Supreme Court overrules Juvenile Court’s summoning of Speaker of Parliament

The Supreme Court on Thursday overruled a request by the Juvenile Court for Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid to attend the court and answer questions regarding medical insurance for judges.

The Supreme Court noted that making arrangements with the relevant authorities to provide health insurance for judges and their dependents was part of the mandate of the Department of Judicial Administration.

“A Juvenile Court Judge has ordered me to his court today to respond to his queries regarding his health insurance approved by Parliament,” Speaker Shahid tweeted on Thursday.

Two hours later, Shahid revealed that the Supreme Court had “issued a writ of mandamus quashing the Juvenile Court Judge’s order stating Juvenile Court has exceeded its mandate.”

Article 39(a) of the Judges Act (Dhivehi) of 2010 states that health care for judges, their spouses, parents and children under the age of 18 must be provided by the state either in the Maldives or overseas under a medical scheme.

Local media reported last week that health insurance for judges and their dependents had not been provided since the introduction of the universal health insurance programme Aasandha in January 2012.

“We did not summon him. We just requested his presence for a discussion. Health insurance had not been provided to the judges of only [the Juvenile Court]. We have just taken the initiative in this matter,” a Juvenile Court official was quoted as saying.

However, the parliament secretariat informed the Juvenile Court that it could not summon the Speaker.

The Supreme Court writ of mandamus (Dhivehi) meanwhile revealed that the court asked Shahid to attend at 1:00pm on Thursday (November 22).

The order or request was made after not receiving a reply from the Speaker to a letter sent on November 4 requesting health insurance for Juvenile Court judges.

The letter had demanded a reply within a specified period, according to the Supreme Court writ.

The apex court determined that the summons or request to answer its queries was made “outside the legal responsibilities of the Juvenile Court.”

Former President Mohamed Nasheed meanwhile condemned the Juvenile Court’s attempt to summon the Speaker.

“I see the courts trying to establish judicial dictatorship. It’s got to stop,” Nasheed tweeted.

The Juvenile Court incident came during a week when two MPs from Speaker Shahid’s government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) were repeatedly summoned to court over longstanding unpaid debts to the Bank of Maldives.

DRP MP Ali Azim alleged political motivation behind the summons following a vote on Monday to conduct no-confidence motions through secret ballot.

Meanwhile, in March 2011, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) moved the current Chief Judge of the Juvenile Court, Mohamed Naeem, from the Civil Court to the Juvenile Court as a disciplinary action for disregarding decisions of superior courts.

Then-Civil Court Judge Naeem had refused to hear cases involving the Attorney General’s Office before parliament approved the reappointment of then-Attorney General Dr Ahmed Ali Sawad.

Naeem’s decision defied precedents set by both the Civil Court and High Court, which ruled that the AG could represent the state at court before receiving parliamentary consent.

However, a few days later the JSC appointed Naeem as the chief judge of the Juvenile Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court overturns Criminal Court’s July 2010 suspension of senior police officers

The High Court on Tuesday overturned the Criminal Court’s suspension of two senior police officers in July 2010, ruling that Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s decision to bar Superintendent Mohamed Jinah and Inspector Mohamed Riyaz from the court for six months was unlawful.

The pair was suspended after they appeared in court over the detention of then-opposition MPs Abdulla Yameen, Ahmed Nazim and Gasim Ibrahim on charges of bribery and treason.

The suspension for alleged contempt of court was appealed at the High Court by the Attorney General’s Office on July 21, 2010.

Police meanwhile filed a complaint against the chief judge at the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) alleging “obstruction of high-profile corruption cases.”

The JSC has however not completed an investigation of the complaint to date. The case is among 168 complaints that the commission has yet to conclude as of December 2011, according to the JSC annual report for 2011 (Dhivehi).

In January 2012, the JSC revealed that there were 11 complaints filed at the commission against Judge Abdulla Mohamed, including allegations of corruption and abuse of power.

Procedural fairness

In its judgment on Tuesday (Dhivehi) – more than two years after the case was registered – the High Court ruled that the administrative action against Jinah and Riyaz was neither procedurally fair nor in accordance with regulations on holding persons in contempt of court.

A police media official told Minivan News at the time that court had “sent a letter signed by the Chief Judge of the court to Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh. The letter did not mention any specific reason [for the suspensions], only ‘ethical grounds’.”

The High Court noted that the Criminal Court did not reply to a letter from the Maldives Police Service – sent two days after receiving the letter from the Criminal Court on July 11 informing the Police Commissioner of the suspension – seeking clarification concerning the unprecedented action.

Police had asked the court to clarify the date the hearing in question took place, the nature of the contempt allegedly exhibited by the pair or the alleged violation of ethical codes, whether it had taken place outside the hearing and whether the police officers were given any warning prior to the administrative action.

While article 43 of the constitution guarantees the right to “administrative action that is lawful, procedurally fair and expeditious,” the High Court noted that due process was not followed by the Criminal Court as the officers were not informed either of the reasons for the action or “the date of the incident”.

The High Court ruling also referred to article 68 of the constitution, which states, “When interpreting and applying the rights and freedoms contained within this Chapter, a court or tribunal shall promote the values that underlie an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom, and shall consider international treaties to which the Maldives is a party.”

“Obstruction of investigations”

Appearing on state broadcaster Television Maldives (TVM) on July 17, 2010, then-Deputy Commissioner of Police Ismail Atheef explained that Jinah and Riyaz had appeared in court on July 9.

However, the letter from Chief Judge Abdullah Mohamed informing police of the suspension was received two days later on July 11.

“If someone is in contempt of the court, action has to be taken immediately according to provision five of the court regulations,” he noted.

Atheef added that the detectives were not given any warning nor had their conduct in court been noted by the journalists who were present.

“So when this letter came to us, the way police interpret it is that this is an obstruction specifically of our investigation,” he claimed.

It was the first time that police officers were suspended from the Criminal Court, Atheef said.

The former Deputy Commissioner contended that the suspension was a deliberate obstruction because Riyaz and Jinah, as the two lead detectives and top police lawyers, would have had to appear at court to seek an extension for MP Nazim’s detention.

Meanwhile, Jinah was among a number of senior officers assaulted by mutinying police inside the police headquarters before the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7, 2012.

Following the police mutiny at the Republic Square and violent clashes with military officers, Jinah was handcuffed and taken to the Dhoonidhoo detention island.

Local media reported this week that Jinah was demoted from the rank of chief superintendent to superintendent on November 19.

Jinah was reportedly demoted over remarks he made to the media following the arrest of Gassan Maumoon, son of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

However, in June this year, the Civil Court ruled in favour of Jinah in a case filed by Gassan claiming violation of his basic rights by the superintendent. In October 2011, Gassan was arrested on suspicion of hurling a wooden block into a crowd of Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) protesters outside the former president’s residence.

While the former head of the Drug Enforcement Department (DED) has reportedly decided to leave the Maldives Police Service, police have said the request made last month has not yet been granted as the disciplinary board was investigating a case involving the senior officer.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Audit report flags irregularities in Elections Commission finances

The audit report of the Elections Commission (EC) for 2011 has flagged several expenses in violation of public finance law and regulations.

The report (Dhivehi) made public on Wednesday listed 20 cases of expenditure made by the EC ostensibly in violation of the Public Finance Act and regulations under the law.

Of MVR 19.2 million (US$123,216) sent by the commission to atoll offices for the local council elections in February 2011, the audit found that MVR 1.4 million (US$90,791) was entered into the EC’s financial statement despite not receiving either confirmation or details of the how the funds were spent.

Moreover, while a contract was awarded to a local company for MVR 4.9 million (US$317,769) to print ballot papers following a public announcement by the EC, the audit noted that the commission did not propose it to the tender evaluation board as required for projects exceeding MVR 1.5 million (US$97,276).

The audit also uncovered that the commission paid MVR334,700 (US$21,705) to a company contracted to provide sea transportation during the council elections, for trips not included in the agreement.

While MVR 536,803 (US$34,812) was agreed upon in the contract for 56 trips, the EC ended up paying the company MVR871,503 (US$56,517) due to a number of additional trips.

Agreements made with private parties to hire temporary staff as well as vehicles for use during the council elections could not be found among the EC’s documents, the audit report noted.

A total of MVR 183,238 (US11,883) was however paid for vehicles and short-term staff for the elections in February 2011.

The audit meanwhile could not verify whether deposits from 91 candidates for the council elections, who either received less than 10 percent of the vote or whose candidacies were invalidated, were entered into the state income account.

Based on documentation at the EC, the audit was also unable to verify whether deposits for 1,254 candidates were ever returned.

Phone expenses

Among the other cases highlighted in the report, the audit discovered that commission members spent extra days overseas during official trips to attend seminars and workshops.

The cost of the extended stays during such trips between January 2010 and April 2012 amounted to MVR50,438 (US$3,270) for food, incidentals and pocket money.

The audit also found that commission members transferred phone credit worth MVR5,585 (US$362) from their mobile phones, the bills for which are paid out of the EC budget.

An examination of international calls by commission members showed that a number of such calls were not related to official business.

The audit further revealed that from April 2010 to April 2012, MVR 92,009 (US$5,967) was spent out of the EC budget to pay mobile phone bills of commission members.

A total of MVR 116,954 (US$7,584) was meanwhile paid to EC employees as phone allowances in 2011.

The audit discovered that between December 2007 and August 2011, the commission spent MVR 248,790 (US$16,134) to buy 30 mobile phones for senior staff.

Based on a decision by the former Elections Commissioner in December 2007, 13 phones were to become personal property of the chosen senior staff after one year, the audit revealed.

“We note however that no law or regulation authorises giving away state property,” the report stated.

Moreover, most of the mobile phones were “the most expensive phones on the market at the time [of the purchases],” the audit report noted.

“In addition to the 13 mobile phones that were given to employees according to documentation at the commission, the records showed that five mobile phones worth MVR 49,135 (US$3,186) were lost,” the report stated, adding that no employees were held responsible and “compensation in any form was not sought” for the losses.

Some of the phones were discovered missing when “commission employees who were given the phones informed auditors that they were lost.”

A senior staff given a mobile phone worth MVR 14,195 (US$920) bought in 2008 did not return it when he or she left the commission, the audit noted, adding that corrective measures had not been taken on the issue despite recommendations in the EC’s 2010 audit report.

Other cases

The audit found that the EC did not sign agreements for work valued under MVR25,000 (US$1,621), despite public finance regulations stating that agreements must be signed for all government projects.

A total of MVR 249,494 (US$16,179) was paid out in 2011 without formal agreements.

The EC also hired a local company to service four photocopy machines for MVR40,000 (US$2,594) a year without a public bidding process and made an advance payment in violation of public finance regulations.

The audit noted that documentation did not show that the EC was receiving the company’s services each month as stipulated in the agreement.

Moreover, the commission did not seek quotations or estimates from three parties as required by regulations for procurements amounting to MVR 251,148 (US$16,287) in 2011, the audit discovered.

A number of expenses were meanwhile made out of the wrong budget code or item, the audit noted.

The audit report also noted that the EC made unnecessary purchases, such as a coffee maker for MVR 67,000 (US$4,345) in 2007, a Nikon D200 camera for MVR 233,298 (US$15,129) in 2008, six TV decoders, 16 TVs, 16 shredders, two washing machines, irons, a deep freezer, a mixer, a blender and a gas cooker.

Of 60 fax machines bought by the commission, 50 were kept unused in storage.

Moreover, items worth MVR 231,193 (US$14,993) were not entered into the registry of the EC’s stock inventory, the audit report noted.

The EC meanwhile failed to collect MVR 469,500 (US$30,447) owed as fines and deposits in 2011 and did not file cases at court as required by regulations.

As of December 2011, the audit revealed that the commission was owed MVR 260,000 (US$16,861) from seven political parties for failing to submit annual audit reports during the past five years.

Lastly, as of the report’s publication, the EC had not recovered MVR 12,999 (US$843) paid to staff in excess of their salaries and allowances.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Judicial Council decided Hulhumale’ court could not hear criminal cases, reveals Nasheed’s legal team

Members of the Judicial Council raised doubts over the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court at a meeting in late 2010 and decided that criminal cases were out of its jurisdiction, former President Mohamed Nasheed’s legal team have revealed.

In a press statement, Nasheed’s legal team said that minutes from a meeting of the Judicial Council were among documents submitted by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to the High Court.

The JSC entered as a third party into an appeal lodged by Nasheed at the High Court challenging a ruling by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, which had summarily dismissed procedural points raised by the former President’s lawyers.

The procedural issues included the legal status of the magistrate court.

However, before the High Court was due to issue a ruling on Nasheed’s appeal, the Supreme Court instructed the High Court to suspend proceedings as the apex court had been asked to determine the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The Judicial Council minutes meanwhile revealed that Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz, former Chief Judge of the High Court Abdul Gani, former Chief Judge of the Juvenile Court Shuaib Hussain Zakariyya, Magistrate Mohamed Niyaz from the north judicial district and Magistrate Ali Shareef from the south judicial district “all raised questions over the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ court.”

The Judicial Council was abolished after the Supreme Court unilaterally struck down articles in the Judicature Act concerning the council.

“Presenting the case [to the council], the Chief Justice said that following the enactment of the law on courts, members of the judiciary as well as lawyers were saying that the court in Hulhumale’ could not function under the law and that the Hulhumale’ court had been stopped following the passage of the [Judicature Act in 2010],” the press release explained.

The Judicature Act states that magistrate courts should be set up in inhabited islands aside from Male’ without a division of the trial courts (Criminal Court, Civil Court, Family Court and Juvenile Court).

According to appendix two of the constitution, Hulhumale’ is a district or ward of Male’ and not a separate inhabited island. The former magistrate court at Hulhumale’ – controversially set up by the JSC before the enactment of the Judicature Act in October 2010 – should therefore have been dissolved when the Judicature Act was ratified.

Moreover, the minutes revealed that the Judicial Council had decided that criminal cases were out of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court’s jurisdiction.

The Chief Justice had said at the Judicial Council meeting that the magistrate court had been dealing with civil cases and family disputes.

The press statement noted that it was the opinion on record of all judges at the council meeting that the Hulhumale’ court could not function as a separate court following the enactment of the Judicature Act.

Supreme Court intervention

Nasheed’s legal team also expressed concern with the Supreme Court ordering the High Court to suspend hearings on the appeal.

If the Supreme Court decides to take over the procedural point raised at the High Court, “President Nasheed would lose one stage of appeal,” the legal team said.

Following the High Court granting an injunction or stay suspending the former President’s trial at the Hulhumale’ court, the magistrate court announced that it has suspended all ongoing cases.

However, the Supreme Court last week instructed the magistrate court to resume the cases and took over a case filed at the Civil Court a year ago by a lawyer, Ismail Visham, contesting the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Speaking to press yesterday after a ceremony to open new offices for the Drug Court, Chief Justice Faiz criticized the JSC as “inept” and contended that “challenges faced by the judiciary would have been resolved” if the judicial watchdog body “properly” carried out its responsibilities.

Faiz also said that the case concerning the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Magistrate Court presently before the Supreme Court had not been addressed before because the JSC had not filed the case.

“When a case was filed in Civil Court contesting the legitimacy of Hulhumale Magistrate Court, the JSC sent a letter to [the Supreme Court] arguing that the Civil Court did not have the jurisdiction to look into the case. We then asked the JSC to file a case as per the procedure and they only filed the case just a few days ago,” he explained.

The Chief Justice added that the Supreme Court would be considering the case as a “high priority”.

The JSC filed the case while Nasheed’s appeal was ongoing at the High Court.

Meanwhile, MP Mariya Ahmed Didi, former President Nasheed’s spokesperson, said that the Supreme Court deciding on the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court without allowing the High Court to rule on Nasheed’s appeal would “give weight to what many are saying about the politicization of the Supreme Court.”

The former Special Majlis MP urged the highest court of appeal to allow the High Court to issue a ruling as those unhappy with the judgment could appeal at the Supreme Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Economic dependency threatens Maldives’ independence, warns President Waheed

The Maldives has become financially and economically dependent on foreign parties to an extent that threatens the nation’s independence and sovereignty, President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik warned in his address (Dhivehi) to the nation on Republic Day.

Speaking at a function at Dharubaaruge last night, President Waheed said the country has still not recovered from the devastation wrought by the tsunami in December 2004.

“The national debt has soared to levels it has never reached before. In the past four or five years, the country has become financially and economically dependent on foreign parties to an extent that undermines our domestic and economic independence,” he said.

The Maldives “faced challenges to domestic stability” with the post-2004 constitutional changes and democratic reforms, he added.

“During this time, the country’s constitutional framework was destroyed and the state started to function outside of legal bounds,” Dr Waheed said. “And in addition to this, after the events of February 7 this year, some people have created further challenges to the country’s economic development and diplomatic relations.”

Then-Vice President Waheed assumed office on February 7 following the resignation of former President Mohamed Nasheed in the wake of civil unrest and a police mutiny at Republic Square.

The Republic Day marks the abolishment of an 853-year-old monarchy and its replacement by a second republic under President Ibrahim Nasir on November 11, 1968.

President Waheed meanwhile said in his speech that the country was facing a trial “during hard economic times” to increase government revenue, improve services to the public, maintain diplomatic ties and “establish financial and economic freedom.”

These objectives had to be achieved in a “world without domestic walls, within a social fabric where protecting Islamic values and the nation’s independence has weakened,” Dr Waheed said.

In his speech at a ceremony to mark ‘Victory Day’ on November 3, President Waheed claimed that foreign parties were attempting to exert undue influence over the Maldives “in different ways, under different names and capacities, to exercise power over us.”

These foreign parties were “saying that we must turn to their ideologies and sending over waves of secularism [or secular ideologies]  to the country,” Dr Waheed had said.

Meanwhile, in his address on Sunday night, President Waheed said sacrifices “such as those of our ancestors” were needed for peace and security and to ensure that “the economy is not destroyed through differences of opinion” and that “the social fabric is not unwoven through political antagonism.”

Important decisions needed to be made for next year’s budget to reduce expenditure and increase government revenue, he added.

President Waheed also announced his intention to convene a “National Conference” as a forum to discuss development strategies.

Ideas and opinions would be sought at the forum to chart a roadmap for development, he said.

Politicians, entrepreneurs, tradesmen, scholars, students, women, youth, judges, lawyers and private parties would be invited to participate in the conference, Waheed said.

In late October, Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad told local media that the Maldives would be unable to pay salaries and meet recurrent expenditure for the rest of the year without a further US$25 million loan from the Indian government.

The US$25 million was agreed upon in September as part of the $US100 million standby credit facility signed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in November 2011.

Jihad told local media that he believed the loan was being delayed due to the ongoing controversy over Indian infrastructure company GMR’s development of the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), which is opposed by all parties in the ruling coalition.

Since coming to power, Waheed’s government has committed to reimbursing civil servants for wage reductions made during the austerity measures of the previous government, amounting to MVR443.7 million (US$28.8 million), to be disbursed in monthly instalments over 12 months from July 2012.

As of November 4, the overall fiscal deficit has already reached over MVR 2 billion (US$129 million). Jihad told the Majlis’ Finance Committee that he expected this figure to rise to MVR 6 billion (US$387million) by year’s end – 28 percent of GDP – alleging that the previous government left unpaid bills equal to over one third of this anticipated deficit.

Former Minister of Economic Development Mahmood Razee told Minivan News that increased expenditure in the face of a pre-existing deficit represented the government “ignoring reality.”

A delegation from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) meanwhile urged parliament’s Finance Committee and Economic Committee last week to expedite legislation on fiscal responsibility.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Broadcasting Commission condemns barring of Raajje TV crew from government press room

The Maldives Broadcasting Commission has condemned an incident on Thursday where a crew from private broadcaster Raajje TV was forced out of a press conference by Islamic Minister Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed.

The commission said it has written to both the President’s Office and Islamic Ministry seeking clarification “at the earliest possible opportunity”, following media reports that the station’s crew was forced out from the Velaanage press room on orders from the President’s Office.

“The commission believes that regardless of whomever it is committed by, such acts hinder the fundamental principles of democracy, freedom of expression and freedom of the press, and [the commission] condemns it,” reads the letter from the commission.

“The commission also believes that all state institutions must provide equal opportunity for media in a free and democratic environment.”

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

Moreover, article 29 states, “Everyone has the freedom to acquire and impart knowledge, information and learning.”

The letter from the Broadcasting Commission noted that the President’s Office had previously assured that it was “the government’s policy to continually provide all information that it is legally obliged to provide to all parties”.

The statement was made in a reply to the commission on August 28 after it had written to the President’s Office regarding media reports claiming that the government was refusing to provide information to Raajje TV.

Government Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza was not responding to Minivan News at the time of press.

Riza however told newspaper Haveeru on Thursday that Raajje TV crew had repeatedly breached codes of conduct inside the President’s Office.

The spokesperson said that the President’s Office would not allow to “do as it pleases.”

The local daily reported that during his press conference Islamic Minister Shaheem had asked a President’s Office employee at the press room if the Raajje TV crew had been expelled.

When the staff confirmed that it was done on orders from the President’s Office, Shaheem reportedly told the employee not to refuse entry to any media crew to an Islamic Ministry press conference without his approval.

“The Islamic Ministry does not have any problems with any TV [station] in the country. I am asking because I’m the one who has to answer for this. I just got an SMS asking me why I forced them out. I didn’t. I thought they left because it was our office,” Shaheem reportedly said after his exchange with the President’s Office staff.

Invitations only

Deputy CEO of Raajje TV Abdulla Yamin told Minivan News that Raajje TV has not faced any “obstruction” from the Islamic Ministry.

“But the press room at Velaanage is managed by staff from the President’s Office,” he explained. “When our crew went to the press conference, [the President’s Office staff] said Raajje TV was not invited and told them to get out.”

Media officials from the President’s Office also refused entry to a Raajje TV crew to a press conference later in the day by the Maldives Ports Limited (MPL), Yamin said.

“But MPL senior officials said they would provide us any information and invite us to their press conferences and events,” he said. “So this issue is between Raajje TV and the President’s Office media staff.”

Yamin added that he was told by President’s Advisor on Political Affairs Ahmed Thaufeeq ‘Topy’ that he was unaware of the apparent non-cooperation policy, suggesting a “difference of opinion within the President’s Office concerning Raajje TV.”

Attempts to contact President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza were unsuccessful, Yamin said.

In September, Raajje TV sued the President’s Office at the Civil Court for effectively boycotting the station from press conferences and official functions.

Yamin told Minivan News at the time that “the whole issue began with the government’s Media Secretary Masood Imad excluding RaajjeTV in all invitations to media to cover their press events.”

“Initially, Abbas Adil Riza held a different opinion. But then it became a norm for the government to block us from events, even refusing access and turning us away when we took the initiative to find out about events and attempt to cover them with or without invitation.”

The Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) released a statement at the time stating that it would neither encourage nor accept the boycotting of any media outlet by either state institutions or political parties

Raajje TV had also filed a lawsuit against the Maldives Police Service (MPS) at the Civil Court, following their decision to not to cooperate with the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)-aligned TV station.

The station had earlier accused police of targeting, assaulting and harrasing its reporters during MDP’s protests.

The lawsuit followed an announcement by the police claiming that the opposition-aligned TV station was broadcasting false and slanderous content about police, which had undermined their credibility and public confidence.

Yamin said today that the cases were ongoing at the Civil Court.

In previous hearings, Yamin said, the government argued that it was within its rights or discretion not to invite certain media to press conferences and events.

“But what we are saying is that it is a constitutional right of media to gather information and we are ready to fight for that right,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Dismissal of Transport Minister “cowardly act”, says JP official

The Jumhore Party (JP) has said that it is “investigating and very closely looking into the abrupt removal of the party’s only cabinet member, Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation, Honourable Dr Ahmed Shamheed.”

In a statement on Thursday night, the government-aligned JP said it would take “necessary action” following an inquiry, expressing “serious concern” with statements in the media by officials from the President’s Office regarding the reasons for Shamheed’s dismissal.

An unnamed JP official alleged to Villa TV (VTV) – owned by JP Leader and MP for Maamigili Gasim Ibrahim – that Dr Shamheed was sacked because of his opposition to the recently concluded sale of a 30 percent stake in the Addu International Airport Company Ltd (AIA) to tourism pioneer ‘Champa’ Hussain Afeef.

JP Leader Gasim Ibrahim had alleged corruption in the deal and claimed the valuation of the 30 percent stake was too low.

The JP senior official meanwhile told VTV that Shamheed was removed to allow Champa Afeef to control the airport project, claiming that the “cowardly” act of sacking the JP minister was intended to divert media and public attention from the Addu airport controversy.

Dr Shamheed was sacked immediately after an agreement was signed to extend the lease of the Maamigili airport – owned by JP Leader Gasim’s Villa Company – for 99 years.

The JP however noted that the decision was unanimously approved by the government’s Economic Committee on November 1. In addition to Shamheed, the Economic Committee consists of Minister of Finance Abdulla Jihad and Minister of Fisheries and Agriculture Ahmed Shafeeu, Housing Minister Dr Mohamed Muizzu, Environment Minister Dr Mariyam Shakeela and Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb.

Government Spokesperson Abbas Adil  Riza told Minivan News on Thursday that despite Shamheed’s dismissal, the decision to extend the lease had “not yet” been reversed.

Abbas had tweeted that the cabinet seat would be reserved for JP, the third largest party in terms of membership in the ruling coalition.

Meanwhile, in a press conference today, MP Gasim Ibrahim said that he did not believe President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik could have been unaware of the ministerial economic committee’s decision to extend the lease, which was finalised at a meeting at the President’s Office on November 1.

For President Waheed to be unaware of a decision “approved by half the cabinet” was “a joke”, he said.

Gasim said Villa has spent more than MVR 1.4 billion (US$90 million) on developing the airport at Maamigili in addition to more than MVR 500 million spent for the island’s development.

The airport was leased by the government for an annual rent of US$24,000, the Maamigili MP revealed.

Dr Shamheed meanwhile told Sun Online following his dismissal that he believed he was sacked for differences of opinion with the President on a number of issues, including his opposition to the sale of the AIA stake and the agreement with Nexbis to install a border control system.

On November 5, Dr Shamheed tweeted that there was “no justification” for the valuation of an asset worth US$150 million for US$13 million.

He also criticised the sale of the AIA stake as “irresponsible”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Human Resource Ministry owed more than MVR 350 million in unpaid work permit fees, student loan repayments

The Ministry of Human Resources, Youth and Sports failed to collect MVR 168.4 million (US$10.9 million) in expatriate work permit fees for the past three years and MVR 191 million (US$12.3 million) in repayments for student loans, the ministry’s audit report for 2011 has revealed.

The audit report (Dhivehi) made public on Monday stated that information from the past three years on expatriate work visas showed that the year-on-year increase in foreign workers arriving in the Maldives was “alarming.”

“Records from the Department of Immigration and Emigration show that from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2011 the state did not receive MVR 168,414,000 (US$10.9 million) owed as work permit fees,” the audit report revealed.

Records showed that the number of foreign workers living in the Maldives without paying work permit fees in 2009 was 16,934.

The figure increased to 27,793 in 2010 and 39,756 in 2011.

While the expatriate workforce in the Maldives as of December 2009 was 57,968 registered workers, the figure had risen to 99,369 by September 2011.

Of the total number of foreign workers, 55 percent or 54,653 expatriates were from Bangladesh and “69 percent of these, or 37,710 people, are working in the country illegally.”

Of the remaining 44,716 from other nations, 18 percent or 8,048 were illegal workers.

“Therefore, records show that the total number of foreigners working in the Maldives illegally is 45,758 (46 percent of foreign workers),” the report revealed.

Student loan repayments

The student loan repayments were meanwhile owed for two loan schemes launched respectively in 2000 and 2005.

As of December 31, 2011, the report found that the ministry failed to collect 154.6 million (US$10 million) as repayments for a long-term student loan programme launched in 2005 from a national higher education fund.

Of MVR 155.6 million (US$10 million) released between 2005 and 2011, the audit discovered that only MVR 904,872.28 (US$58,681) was repaid.

“Students who went for higher education under the scheme have not been repaying the loans because the department of higher education had not sent repayment schedules with details of the total amounts owed,” the report found.

If “adequate efforts” had been undertaken to collect payments, the Auditor General’s Office noted that “a revolving fund could have been established to provide higher education opportunities without additional expenditure from the state budget.”

Meanwhile in 2000, the report explained, the ministry launched a programme with World Bank loan assistance titled the “third education project” and issued MVR 250 million (US$16.2 million) under the scheme, with a specified portion to be paid back to the ministry.

“While it was determined that 15 percent from government employees participating in the scheme and 50 percent from participants from private companies would be collected, we note that repayments have not been sought from anyone,” the report stated.

“And as a result of the ministry not properly maintaining records of how the money was spent on students under the scheme, we note that details of how funds were released for individual students are not available and no one was sent repayment schedules.”

The report observed that MVR 37.5 million (US$2.4 million) estimated as repayments owed under the scheme has not been collected due to the “carelessness, incompetence and negligence of those in charge of the ministry’s relevant department”.

In February 2012, the report noted, the department of higher education and its staff at the Human Resource Ministry were transferred under the Ministry of Education.

Violations of Public Finance Act

The Auditor General’s Office stated that it did not believe expenditure out of the ministry’s budget was “mainly” in accordance with the Public Finance Act and “to the extent specified in the budget, on matters determined in the budget and in ways that would achieve the objectives of the ministry’s budget for 2011.”

In addition to the ministry failing to collect student loan repayments and unpaid work permit fees, the audit report noted a number of instances that were ostensibly in violation of the Public Finance Act and regulations under the law.

The audit discovered that seven political appointees were paid salaries and allowances in 2010 with no records of attendance.

The responsibilities of the seven senior officials who did not sign attendance sheets were unclear, the report noted.

Moreover, the audit found that a state minister was paid MVR 165,897.93 (US$10,758) as salary from February 13, 2012 to May 2012 despite not attending the office during the period.

While the state minister had submitted a written request for a holiday on February 13 before flying abroad, the report noted that the ministry had not made official arrangements for the leave of absence.

On February 7, 2012, former President Mohamed Nasheed resigned under controversial circumstances following a police mutiny at the Republic Square.

“[The state minister] was removed from the post by the President’s Office on July 22, 2012,” the report noted.

In another case, the audit discovered that MVR 865,500.70 (US$56,128) was deposited for seven students studying in Malaysia under the office’s staff development scheme, in excess of the official approved stipend.

In place of RM11,760 (Malaysian Ringgits) as six month’s stipend for each student, a sheet sent to the bank from the ministry mistakenly stated US$11,760, the report found.

While the ministry’s staff studying in Malaysia received an additional MVR 123,642.96 (US$8,018) each, the report noted that no attempt had been made to recover the excess amounts.

The audit report blamed the “failure of the employees to carry out their responsibilities” in preparing, checking and authorising the sheet sent to the bank.

The ministry meanwhile incurred MVR 133,938 (US$8,686) as fines for late payment of water and electricity bills in 2011, but no employees were held responsible and the loss to the state was not recovered.

The report also found that a total of MVR 420,000 (US$27,237) was paid as allowances in 2011 – at a rate of MVR 2,500 (US$162) a month – for 15 members of the National Sports Council under the ministry, without official approval from the government.

The report noted that the council held only seven meetings in 2011, each lasting for about an hour and with half the council’s membership in attendance.

Meanwhile, as a result of failing to properly maintain stock inventories, equipment purchased by the ministry was not registered and five laptops and 15 printers were lost.

The audit also discovered that the ministry provided MVR 200,000 (US$12,970) to the Shaviyani Milandhoo island council in June 2011 to set up a net around the island’s football stadium.

The funds were not approved in the 2011 budget but were released based on a pledge by the President to the islanders, the report stated, noting that such expenditure was “in breach of budgetary rules.”

Cancelled beach games

The audit report revealed that the ministry spent MVR 1.28 million (US$84,306) for “a first-ever beach and water sports tournament in South Asia” that never took place.

In February 2011, event organisers told Minivan News that the “Maldives Beach Games 2011” would bring hundreds of athletes from around the world to compete in 10 sporting events.

The international games were launched in February with a laser show and an appearance from renowned Sri Lankan cricketer Sanath Jayasuriya at a ceremony in Male’s Kulhivaru Ekuveni Indoor Hall.

The audit report meanwhile noted that the reasons for the eventual cancellation could not be discerned from the official documents.

The expenditure – made through the Maldives Olympic Committee – included over MVR 542,000 (US$35,149) on advertising and MVR 103,450 (US$6,708) on “a mascot and theme song for launching the beach games.”

Equipment, furniture and other items purchased for the cancelled games cost MVR139,545 (US$9,050).

Of the ultimately wasteful expenditure, the report noted that MVR 843,571 (US$54,706) was spent in violation of the Public Finance Act and regulations as estimates were only sought from one party.

A member of the sports council created by the ministry was meanwhile paid MVR50,000 (US$3,242) – without a public bidding process – to transfer sand from a soccer pitch made for the games to the artificial beach, the report found.

The Olympic Committee spent MVR 117,000 (US$7,588) to prepare the soccer pitch in the vacant plot in front of Villa College.

Moreover, a deputy minister and the sports council member travelled to Bangalore at a cost of MVR57,825 (US$3,750) purportedly in relation to the games, but the purpose of the trip was unclear as an official report was not prepared.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)