldivian Democratic Party.

It was a sign of shifting political tides. The report appeared a day after the MDP held the largest rally by a political party in the country’s history to celebrate the signing of Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid. Grudging acknowledgment of the MDP’s grassroots support, innovation and enterprise was a common sentiment in the aftermath of the mass rally.

The most significant observation in the Haveeru report, to my mind, was this: “MDP is the party that introduced many democratic concepts [to the Maldives].” The author observed that it was the MDP that introduced “door to door campaigning,” “manifesto,” “haruge and campaign jagaha (meeting halls)” into the local vocabulary. Other political parties have since followed in the footsteps of the pioneering party by adopting these phrases.

The MDP was born out of a pro-democracy movement in the wake of unprecedented civil unrest in September 2003, which was precipitated by a custodial death exposed to the public and fatal shooting of inmates. The movement culminated in the election of Mohamed Nasheed as president in October 2008, ending a 30-year autocracy and heralding a new dawn for the Maldives with unheard-of levels of freedom of expression and civil liberties.

As a voter in tomorrow’s historic election, the considerations for choosing a candidate sadly remain much the same as in 2008. Five years ago, a majority reached the conclusion that Nasheed was the only choice. Apart from Ibrahim Ismail ‘Ibra,’ he was the only candidate with genuine democratic credentials. The others could not be trusted to dismantle the autocratic status quo.

The dictatorship of President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom was characterised by repression, torture, nepotism, wanton corruption, income inequality and self-serving Islamo-nationalist propaganda on state media. If Gayoom was re-elected and emboldened with a mandate, the fear was that he would crush the opposition and jail its leaders or force them into exile. An independent auditor general would not dare reveal illegal expenditure, the judiciary would remain under his thumb, and the nefarious security forces would once again be used to stifle dissent.

As for the rest, including current presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim and his running mate Dr Hassan Saeed, they lost credibility to speak of democracy by perpetrating the televised coup d’etat on February 7, 2012 and because of their disgraceful behaviour while in opposition: relentless efforts to topple the government, blocking the Nasheed administration at every turn, obstructing essential tax reforms, deliberately sabotaging the economy and whipping up religious hatred. Their commitment to stability and democratic processes was on display at the Republic Square on the day we lost our hard-won democracy.

I believe the overriding issue of this election is saying no to the coup and police brutality. What is at stake here is a second chance at consolidating democracy. According to the “two-turnover test” of political scientist Samuel Huntington, an emergent democracy must undergo two peaceful transfers of power to become stable. The February 7 coup threatened a complete authoritarian reversal and imperilled the fraught transition. If the coup had not happened, tomorrow’s election would take the Maldives closer to a functioning democracy regardless of the winner. As it stands, the only hope is a victory for the democratic party.

It is for this reason that voters cannot afford to be apathetic. In established democracies such as the UK or US, a liberal could arguably rationalise non-participation in the political process if the choice is “voting for the lesser evil.”

The same cannot be said of the Maldives. It is harder to justify withholding support to the most liberal president we are likely to see in our lifetime when the other candidates represent a cabal of authoritarian loyalists, oligarchs and Islamists that employed mutinous security forces to overthrow the first democratically-elected government.

In other words, the possibility of coup perpetrators winning the election should be part of the equation for voters unconvinced by Nasheed. This election is bigger than one person. Idealists who cannot bring themselves to vote for Nasheed should consider the consequences of the alternative and take a long view: living in a police state ten years from now where the Islamist party has revamped the education curriculum. Whatever issue you have with Nasheed will seem petty then.

The track record of the coup government speaks for itself as a sign of things to come under “Baaghee” rule. Consider the following before you cast your ballot tomorrow,

* In the first 24 hours, the same Specialist Operations (SO) police officers who instigated the coup d’etat with a violent mutiny baton charged an MDP march, leaving dozens of unarmed civilians in the ICU with head injuries.

* Al Jazeera reported that “the police and military charged, beating demonstrators as they ran – women, the elderly, dozens left nursing their wounds.”

* In the wake of the brutal crackdown, the SO officers bore down on the capital’s two main hospitals and arrested dozens of people visiting their injured friends and relatives. The BBC reported “a baton charge by police on crowds gathered outside one of the main hospitals.”

* The toothless and politically-compromised Human Rights Commission of the Maldives was forced to acknowledge that the crackdown was “brutal” and “without warning.”

* Amnesty International observed in May 2012 that failure to prosecute police officers accused of human rights violations and “serious failings in the justice system entrenched impunity.”

* In a report titled “The Other Side of Paradise: A Human Rights Crisis in the Maldives,” Amnesty International warned that “the country is slipping back into the old pattern of repression and injustice.”

* In June this year, the police disciplinary board decided not to take any administrative action, such as suspension, against five officers facing criminal prosecution over police brutality on February 8, 2012. In the most egregious case of impunity, a staff sergeant who was caught on tape kicking a fallen protester was promoted despite the Police Integrity Commission forwarding a case against the officer for prosecution in May 2012.

* Pressed on police brutality, the California liberal Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan dismissed it as “a matter of opinion.”

* The Maldives was dropped from Freedom House’s list of electoral democracies “due to the forcible removal of democratically elected president Mohamed Nasheed, violence perpetrated against him and his party, the suspension of the parliament’s summer session, and the role of the military in facilitating these events.”

* The Maldives plummeted to 103rd in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index, a return to pre-2008 levels after climbing to 51st in 2009. I can personally testify to the state of press freedom in the aftermath of the coup. On August 30, 2012, I was arrested for the crime of pointing a camera at SO officers.

* Weeks after coming to power, the new government rewarded resort tycoons by allowing extended resort leases to be paid in instalments rather than upfront or in a lump sum at the end of the lease. The Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA) revealed in April 2012 that revenue collected in March was 37.9 percent lower than the projected revenue “mainly due to the unrealised revenue from the Lease Extension Period.” The lost revenue amounted to MVR352 million (US$23 million).

* Despite an ongoing budget crisis, the government had the funds to promote more than 1000 officers, hire 110 new officers, seek recruits for a “special constabulary” reserve force, introduce a loan scheme for police officers, make arrangements for officers and their families to receive cheap accommodations and medical treatment in Sri Lanka and award 600 flats to police and military officers.

* In January 2013, former chief of police intelligence, Chief Superintendent Mohamed ‘MC’ Hameed revealed to a parliamentary committee that 1,112 officers were promoted the previous year despite only 600 forms being submitted under the normal promotion procedure. “What we saw was that officers with a disciplinary record from the floor to the ceiling were given promotion by the executive board,” Hameed told MPs.

* In late November 2012, the Finance Ministry revealed that GDP growth of the tourism industry had flatlined in 2012 to 0.7 percent, falling from 15.8 percent in 2010 and 9.1 percent in 2011. Economic growth meanwhile slowed to an anaemic 3.5 percent, significantly down from 7.1 percent growth in 2010 and 7 percent in 2011.

* In February 2012, the new administration abolished the Maldives Volunteer Corps.

* The public sector wage bill skyrocketed 37 percent in 2013 with MVR1.3 billion in additional recurrent expenditure, including a 14 percent hike in military spending and plans to hire 864 new staff for the security services.

* “[The coup perpetrators] have destroyed US$2-3 billion worth of investment and condemned the country to an unstable economic future based upon diesel”: Mike Mason in June 2012.

* In June this year, the government accused UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers of undermining “national jurisdiction and the court system.”

* In November 2012, the President’s Office Spokesperson publicly insulted the Indian High Commissioner, sparking a diplomatic incident and souring relations with India.

* In the next month, the government arbitrarily terminated a concession agreement with the GMR-MAHB consortium to manage and develop the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport, a move that arguably shattered investor confidence and could force the country to pay the GMR US$1.4 billion as compensation.

* In December 2012, the pro-government majority in parliament passed a draconian law that restricts freedom of assembly.

* Also in December 2012, it emerged that the Maldives would be omitted from Transparency International’s global Corruption Perception Index (CPI) due to “insufficient data.”

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

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former JSC member ‘Reynis’ Saleem commissioned Afrasheem murder suspect for extortion: police

President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s dismissed representative on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem, commissioned Azleef Rauf, a suspect in the murder of MP Dr Afrasheem Ali, to retrieve money owed to him, a police investigation has found.

Police revealed the case was forwarded to the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) on June 26, with charges of extortion, theft and damaging private property raised against Saleem, Rauf and three others.

The other suspects were identified as Mohamed Hamid, 26, of Irak in Seenu Meedhoo; Abdulla Saeed, 29, of Autumn Vaadhy in Haa Alif Dhidhoo; and Abdulla Hunaish, 42, of Galolhu Moonlight View in Male’.

The five men are accused of “intimidating and threatening two people over the course of several days saying they owed money, robbing them of their belongings, forcibly taking them places and damaging their property”.

Moreover, the group stole a motorcycle belonging to the victims “to [keep] until they paid”, assaulted the pair, and threatened them at their workplace after forcing their way in and damaging items in their office, according to police.

‘Reynis’ Saleem was sacked from his post at the JSC by President Waheed on June 18 following unsuccessful attempts by police to take the criminal defence lawyer into custody.

The Criminal Court reportedly refused to grant police an arrest warrant earlier this month, a decision backed upon appeal by the High Court.

Saleem was the defence counsel of Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim in criminal cases involving an alleged scam to defraud the now-defunct Ministry of Atolls Development.

The cases were dismissed by the Criminal Court shortly after the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7, 2012.

Saleem was sacked by President Waheed a day after the Civil Court issued a court order freezing the bank accounts and holding the passport of Dr Waheed’s running mate and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Leader, Ahmed Thasmeen Ali.

The court order was issued in a case filed by Deputy Speaker Nazim seeking enforcement of a Civil Court verdict in April 2011 –  upheld by the High Court in April 2013 – ordering the recently appointed running mate to settle an unpaid debt of MVR 1.92 million (US$124,513).

The move followed increasingly fractious relations between Nazim’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and the coalition of four parties backing Dr Waheed’s bid for the presidency.

Meanwhile, after he was summoned for questioning by police in May, Saleem denied the allegations of commissioning gangs for extortion.

“The first thing I want to make clear is that I don’t have any links with gangs, or links with any person connected with gangs,” Saleem told local media.

“The question the police asked was whether I had sent a group to collect some money owed to me by someone. I said that I never sent any group to collect any money for me. So if someone owed me money, I would go to court. I shouldn’t have to involve a group,” explained Saleem.

Saleem also denied allegations he had links to the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) officer Azleef Rauf, who was accused of planning the murder of MP Dr Afrasheem Ali by chief suspect Hussein Humam, and was subsequently arrested on May 23.

“A serious question is being raised, about a person named Azleef. When I read the papers today, there were reports about a person named Azleef. Right now is a very critical moment, and they have associated my name with his name. I don’t want any newspaper writing in this manner,” said Saleem.

Saleem claimed that his police summons was politically motivated and related to his current JSC responsibilities, but that he would “disclose details [about the allegation] when the right time comes”.

After initially denying that he murdered the moderate religious scholar and PPM MP, Humam confessed to the crime at a court hearing in May.

According to a previous statement given by Human at a pre-trial detention hearing on December 7, 2012, which was read out by the state prosecutor at court, Human was enlisted by Azleef Rauf to commit the murder.

Human however retracted his confession at the next trial date on June 2, claiming his previous statement was obtained by police through coercion.

Rauf was meanwhile dismissed from the army earlier this month following his arrest in May.

On May 28, the Criminal Court extended Rauf’s detention period while local media reported that he was arrested on charges of mugging.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)