JJ Robinson – Page 15 – Minivan News

Airport’s 2014 refurbishment was 25 percent complete prior to GMR’s termination: Auditor General’s Special Audit

The government has released a Special Audit by the Auditor General (AG) into the former government’s concession agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR, ahead of upcoming arbitration proceedings.

The two parties agreed to commence arbitration proceedings in mid-2014, following a preliminary meeting in London on April 10 this year.

GMR is seeking US$800 million in compensation for the sudden termination of its 25 year concession agreement, while the Maldivian government has contended it owes nothing as the contract was ‘void ab initio’, or invalid from the outset.

The AG’s report notes that Axis Bank is separately seeking repayment of US$160 million in loans to GMR, which were guaranteed by the Maldives’ Finance Ministry.

“Under the terms of the direct agreement, these loans would be repayable if the concession was terminated early, as defined in the direct agreement. The government contends, however, that if the concession agreement is void ab inito, then these terms do not apply.”

Report

The AG’s report reveals that concession revenue due the government plummeted fourfold in 2012 as a result of the Civil Court case – filed by the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) in 2011 – blocking the charging of an Airport Development Charge (ADC) to outgoing passengers as stipulated in its concession agreement.

Net concession revenue in 2011 of US$25,424,877 fell to just US$6,058,848 in 2012, after GMR Male’ International Airport Limited (GMIAL) deducted the ADC from the concession fees due to the government – a stopgap measure approved by the Nasheed government while it sought to appeal the ruling. However, the DQP, in coalition with other opposition parties, came to power following the controversial transfer of power on February 7 2012, before the appeal was complete.

“The new government took the view that it would not be proper for it to intervene in the legal process for the benefit of a private concern,” the report stated. Instead, on April 19, 2012, MACL informed GMIAL it was “retracting the previous agreement [to offset the ADC] on the grounds that the then Chairman of MACL did not have the approval of the MACL board to make the agreement.”

GMIAL asserted that this decision was a political event as defined within its concession agreement, and warned that “this would amount to a breach of the agreement by the government. The government did not accept this argument.”

By the end of 2012, GMIAL had withheld a total of US$22.9 million from the concession fee paid over to MACL, 79 percent of the total fee that would otherwise have been due, the report noted, adding that the decision by the Transport Minister and MACL Chairman to agree the offset had been sent to the Anti-Corruption Commission on the grounds that the decision had required presidential approval.

Prior to the court ruling, GMIAL’s audited net profit for the period November 25, 2010 to December 31, 2011 was US$26,141,438. During this period GMR paid US$30,327,644 in concession fees to government.

GMIAL’s pre-tax profit for the first nine months of 2012 was US$31,668,384, on total revenue of US$184,641,985 (US$125,193,817 of this consisting of fuel sales).

MACL’s own net profit was US$14.9 million in 2008 and US$16.6 million in 2009 – the last two full years in which it operated the airport prior to the concession agreement coming into force. In 2010, this increased to US$21.4 million, and in 2011, US$27.4 million.

Fuel sales

The AG’s report examines fuel sales at the airport in light of the new government’s criticisms of GMIAL’s management, in particular an increase in prices it claimed had driven away airline operators.

The analysis showed “a mixed picture”, according to the AG’s report. Sales had dropped to 143 million litres in 2009 from 160 million litres in 2008, but rose from 166 million litres in 2010 to a five-year high of 173 million litres in 2011. The figure dropped to 152 million litres in 2012 – almost entirely due to a decision by SriLankan Airlines to stop fueling its London-Colombo route in Male.

“Until 2012, Sri Lankan Airlines’ daily London-Colombo flight called at Male’ to refuel but no longer does so; SriLankan Airlines told us that the increased price of fuel at Male’ was one of the reasons they stopped doing so. In 2011, Sri Lankan Airlines bought some 18 million litres of fuel, so this change along represents a significant reduction in airport fuel sales,” the report suggested.

It also noted that the Ministry of Tourism had blamed a 25 percent decline in seat capacity on routes from Europe between 2010 and 2012 on higher fuel prices, although this hypothesis did not appear to be reflected beyond SriLankan Airlines in the amount of fuel sold in 2012.

Bidding process

The report examined the bidding process conducted by the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC) in which the airport was awarded to GMR. The report stated that evidence to back allegations of “improper interference” during technical bidding process “is not conclusive on this point”, and deferred the matter to the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

However, the report noted that the IFC’s terms of reference involved “securing the best deal for the government in terms of the concession fee paid to the government and MACL, and did not consider impacts on the Maldivian economy.”

“Such impacts could be both negative and positive,” the report suggested.

“For example, there has been concern that Maldivian businesses working at the airport might not have their contracts renewed, and that proposed commercial development at the airport would take business away from existing local businesses. Conversely, Scott Wilson’s work in 2008 suggested that successful development of the airport could benefit employment both at the airport itself and more widely in the Maldivian economy, and the rents from commercial development could increase the concession fee paid to the government,” it explained.

Future

The report noted that at time of publication, the government had not announced how it intended to take forward development of the airport, but noted that Universal Chairman Mohamed Umar Manik and four other directors had been appointed to the board of Male’ International Airport Limited (MIAL). Bandhu Ibrahim Saleem has meanwhile been appointed Managing Director.

According to an independent engineering report, as of October 31 2012 GMR Male International Airport (GMIAL) had completed 25 percent of the refurbishments and upgrades to Ibrahim Nasir International Airport planned for the end of 2014, and had been invoiced by its contractor for US$69 million.

“Significant progress had been made in some areas – for example, 87 percent of the material for land reclamation had been dredged,” the AG’s report noted.

However, according to the engineering report, work was 155 days behind schedule after the new government order GMIAL to stop work “pending regulatory approvals”.

“In the meantime, all work on the ground on the improvement to the airport has ceased. Sensitive elements of the new structures that had been planned by [GMR] are incomplete and exposed to the weather and at risk of damage – possibly closing off the option of re-using these elements to reduce the cost of any future development of the airport,” the report concluded.

Read the full report (English)

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Gross state reserves to reach US$310 million by June, MMA Governor warns parliament

The head of the Maldives’ central bank, Fazeel Najeeb, has warned parliament that the country’s gross state reserves will drop to US$310 million in two months due to outstanding debts.

The statement by the governor of the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) follows confirmation from Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad this week that the government had suspended new development projects due to shortfalls in revenue, and was in the process of drawing up a supplementary budget.

“This is not a healthy level. The existing amount is equivalent to that needed for imports of the next two months. The best practice is to have funds for imports needed for six months,” local media reported Najeeb as telling parliament’s finance committee.

The government trying to address the problem by selling bonds to foreign countries, he said, noting that the overdrawing of the state account was “common” as a result of cash flow constraints.

He dismissed rumours that the MMA had recently frozen the state’s current account, but said there were ongoing discussions to increase the state’s overdraft limit from MVR 140 million (US$9 million) to MVR 200 million (US$13 million).

Earlier this month, India’s Financial Express publication reported that Axis Bank had initiated an arbitration process to recover US$160 million in loans granted to infrastructure developer GMR, which were guaranteed by the Finance Ministry during the former administration.

The developer was given a seven-day eviction notice late last year after the new government declared that its 25 year, $US$511 million contract to upgrade and manage Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) was ‘void ab initio’ (invalid from the start).

The Attorney General (AG’s) Office at the time denied receiving any notice of arbitration from Axis Bank.

Maldivian President Dr Mohamed Waheed meanwhile told a rally on Thulusdhoo last Saturday that there was no cause to worry about the budget or rumours of impending bankruptcy.

“The Maldivian economy is not really that bad,” he declared.

However, the president acknowledged that as a consequence of deficit spending financed by loans, the government had to spend an amount almost equal to the state’s wage bill on interest and loan repayments.

“We Maldivians are not indebted to anyone. We are proud people. We pay back what we borrow. We don’t have any outstanding payment, to any party,” Dr Waheed said in his speech, according to the President’s Office website.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

No US base under discussion, only joint training exercises: Defence Minister

Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim has said there is no proposal to establish a US base in the Maldives, and that a ‘Status of Forces Agreement’ (SOFA) currently under discussion only concerns joint military training exercises between the two nations.

“It is an agreement signed to carry out military training exercises with other countries. There is no proposal to establish a US military base in the Maldives. The government won’t give that opportunity to any country,” Nazim told local media.

“The US has proposed joint military training exercises with our forces. The proposal is being discussed with the relevant authorities of the Maldives. The agreement will be signed on the advice of the Attorney General,” he added

The US Embassy in Colombo has also refuted reports of a planned US military presence in the Maldives.

“There are no plans for a permanent US military presence in Maldives. SOFAs are normal practice wherever the Unites States cooperates closely with a country’s national security forces. SOFAs generally establish the framework under which US personnel operate in a country when supporting security-related activities and the United States is currently party to more than 100 agreements that may be considered a SOFA,” an Embassy spokesperson told Minivan News on Wednesday.

An apparent draft of the SOFA agreement was published by Maldivian current affairs blog DhivehiSitee on Wednesday.

The draft outlines conditions under which US personnel and civilian staff would operate in the Maldives, granting them freedom of movement and the diplomatic immunities of the Vienna Convention, authority to carry arms, use naval and aerial base facilities, and the radio spectrum. US personnel in the Maldives would be subject to US laws and exempt from paying taxes and any undergoing any form of customs inspections.

Under the proposed 10 year agreement outlined in the draft, the Maldives would moreover “furnish, without charge” to the United States unspecified “Agreed Facilities and Areas”, and “such other facilities and areas in the territory and territorial seas of the Republic of Maldives as may be provided by the Republic of Maldives in the future.”

“The Republic of the Maldives authorises United States forces to exercise all rights and authorities with Agreed Facilities and Areas that are necessary for their use, operation, defense or control, including the right to undertake new construction works and make alterations and improvements,” the document states.

The US Embassy in Colombo was unable to verify the authenticity of the leaked draft, “as the agreement has not been finalised.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Leaked draft agreement opens possibility for US base in Maldives

The United States has confirmed it is in discussion with the Maldivian government over the signing of a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), an unauthenticated draft version of which outlines conditions for the potential establishment of a US military base in the country.

The draft agreement, obtained by Maldivian current affairs blog DhivehiSitee, “incorporates the principal provisions and necessary authorisations for the temporary presence and activities of United States forces in the Republic of Maldives and, in the specific situations indicated herein, the presence and activities of United States contractors in the Republic of Maldives.”

A spokesperson for the US Embassy in Colombo was unable to verify the authenticity of the leaked draft, “as the agreement has not been finalised.”

“There are no plans for a permanent US military presence in Maldives,” the spokesperson stated.

“SOFAs are normal practice wherever the Unites States cooperates closely with a country’s national security forces. SOFAs generally establish the framework under which US personnel operate in a country when supporting security-related activities and the United States is currently party to more than 100 agreements that may be considered a SOFA,” the spokesperson added.

Senior Maldivian government officials were meanwhile recently invited aboard a United States aircraft carrier (March 27) as it passed by the Maldives.

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb, Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim, Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz and Vice President Mohamed Waheed Deen were flown to the USS John C Stennis aircraft carrier as part of an arrangement between the US embassy and Maldives Defence Ministry.

The visit was followed by the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Maldives and the US government to install a free border control system.

President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad said today that he had texted President Dr Mohamed Waheed who had no knowledge of any agreement. The Defence Ministry also had no information on the matter, he said.

Imad would not comment on whether the government would be open to such a proposal.

Spokesperson for the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, said the party had heard of the proposal – supposedly concerning Laamu Atoll and the site of the former British airbase on Seenu Gan in the south of the country.

“We are wondering what our other international partners – India, Australia, etc – think of this idea,” Ghafoor said.

The party’s parliamentary group leader, MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, said he had heard about the proposal “a few days ago”, and believed the matter would eventually be taken to parliament’s national security committee.

Draft proposal

Under the proposed 10 year agreement outlined in the draft, the Maldives would “furnish, without charge” to the United States unspecified “Agreed Facilities and Areas”, and “such other facilities and areas in the territory and territorial seas of the Republic of Maldives as may be provided by the Republic of Maldives in the future.”

“The Republic of the Maldives authorizes United States forces to exercise all rights and authorities with Agreed Facilities and Areas that are necessary for their use, operation, defense or control, including the right to undertake new construction works and make alterations and improvements,” the document states.

The US would be authorised to “control entry” to areas provided for its “exclusive use”, and would be permitted to operate its own telecommunications system and use the radio spectrum “free of cost to the United States”.

The US would also be granted access to and use of “aerial ports, sea ports and agreed facilities for transit, support and related activities; bunkering of ships, refueling of aircraft, maintenance of vessels, aircraft, vehicles and equipment, accommodation of personnel, communications, ship visits, training, exercises, humanitarian activities.”

US personnel would be be authorised to wear uniforms while performing official duties “and to carry arms while on duty if authorised to do so by their orders.”

US personnel (and civilian staff) would furthermore “be accorded the privileges, exemptions and immunities equivalent to those accorded to the administrative and technical staff of a diplomatic mission under the Vienna Convention”, and be subject to the criminal jurisdiction of the United States.

US personnel and contractors would moreover be permitted to import and export personal property, equipment, supplies and technology without license, restriction or inspection, or the payment of any taxes, charges or customs duties.

Vessels and vehicles operated by, and for, US forces would be permitted to enter and move freely within the territorial seas of the Maldives, free from boarding, inspection or the payment of landing, parking, port or harbour fees.

Disputes would be resolved without recourse to “any national or international court, tribunal or similar body, or to a third party for settlement, unless otherwise mutually agreed.”

At the conclusion of the lease, “the parties shall consult regarding the terms of return of any Agreed Facility and Area, including possible compensation for improvements or construction.”

Each party would furthermore waive claims (other than contractual) concerning “damage to, loss of, or destruction of its property or injury or death to personnel of either party’s armed forces or their civilian personnel arising out he performance of their official duties in connection with activities under this agreement.”

The proposed agreement would supersede an earlier agreement between the US and Maldives regarding “Military and Department of Defense Civilian Personnel”, effected on December 31, 2004.

Diego Garcia and the 2016 lease extension

The US Navy currently operates one of its largest bases outside the US at Diego Garcia, approximately 740 kilometres south of Addu Atoll, the lease for which is due to expire in 2016.

The site includes multiple landing strips for heavy bombers, pier and port facilities for the largest vessels in both the US and UK fleets, and accommodation for thousands of navy personnel.

Part of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), the site was leased to the US by the UK following its forcible eviction of the local inhabitants – the Chagos – after its purchase from Mauritius for UK£3 million at the time in 1965. Then-Mauritian Prime Minister, Seewoosagur Ramgoolam, received a knighthood from the Queen the same year.

In 1966, the UK granted the US a 50-year lease of the archipelago in exchange for favours including a US$14 million discount on submarine-launched Polaris missiles.

The lease is due to expire in 2016 with both parties required to end, modify or extend it by December 2014. However, the feasibility of an extension is uncertain as the UK has been engaged in a series of long-running and politically embarrassing court battles with Chagos islanders seeking to return to the archipelago.

The Chagos won a high court victory in the UK in 2000 enabling them to return, but the decision was extraordinarily overruled by the Queen’s royal prerogative. In 2008, the House of Lords overturned the high court verdict, forcing the Chagos to appeal in the European court of human rights.

In April 2010, the UK declared the Chagos Archipelago a marine reserve – theoretically making it the world’s largest marine protected area (MPA). Funds to manage the MPA for the next five years were provided by Swiss-Italian billionaire Ernesto Bertarelli.

A leaked US embassy cable dated May 5, 2009 and marked ‘NOFORN’, or ‘No foreigners’, subsequently suggested the marine park was a calculated attempt by the UK Foreign Office to scuttle the resettlement claims of the 3,000 Chagos islanders.

In the leaked US cable, Colin Roberts, the then UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s (FCO) Director of Overseas Territories, is quoted as saying that the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) has “served its role very well”.

“‘We do not regret the removal of the population,’ since removal was necessary for the BIOT to fulfill its strategic purpose,’ he said. Removal of the population is the reason that the BIOT’s uninhabited islands and the surrounding waters are in ‘pristine’ condition,” the cable read.

“Establishing a marine reserve might, indeed, as the FCO’s Roberts stated, be the most effective long-term way to prevent any of the Chagos Islands’ former inhabitants or their descendants from resettling in the BIOT,” it adds.

In the cable, Roberts emphasised that the establishment of the marine park would ensure it was reserved for military use and “would have no impact on how Diego Garcia is administered as a base.”

“[Roberts] noted that the establishment of a marine reserve would require permitting scientists to visit BIOT, but that creating a park would help restrict access for non-scientific purposes. For example, he continued, the rules governing the park could strictly limit access to BIOT by yachts, which Roberts referred to as ‘sea gypsies’.”

As a result of the British government’s “current thinking” on the reserve, there would be “no human footprints” or “Man Fridays” on the uninhabited islands of the archipelago, Roberts stated in the cable.

In response to concerns from US Political Counsellor Richard Mills that advocates of Chagossian resettlement might continue “to vigorously press their case”, Roberts replied that the UK’s “environmental lobby is far more powerful than the Chagossians’ advocates.”

However, the escalating Chagos case in the UK suffered a setback as recently as last week – April 18, 2013 – after a UK court ruled that the leaked cable was inadmissible as evidence.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Tourism boycott would be “setback for economic rights of women” says President, as Avaaz petition reaches two million

President Dr Mohamed Waheed has issued a statement warning that calls for a boycott on tourism over the flogging sentence for a 15 year-old rape victim “will only serve as a setback to the economic opportunities and rights we are all striving to uphold for women, girls and the hardworking Maldivian people in general.”

The President’s statement comes as an Avaaz.org petition calling for a moratorium on flogging and better laws to protect women and girls in the Maldives reached more than two million signatures – more than twice the number of tourists who visit the country each year.

In a letter published on Minivan News on Saturday, Avaaz.org Executive Director Ricken Patel insisted that the organisation had not called for a outright tourism boycott.

“What we do stand ready to do, however, is to inform tourists about what action is and isn’t being taken by the Maldives government to resolve this issue and change the law, and to identify those MPs and resort owners who are using their influence to push for positive change – and those who are not,” Patel said.

“Around the world people are interested (and have a right to know) what kind of systems they’re supporting with their tourism dollars, and to make their holiday decisions accordingly,” he added.

President Waheed meanwhile thanked the international community “for their concern” in the case, noting that Attorney General Azima Shukoor had met the girl “and she is receiving the appropriate physical and psychological counseling.”

“This case should never have been presented in the courts and we are working to ensure that cases like this are never brought to the courts again,” President Waheed said.

“We appreciate the international compassion for this young woman and ask for your patience as this case moves through the judicial system. As both the President and as a father, I am fully committed to protecting and advancing the rights of women and girls in the Maldives and throughout the world and share your deep concern about this young victim,” he said.

“The Maldives is a young democracy working to balance our religious faith with our new democratic values. I ask that you support us and join us as partners as we work through this challenge.”

President Waheed’s Gaumee Ithihaad Party (GIP) has meanwhile declared itself in coalition with the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP), which has publicly endorsed the 15 year-old’s flogging sentence, stating that she “deserves the punishment” as outlined under Islamic Sharia.

The Adhaalath party, members of which largely dominate the Maldives’ Ministry of Islamic Affairs, stated that the sentence of flogging had not been passed against the minor for being sexually abused by her stepfather, but rather for the consensual sex which she had confessed to having to authorities.

“The purpose of penalties like these in Islamic Sharia is to maintain order in society and to save it from sinful acts. It is not at all an act of violence. We must turn a deaf ear to the international organisations which are calling to abolish these penalties, labeling them degrading and inhumane acts or torture,” read a recent statement from the party.

“If such sinful activities are to become this common, the society will break down and we may become deserving of divine wrath,” the Adhaalath Party stated.

A previous call for a moratorium on the flogging of women for the crime of extramarital sex was raised by UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay during an address to parliament in 2011.

Following her address, demonstrators gathered outside the UN building holding placards calling for Pillay to be “arrested”, “flogged” and “slain”.

Pillay’s statement was publicly condemned by the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), Islamic Ministry, MPs and religious NGOs, while the Adhaalath Party called on then President Mohamed Nasheed to condemn Pillay’s statements “at least to show to the people that there is no irreligious agenda of President Nasheed and senior government officials behind this.”

“What’s there to discuss about flogging? There is nothing to debate about in a matter clearly stated in the religion of Islam. No one can argue with God,” said Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem at the time.

More recently, a report on extremism in the Maldives published in US West Point military academy’s Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) Sentinel has warned that growing religious extremism and political uncertainty in the country risk negatively affecting the country’s tourism industry.

“Despite its reputation as an idyllic paradise popular among Western tourists, political and religious developments in the Maldives should be monitored closely,” the report concluded.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Police ask government to revoke Artur brothers’ investor license

An investment license issued by the Tourism Ministry to a pair of Armenian brothers is to be revoked on recommendation of the police, reports local media.

Haveeru reported that police advised the Ministry of Economic Development not to issue an investor license to the Artur brothers, who were alleged to be involved with drug trafficking, money laundering, raids on media outlets and other serious crimes in Kenya. The Ministry then reportedly issued a letter to the Tourism Ministry requesting the license be revoked.

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef is not responding to calls at time of press.

Photos of the Arturs in the company of Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim and Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb emerged on social media last week. The ministers denied involvement in the pair’s business activities, however a letter signed by Adheeb in late January requesting immigration authorities grant the brothers residency permits was later leaked to the media.

Adheeb claimed Artur brothers had previously invested in the country through a registered joint venture company with members of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

“They complained to me that these partners had [defrauded] them and that their visas had expired,” he said at the time.

“I advised them to leave peacefully and they agreed to sort out their visa and leave. They have now left,” Adheeb said.

According to Haveeru, police advised the Economic Development Ministry revoke the Artur brother’s investment license by saying that the brothers’ presence in the Maldives was “a threat to the economy and security of the country.”

The company ‘Artur Brothers World Connections’, was registered in the Maldives in October 2012, with the Artur brothers holding an 80 percent share in a 61-19 percent split.

French nationals identified as Godzine Sargsyan and Edga Sargsyan had a 10 and 7 percent share, while a Maldivian national Ismail Waseem of H. Ever Chance was listed as holding the remaining 3 percent.

Waseem’s share was subsequently transferred to Abdulla Shaffath of H. Ever Peace on November 25.

A statement on the President’s Office website dated April 4 noted that President Mohamed Waheed was advised in January that the brothers were in the Maldives “but had not broken any laws and were being monitored by the police as a precaution. The administration later decided to ask them to leave once their visa extension expired.”

“The Artur brothers are no longer in the Maldives nor do they currently hold visas to return. The President, along with the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture, Ministry of Economic Development, Ministry of Defence and National Security, and the Maldives Police Service are looking into any irregular dealings during the time the Artur brothers and their associates were here and will determine if there were any breaches in protocol or conduct that need to be addressed,” the statement read.

However Immigration Controller Mohamed Ali told local media this week that while Sargasyan Artur had left the Maldives on March 31, given issues with the country’s border control system “there are questions surrounding the second brothers’ exit from the Maldives.”

Meanwhile, reports in local media today (April 8 ) suggested that Zaidul Khaleel, General Manager of the Club Faru resort, operated by the state-owned Maldives Tourism Development Corporation (MTDC), had been dismissed after he was found to have paid the brothers’ US$6000 bill.

A spokesperson for the MTDC told Minivan News the company would shortly be issuing a statement on the matter as there were “heavy factual inaccuracies in the public domain and on electronic media”.

The brother’s activities in the Maldives have sparked substantial local interest following their dramatic departure from Kenya, after they allegedly pulled guns on uncooperative customs officials.

Subsequent investigative reports in Kenyan media found the pair had ingratiated themselves with senior government officials to such an extent that they were granted Kenyan citizenship and appointed Deputy Police Commissioners.

Local media interest in the pair extended to the publication yesterday of a photo apparently depicting former President Nasheed and former SAARC Secretary General Ibrahim Hussain Zaki apparently meeting Artur Sargsyan.

However the photograph turned out to be an edited photo taken during a formal reception for US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg, held at the former Presidential residence of Muleaage in January 2011, with Sargsyan Artur’s head carefully photo-shopped onto Steinberg.

Local media outlet Channel News Maldives (CNM) reported that the photograph was originally leaked by the former Immigration Controller and current State Minister for Defence, Ilyas Hussain.

Ilyas refused to comment on the matter, and edited versions of the photo featuring Nasheed meeting characters ranging from Big Bird to Justin Bieber began circulating on social media.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Fair trial for Nasheed “difficult to see” when judicial bench “cherrypicked to convict”: BHRC trial observers

Read the BHRC’s second independent trial observation

The UK’s Bar Human Rights Committee (BHRC) has expressed “serious concern” over the appointment of judges by the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) in the trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Accounts of the appointment process, “if accurate, suggest egregious unconstitutional behaviour by the JSC in selecting the judicial bench to hear Mr Nasheed’s case,” stated BHRC Executive Committee member Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh, who visited the Maldives to observe recent proceedings against Nasheed.

The committee has conducted several independent trial observations of proceedings involving the former President, who is charged over the detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, during the final days of his presidency.

Nasheed and his Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) maintain that the charges are a politically motivated attempt to prevent him contesting the 2013 presidential elections, challenging both the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court hearing the case, and the JSC’s appointment of judges to the case. The JSC itself includes several of Nasheed’s direct political opponents, including rival presidential candidate, resort tycoon Gasim Ibrahim.

The Nasheed trial was meanwhile suspended by Chief Judge of the High Court last week pending a ruling into the legitimacy of the bench’s appointment – an action which led all other High Court judges to file a complaint against the Chief Judge with the JSC.

“It is difficult to see how proceedings presided over by a judicial bench, cherrypicked for their likelihood to convict by a highly politicised JSC, which includes a number of Mr Nasheed’s direct political rivals, could in any way be deemed to comply with constitutional and international fair trial rights, including the right to an ‘independent court established by law’,” stated Ghrálaigh, in her concluding remarks.

“The BHRC welcomes the current investigation by Parliament’s Independent Commission’s Oversight Committee into the judicial selection process in the case, but notes with concern the refusal by the JSC to cooperate with that investigation,” she added.

“Lack of transparency in the constitution of judicial benches and in the assignment of cases fundamentally undermines the proper administration of justice: fair trial guarantees and the requirements of natural justice demand not only that justice be done, but that it be seen to be done,” her report states.

The report provides a detailed overview of state of the judiciary and political context in the lead up to Nasheed’s resignation and prosecution.

Ghrálaigh states that given concerns about the JSC’s politicisation and “serious questions” concerning its appointment of judges to the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, “it is perhaps surprising that the court should have decided of its own motion (“ex proprio motu”) to deny the request made by Mr Nasheed’s legal team to postpone the proceedings until after the elections, in the absence of any objection by the prosecuting authorities to such an adjournment.”

“Although there is nothing to prohibit courts from making decisions governing their process ex proprio motu, the allegations concerning the manner of selection of the Hulhumalé Magistrates’ Court panel render the Court’s stated reasoning for its decision all the more disquieting,” she stated.

The BHRC was not seeking to downplay the seriousness of the charges against Nasheed, she noted.

“However, what is clear is that the case is far from straightforward. Central both to the context of Judge Abdulla’s arrest and to the nature of the criminal proceedings against the former president are fundamental questions of judicial independence in the Maldives.”

“The charge against Mr Nasheed is that he acted “in a manner contrary to law” in ordering the arrest and detention of a senior judge. Although the details of the prosecution case have yet to be set out, it is clear that the Article 81 offence with which Mr Nasheed is charged is not a trivial one,” the report states.

“The BHRC notes with concern the increasing number of reports and statements by international bodies, including those referenced in this report, which conclude that the Maldives does not have an independent and impartial judiciary,” the report states.

“The BHRC further notes the view inside and outside the Maldives that the failure by the institutions of the State, in particular the JSC, properly to implement constitutionally mandated reforms to create an impartial judiciary, independent from political pressures, and the failure properly to investigate and/or sanction allegations of egregious, unlawful and/or unconstitutional judicial conduct, have served significantly to derail the State’s transition to a functioning constitutional democracy,”

Given extensive local and international concern over the state of the Maldivian judiciary, Ghrálaigh observes that the context for the criminalisation of Nasheed’s detention of Judge Abdulla, hangs on whether the Chief Judge is, as stipulated by Article 81 under which Nasheed is being charge, “an innocent person”.

“It is against that background, and in the context of a number of serious complaints against Judge Abdulla, that the order for his arrest was made. That background is intrinsically bound up in the nature of the charge against Mr Nasheed: the wording of Article 81, which criminalises a public servant for “us[ing] the authority of his office to intentionally arrest or detain an[…] innocent person contrary to the law” suggests that the context to the arrest, and in particular the allegations against Judge Abdulla, will necessarily be central to the determination of the charges against the former President,” the BHRC report states.

Ghrálaigh notes that the JSC was “also subject to significant criticism for its failure properly to oversee individual complaints against individual judges. One judge against whom a number of serious complaints were levied was Judge Abdulla, accused inter alia of “implicat[ion] in 14 cases of obstruction of policy duty”, including “strategically delaying cases involving opposition [Gayoom loyalist] members”, “twist[ing] and interpret[ing] laws so they could not be enforced against certain politicians”, “accepting bribes to release convicts”13 and “hijack[ing] the whole court”.

“I was informed that a JSC complaints committee charged in December 2009 with investigating Judge Abdulla, failed to issue any findings, following an injunction sought by, and granted to the judge by the Civil Court, preventing his further investigation by the JSC and/or the publication of any report concerning his conduct,” Ghrálaigh noted.

The JSC, responsible for reappointing judges including Judge Abdulla in 2010 at the conclusion of the constitutional interim period, “failed properly ‘to fulfill its constitutional mandate of proper vetting and reappointing of judicial candidates’, a failure regarding which international bodies, including the International Commission of Jurists, have expressed concern,” she added.

“Rather, in August 2010, amidst much controversy, it proceeded to confirm almost every Gayoom-regime judge, qualified or not, in office for life, finding that the constitutional provisions regarding judicial appointment were merely “symbolic”.

“Consequently, the Maldivian judiciary remains largely unchanged since the country’s transition to a constitutional democracy: the vast majority of judges in office, including Judge Abdulla, are political appointees of former President Gayoom, and many still lack any formal training in law.”

Furthermore, “The blocking in the People’s Majlis of key pieces of legislation including the Penal Code and the Criminal Evidence Act, that would provide for equality and uniformity in the application of a codified body of law, means that mainly untrained judges continue to wield considerable discretion in their determination of cases.”

Read the BHRC’s second independent trial observation

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Tourism, Defence Ministers deny involvement with “international criminals”

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb and Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim have denied involvement with an infamous pair of Armenian brothers linked with drug trafficking, money laundering, raids on media outlets and other serious crimes in Kenya.

Photos of the Arturs in the company of the two Maldivian ministers emerged on social media over the weekend, apparently taken during the Piston Motor Racing Challenge held on Hulhumale’ between January 25 and 26.

One photo showed Artur Sargsyan next to Adheeb and Nazim, while another has him apparently starting one of the motorcycle races at the event, which was organised by the Maldivian National Defence Force (MNDF). Another image showed Sargsyan at the red carpet opening for the Olympus Cinema.

Defence Minister Nazim has denied any association with the brothers: “I came to know about them after the rumors started spreading on social media networks. But no country had informed of us anything officially,” local media reported Nazim as saying. “To my knowledge those two men have left the Maldives,” he said.

Adheeb acknowledged meeting the brothers during the event, but bemoaned to Haveeru how “information about this issue is being spread by the media rather negatively. I have no links with them.”

“They met with us in Hulhumale’. They told us that they were defrauded by some senior officials of the former government [former President Nasheed’s government], who took large sums of money from them for investment in the Maldives,” Adheeb said.

“If you want to know the truth about who has links with the Artur brothers, you should find out who the shareholders are of the company established by them in the Maldives. It’s not right that Haveeru reports everything that’s shared on social media. The photo showing [me with] the Artur brothers was taken at an event that was open to the public,” he said.

Meanwhile, a letter from the Tourism Ministry to immigration authorities requesting a residency visa for Margaryan and Sargayan Artur, dated January 27 and signed by Adheeb, was subsequently leaked on social media.

Speaking to Minivan New, Adheeb reiterated that he had no personal links with the Artur brothers, whom he said had now left the country on his recommendation.

According to Adheeb, the Artur brothers had previously invested in the country through a registered joint venture company with members of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

“They complained to me that these partners had [defrauded] them and that their visas had expired,” he said.

“I advised them to leave peacefully and they agreed to sort out their visa and leave. They have now left.”

Adheeb added that his decision to ask the brothers to leave had been “for the good of the country”.

He claimed issues concerning the two brothers had been politicised intentionally following the PPM primaries held on Saturday (March 30).

Details of the brothers’ investments in the Maldives – and their Maldivian partners – were also released by the Ministry for Economic Development.

Haveeru reported that ‘Artur Brothers World Connections’ was registered in the Maldives in October 2012, with the Artur brothers holding an 80 percent share in a 61-19 percent split.

Waseem’s share was subsequently transferred to Abdulla Shaffath of H. Ever Peace on November 25.

The Untouchables

Kenyan media network KTN in 2011 dubbed the brothers ‘The Untouchables’ in a three-hour exposé of their activities in the country, during which time they were found to have ingratiated themselves with the government to such an extent that they were made deputy police commissioners – the third highest rank in the Kenyan police force.

Their arrival in Kenya followed the 2004 seizure by police of 1.1 tons of cocaine, the country’s largest cocaine haul worth US$88 million at the time.

Fifteen months later, according to an investigation by Kenya’s Standard newspaper, the brothers were brought into the country “by rogue government officials to set up and train a specialised anti-narcotics unit.”

“More than one source suggests the state was tricked into hiring enforcers working for drug traffickers who wanted to recover the cocaine being held in Kenya,” the Standard reported.

“The hired guns failed to complete their task after they were publicly exposed following their March 2, 2006, raid on the Standard Group. This was a bungled operation ordered on the strength of false information about an alleged story linking powerful individuals to drug trafficking in Kenya. No such story existed,” the paper stated.

In a Skype interview for the earlier KTN report, one of the brothers admitted to leading the armed, masked police raid on the media outlet, which saw journalists beaten, computers confiscated and newspapers burned.

A leaked US Embassy cable in 2006 observed that “the presence in Kenya of armed foreigners working on behalf of ruling elements has alarmed many Kenyans, both in and out of government.”

“Despite repeated government denials, post believes foreigners were indeed directly involved in the police raids. One journalist who escaped the raids privately tells us police contacts warned him weeks earlier that foreigners had been imported to protect the First Family from public corruption charges,” read one leaked cable.

“Some believe these same foreigners played a role (via the Akasha crime family) in the 2004 cocaine shipments seized in Kenya, and have now returned to intimidate opponents (in or out of government) from releasing information incriminating State House in any illicit activities,” it added.

Whatever their real activities, the Kenyan government’s indulgence of the brothers came to an end three months after the Standard raid, when the brothers took umbrage at a request to search their bags at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport and pulled guns on customs officers.

“The Arturs stormed the customs area, demanding their bags be allowed through,” reported KTN. “Customs protested, but were punched and shoved aside. The two drew pistols, forcing the officers to scamper for safety. They then left the airport.”

Travelling in and out of the country on multiple passports was “normal practice” for the brothers, KTN reported, “as was carrying guns around the city. They took over the town by storm while the government looked the other way.”

Facing international condemnation for its inaction over the pair, the Kenyan government finally suspended a number of senior police officials and ordered their arrest, KTN reported.

After a standoff at their residence, police used a vehicle to ram the gate of the compound and took the brothers into custody.

A search revealed of the residence revealed bulletproof jackets, gun holsters, CCTV and infra-red cameras, Kenyan passports in the brothers’ names, several AK-47 assault rifles, and four pistols with filed serial numbers, two of which were later found to belong to two officers of the Kenyan President’s elite escort unit who had been robbed of them at gunpoint, KTN reported.

“The men were finally kicked out of the country and disowned by state officials as ‘international criminals’,” reported the Standard.

KTN’s investigation into the ‘Untouchables’ Part One

KTN’s investigation into the ‘Untouchables’ Part Two, Three

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4RAAwz9jko

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

British government must “acknowledge what is really happening in the Maldives”: Salisbury MP John Glen to UK parliament

The international community “will not find it tenable” if former President Mohamed Nasheed is excluded from elections in the Maldives later this year, Deputy Leader of the UK’s House of Commons Tom Brake has stated.

Brake was responding to a speech in British parliament on March 27 by UK MP for Salisbury, John Glen, who called for the British government to “acknowledge what is really happening” in the Maldives “and stand firm later this year”.

“The [Maldives] is now in a critical state. The free and fair elections that should happen later this year are in the balance. It is difficult to get clarity from the international community, and even from the British Government, on how assertive it is prepared to be to deal with the country,” Glen stated.

“There is systematic corruption among the judiciary, and almost every week new stories of human rights violations reach the press. Although the ousted [former President] Nasheed is expected to run in the forthcoming elections, it is difficult to say that he will have a clear pathway to the elections, given the legal machinations put up against him almost every week.

“As I have mentioned, there are the most vile human rights abuses in the Maldives. A 15-year-old girl has been sentenced to 100 lashes in public when she turns 18, and to eight months of house arrest. It is appalling that the international community can apparently do nothing about the situation. I stand today to generate some publicity, I hope, so that people are aware of the direness of the situation in the country,” he stated.

“We will only get changes in the Maldives if there is public awareness of what is going on. Similar things are happening in many countries across the globe, but I am not prepared to just stand back and let these things happen.”

Glen added that, “people often ask why the Member of Parliament for Salisbury is so concerned about the smallest Asian country.”

“I am concerned because the ousted President of the Maldives has a strong association with my constituency,” he said. “He was educated just outside it and has spent a lot of time in exile there. Since I came to the house, I have taken a great interest in the Maldives. The situation there is dire and appalling, and it deeply concerns me. I am also very worried by the reaction of the international community.’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaIPCH92cmQ&feature=youtu.be

The European Union (EU) has also earlier this month declared that it would be “difficult” to consider the Maldives’ upcoming presidential elections credible unless former President Mohamed Nasheed is allowed to contest.

Following the EU’s comments, President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad tweeted on March 16 that “it’s not proper for governments to discredit the independence and integrity of our judiciary. Doing so is undermining Democracy in Maldives.”

Masood added that the 2013 elections would be free, fair and exclusive, but would be “exclusive” of individuals who did not meet the legal criteria.

The Salisbury connection

Glen’s predecessor in the Salisbury seat, UK Conservative Party MP Robert Key, first brought the Maldives to the attention of British parliament prior to the country’s first democratic elections in 2008.

In an interview with Minivan News in 2010, Key described his first encounter with the self-exiled Maldivian activists, including Nasheed, who had established the Maldivian Democratic Party “in a room above a shop in Millford street in Salisbury.”

“[Nasheed] walked in through the door with his school-friend David Hardingham (Nasheed attended Dauntsey’s school with the founder of the Salisbury-based Friends of Maldives NGO), and said: ‘I have problems. I have problems with visas, I have problems with police, I need some advice from police about how to protect my little office in Salisbury’ – all these sorts of issues.”

“There were bigger problems: such as how to engage the British government ministers and the Commonwealth with what was happening in the Maldives. He quite rightly, as a good democrat, used the democratic system in the UK to pursue answers to his problems,” Key said at the time.

Unsettled by the political opposition growing overseas, the then Gayoom government in the Maldives commissioned private investigators to investigate Hardingham and the MDP’s Salisbury origins, in a project dubbed ‘Operation Druid’.

“When there was emergency rule here, there were a number of concerns as to who was funding the MDP. The government wanted to know who was behind it, and whether it was a foreign government,” Gayoom’s (and later Nasheed’s) Foreign Minister at the time, Dr Ahmed Shaheed, told Minivan News in an interview in 2011.

“The government may have wanted to see what was going on. What these operations did was try to see who was who. And a lot of the operations the government felt were against it came from Salisbury, and I think the government of the day felt justified in engaging a firm to look into what was going on,” Dr Shaheed said.

“We’re talking about people who they had deported from the Maldives for proselytisation, people involved in all sort of activities. They felt they needed to check on that, and what came out was a clean bill of health. Nothing untoward was happening, and these people were by and large bone-fide.”

After the investigators failed to turn up anything untoward, Hardingham and MP Key were vilified by Gayoom’s government as ‘Christian missionaries’ intent on building a church in the Maldives, on behalf of Salisbury cathedral.

“Well I recognised it as a political ploy. But we had to take it seriously as a threat because that was how it was presented – that Salisbury cathedral might become a target for some kind of activity. It was very specific,” said Key.

“The actual threat was that Salisbury and Salisbury Cathedral were trying to convert the Maldives to Christianity. Which was absolute nonsense but had to be taken seriously, because quite obviously in the Maldives that would be seen as a significant threat in a country that is 100 percent Islamic. I understood that straight away.

“It was not true, and therefore we had to say ‘It is not true.’ The Dean of Salisbury Cathedral understood the issue, she took it at face value, and we sought security advice as necessary. But it was never a serious threat. It was a juvenile political ploy.”

“It was just a mischievous suggestion,” said Dr Shaheed, in the subsequent interview. “At the time everyone was accusing each other of being non-Muslim, and this accusation that the MDP was non-Muslim was getting very loud.”

Meanwhile, following the controversial transfer of power on February 7, 2012 and the resignation of Nasheed, the Salisbury-based Friends of Maldives NGO reverted from health, education and sports development to advocating human rights and democratic restoration.

“FOM’s focus has been forced to revert to protecting human rights and promoting social justice until safety and democracy is restored,” the NGO states on its website.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)