JJ Robinson – Page 21 – Minivan News

High Court of Singapore upholds injunction against MACL, blocking action over ADC in Maldives’ Civil Court

The High Court of Singapore has rejected an attempt by the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) to release an injunction blocking the government from taking action in the Civil Court of Maldives blocking GMR’s offset of the airport development charge (ADC).

MACL is the government party in the concession agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to manage and develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport, signed during the Nasheed administration.

Opposition parties at the time the agreement was signed – and are now in government following February 7’s controversial transfer of power – first opposed GMR’s development of the airport on nationalistic grounds, and then levelled numerous allegations against the company ranging from corruption to concerns that the deal would allow Israeli bombers to refuel en route to bombing Arab countries.

The opposition had some success in disrupting the agreement in late 2011, after the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) won a case in the Civil Court blocking GMR from levying an airport development charge (ADC) as stipulated in its concession agreement.

MACL in a letter sent on January 5, 2012, instructed GMR to deduct the ADC revenues from the concession fees due the government, while it sought to appeal the Civil Court ruling. However the Nasheed government fell a month later and the opposition inherited the problem, receiving a succession of bills from the airport developer throughout 2012.

In the first quarter of 2012 the government received US$525,355 of an expected US$8.7 million, after the deduction of the ADC. That was followed by a US$1.5 million bill for the second quarter, after the ADC payable eclipsed the revenue due the government.

Combined with the third quarter payment due, the government now owes the airport developer US$3.7 million.

“The net result of this is that the Maldivian government now has to pay GMR for running the airport. On this basis it is likely that the Maldivian government will end up paying about MVR 8 billion (US$519 million) to GMR for the duration of the contract,” wrote Dr Hassan Saeed, President Mohamed Waheed’s Special Advisor, in a recent appeal to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh calling on him to cancel the Maldives’ agreement with GMR.

Saeed is the leader of the DQP, the party that filed the case against the ADC while in opposition, and has strongly opposed GMR’s involvement in the airport development.

As per the concession agreement, the ADC matter was referred to the Singapore Court of Arbitration.

The High Court of Singapore on July 23 granted an injunction in favor of GMR, restraining MACL from taking any step in the Civil Courts of the Maldives preventing the company “from adjustment/set-off of the Airport Development Charge and insurance surcharge, as per MACL’s 5th January 2012 letter, which is now referred to arbitration,” according to the airport operator.

MACL approached the High Court of Singapore in October 2012 seeking to have the injunction lifted. However the court dismissed the application on November 19.

MACL has challenged the validity of the July 5 letter instructing GMR to deduct the ADC from its concession revenues, claiming that it was signed by the former MACL Chairman ‘Bandhu’ Ibrahim Saleem without approval from the company’s board, and noted that he had been subsequently replaced under the new administration.

“The dispute raised by MACL on the validity of the 5th January 2012 letter will be decided in the arbitration proceedings to be held in Singapore,” GMR noted in a statement.

Attorney General (AG) Aishath Azima Shakoor claimed in local newspaper Haveeru on Monday that the Singaporean court had permitted MACL to try the matter in a Maldivian court, and allow the company to sue Saleem for the loss of revenue caused by the July 5 letter.

“But in accordance with the agreement whether MACL had the right to ignore or comply with the letter would be decided by arbitration. Even if a Maldivian Court rules the letter as null and void it would not binding for the arbitration,” Azima was reported as telling the paper.

There was, she said, no impediment to the government terminating the GMR agreement altogether, although this would be subject to compensation payable to GMR to be decided through arbitration.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

“Everybody running the state as they please”: President Waheed

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan told a rally on the island Kinolhas in Raa Atoll over the weekend that the Maldives “does not have a leader now.”

“As some people [say], the Maldives does not have a leader now. Lots of leaders are here, and all are of the same level. And so then everybody runs the state as they please,” Waheed told the rally.

“And the senior leader should not say anything. If he does, then it’s time to take away his post quickly,” Waheed said.

Waheed’s remarks came amid rising tension between parliament and the executive following the arrest of two opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs and an MP from the ruling coalition, Abdulla Jabir, on charges of a consumption of alcohol.

The Civil Court on Sunday also ordered the arrest of two MPs in the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) – another ruling coalition member – in connection with unpaid loans of several million dollars with the Bank of Maldives, through companies with ties to DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali.

DRP MP Azim alleged that President Waheed and other senior members of the executive had approached him, offering to cancel the court summons if he agreed during Monday’s vote on secret balloting to vote in the way they preferred.

The court hearing was scheduled at 1:00pm – the same time as the vote. The court order was subsequently cancelled.

“It is difficult to believe that the court order for the arrest of the two MPs, Azim and Nashiz, at the time the vote is scheduled is a coincidence. It proves the allegations made by a huge section of society that the courts are politicised,” said the MDP in a statement.

The wife of Jumhoree Party (JP) MP Jabir, Gender and Human Rights Minister Dhiyana Saeed, said following her husband’s arrest that President Waheed had sent her a text message denying any knowledge of the arrests.

“The leader of the country is saying that he himself is questioning the motivation behind this and who it was that did this. Police made the arrests, right? So this is an allegation against police by the President. And he said in the SMS that there is a possibility that some people might have done this to antagonise people against [the President] with regard to the vote on Monday,” Saeed told an emergency meeting of parliament’s privileges committee.

According to Saeed, President Waheed had alleged that the arrests were “directly connected to Monday’s vote.”

That vote concerned whether to allow a ‘secret vote’ in an as-yet unscheduled no-confidence motion against President Waheed. The MDP-initiated proposition was ultimately defeated during Monday’s parliamentary vote by a narrow margin of 34 to 39 votes.

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz meanwhile declared that President Waheed had no prior knowledge of the arrests of the MPs.

“Such operations are not carried out by police after informing the President or the Home Minister. This institution does not have any political influence. We have the room to function with professionalism,” Riyaz told local media.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Arrests of MPs with liquor, drugs, “politically motivated”: Human Rights Minister, MDP

Additional reporting by Ahmed Naish

Parliament’s Privileges Committee held an emergency meeting on Friday following the arrest of two MPs and senior figures in the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), for the alleged possession of drugs and alcohol.

In a statement, police said 10 people were arrested on Thursday night during a ‘special’ operation on the island of Hodaidhoo in Haa Dhaal Atoll.

In addition to ruling coalition Jumhoree Party (JP) MP Abdulla Jabir and MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor – also the party’s international spokesperson – those arrested included former SAARC Secretary General and Special Envoy to the former President, Ibrahim Hussain Zaki, former Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair and his wife Mariyam Faiz.

The others arrested were Jadhulla Jaleel, Hamdan Zaki, two Sri Lankan nationals named Raj Mohan and Anoor Bandaranayk as well as a Bangladeshi named Suhail Rana.

Police said they found large amounts of “suspected” drugs and alcohol upon searching the island with a court warrant.

The arrests were made “based on information received by police intelligence,” police said. Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Haveeru that the suspects were arrested with alcohol and “hash oil”.

Following the arrests around midnight, the suspects were taken to Kulhudhufushi in Haa Dhaal Atoll, and Zaki was hospitalised.

Despite a police attempt to extend the detention periods all suspects including the two MPs have now been released by the Kulhudhufushi Magistrate Court, with the exception of Hamdan Zaki.

The island of Hodaidhoo was leased to Yacht Tours for resort development in January 2003. According to Haveeru, it was previously inhabited but the population was relocated to Haa Dhaal Hanimadhoo in 1997. Kaashidhoo MP Jabir is Chairman of Yacht Tours.

“Politically motivated”

The MDP has alleged the arrests were a politically-motivated attempt to disrupt parliament ahead of a no confidence motion against President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, and an amendment to voting procedure to make such votes secret. A second no-confidence motion against Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel was withdrawn this week pending the outcome of the secret vote amendment.

“It is such a coincidence that whenever the Waheed Government wants to frame those critical of their government, they come up with trumped up charges and very often it is something to do with alcohol,” said former MDP Chairperson Mariya Ahmed Didi, in a statement.

“Such accusations have led one of our MP’s to submit a bill to parliament totally banning its importation,” she added, calling on the government “to stop harassing senior politicians and MPs and have early elections in the country so as to get the country on track to democratic governance.”

Following the arrests, former President Mohamed Nasheed alleged in a tweet that the arrests were made the same day Waheed had “threatened” parliament during a speech on Kinolhas in Raa Atoll.

“Less than 24 hours after my former deputy threatened the parliament, police have arrested MP Hamid, Jabir and my press secretary. They must be freed immediately,” Nasheed said.

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz has stated that the MPs were arrested “at the scene of the crime” and that it was up to a judge to release them.

Emergency meeting

Section 102 of Parliament’s rules of procedure states that MPs cannot be arrested while there is a no-confidence motion before parliament to impeach the president or remove a cabinet minister, judge or member of an independent commission from his or her post.

The Majlis secretariat released a statement on Friday afternoon stating that Speaker Abdulla Shahid had instructed police to abide by parliament’s rules of procedure after he was informed of the arrests.

“Currently, the approval of dismissal of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan and the Civil Service Commission President Mohamed Fahmy Hassan have been sent to the Parliament,” read a statement from the secretariat.

Meanwhile, at an emergency meeting of the Priviliges Committee, Jabir’s wife and Minister for Gender and Human Rights, Dhiyana Saeed, alleged police brutality during the arrest and argued that they were a politically-motivated attempt to disrupt Monday’s vote.

Saeed said she had received a text message from President Waheed stating as much, which she said she would share with parliament.

“Abdulla Jabir didn’t get the opportunity to call his family. But when we sent people over there [to Kulhudhufushi] and spoke to him [on speakerphone], members of our family heard him say that he was severely brutalised,” she told the committee.

“[Jabir said] he was struck on the face, hit on the head from behind after they came from the sea while he was walking on the beach, thrown down on the beach and handcuffed from behind and dragged away. [He said] his feet and body were bruised in several places as a result.”

Dhiyana said she was told by the lawyers that they have seen signs of injury on Jabir’s body. A journalist from Haveeru, another “eyewitness”, had corroborated the lawyer’s account, she said.

According to the lawyers, police refused to allow photographs of the injuries to be taken, she added.

While “even MPs” should be investigated if they were suspected of committing a crime, Saeed said she found it “hard to believe today” that this was the case.

“If it was a case of alcohol, it is not today that this should be investigated. This happened before a very important vote by the People’s Majlis on Monday,” she said.

“I have a very strong reason for making this allegation. That is, in a text message to me, the President has alleged that this happened with a different motivation. He directly connects his accusation with Monday’s vote. I believe this is something that the Majlis should be very concerned about and investigate in depth.

Saeed offered to share the text message with parliament, adding that it “should be very relevant.”

She claimed that Jabir was arrested on the beach without any drugs or alcohol, and questioned as to how the whole island could be considered a scene of crime.

Under Islamic Shariah, she explained, four witnesses are required to prove intoxication. If there were witnesses to the crime, she argued that there would be no need to either keep the suspects detained or extend their detention.

She suggested that the attempt to extend the detention was “very much connected to Monday’s vote.”

Concluding her statement to the committee, Dhiyana said the issue was “larger than arresting Jabir” as police had violated the Majlis rules.

She noted the Majlis rules or regulations derived authority directly from the constitution and that that the Supreme Court had “on many occasions upheld the regulations as valid”.

“Therefore, police have breached a very clear article [in the house rules] and this is really a very serious problem,” she said.

The Privileges Committee passed a motion to ask the Prosecutor General to press charges against Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz for arresting the MPs in violation of the law, and disregarding the Speaker’s instructions to release them.

The committee also passed a motion to ask the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate allegations of police brutality against the MPs.

Indian government expresses concern

India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has issued a statement expressing concern at continuing political instability in the Maldives, observing an “urgent need for dialogue and reconciliation among all political parties in Maldives in a peaceful and democratic manner.”

“We have seen reports related to the arrest of former Secretary General SAARC and other members of the Majlis in the Maldives earlier today,” said the MEA’s spokesperson.

“India urges the government of Maldives and all political parties to adhere strictly to democratic principles and the rule of law thus paving the way for the holding of free, fair and credible elections. Violence and coercive measures are not conducive to this end,” the MEA said.

“India has also been concerned at the occurrence of anti-India demonstrations and statements by a section in Maldives. A senior official of the government of India visited Maldives recently and conveyed our concerns in regard to recent developments in the country.

“The situation is being monitored closely keeping in view the need to ensure safety and security of Indians in Maldives and Indian interests in that country,” the statement concluded.

Coalition impact

The arrest of one of its MPs, Jabir, is likely to further strain the ruling coalition, particularly the executive’s relationship with the JP.

President Waheed last week sacked one of the JP’s cabinet ministers, Transport Minister Ahmed Shamheed.

The sacked minister, who on local media claimed he had “several differences” with the President, was removed from cabinet following the announcement of the extension of his party leader’s Maamigili Airport lease for 99 years.

Dhiyana Saeed – the Human Rights Minister, Jabir’s wife and another former SAARC Secretary General – is the JP’s other cabinet minister.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Parliament accepts bill potentially banning pork and alcohol from resorts

Parliament has narrowly voted to accept a bill that would potentially ban pork and alcohol completely from the Maldives, requiring resorts to cease serving haram (prohibited) products to foreign tourists.

The proposed amendment to the Contraband Act was initially submitted by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Nazim Rashad, who after the vote praised MPs’ “willingness to serve Islam”.

When presenting the bill, Nazim argued that the import of these products violated article 10(b) of the constitution which states that “no law contrary to any tenet of Islam shall be enacted in the Maldives.”

“We often hear rumours that people have alcohol at home in their fridge, available any time. We’ve heard that kids take alcohol to school to drink during their break. The issue is more serious than we think, it should not be ignored,” Nazim told the media, presenting the bill last week.

The vote was level with 24 MPs voting to accept the bill, and 24 to reject it, while 11 MPs abstained. Speaker Abdulla Shahid cast the deciding vote, in favour of accepting the bill.

The bill will now be sent to Parliament’s National Security Committee, which will assess it and potentially forward the proposal to parliament for a final vote on the matter.

Regulation permitting the sale of pork and alcohol in tourism establishments was passed by the Ministry of Economic Development in 1975. Parliament did not reject the regulation on the sale of pork and alcohol in 2009 following the introduction of the new constitution, thus allowing it to stand by default.

However the 2008 constitution explicitly states that no regulations against a tenet of Islam may be passed in the Maldives, in apparent contradiction of those laws allowing the import and sale of haram commodities.

After being asked in January for a consultative opinion over whether the Maldives could import pork and alcohol without violating the nation’s Shariah-based constitution, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the case on the grounds that the matter did not need to be addressed at the Supreme Court level.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Mariya Ahmed Didi this week told Minivan News that the issue of alcohol needed to be “clarified” and “addressed”.

“If this is a religious issue, that is if Islam bans sale of alcohol, it should not be sold in the Maldives as we are a 100 percent Islamic nation. If the sale is allowed, then the question to ask is whether alcohol is needed for the tourist trade to flourish,” she said.

She added that if alcohol proved to be a vital element in the tourism sector, then the sale of alcohol should be allowed for “registered places” to which a permit is given to accommodate tourists including resorts, safari boats and guest houses.

“If the objection to the sale of alcohol is on [religious] grounds, it should not be sold in places where Maldivians reside. But Maldivians do reside on resorts as employees. If we deny Maldivians the employment opportunities in the resorts, then the income from resorts will be restricted to those who own resorts, that would give way to increase in expatriate workers and foreign currency drainage,” she explained.

Jumhoree Party (JP) MP Abdulla Abdul Raheem – who voted in favour of accepting the bill – was reported by Sun as stating that as alcohol was banned under Islam, it was illegal in the Maldives to create laws and regulations concerning it.

The JP is headed by local resort tycoon, Gasim Ibrahim, who owns the Villa Hotels chain. According to customs records for 2011, those properties – including the Royal, Paradise, Sun, and Holiday Island resorts, in 2011 imported approximately 121,234.51 litres of beer, 2048 litres of whiskey, 3684 litres of vodka and 219.96 kilograms of pork sausages.

Gasim abstained on the vote, as did fellow resort owners Abdulla Jabir and Ahmed Hamza. Resort owner ‘Sun’ Shiyam voted in favour of accepting the bill.

Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali voted against accepting the bill, as did Independent MP Mohamed Nasheed and Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) Parliamentary Group Leader, Abdulla Yameen.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Government’s contract with Ruder Finn PR firm expires

The Maldivian government has concluded its contract with international public relations firm Ruder Finn, according to industry publication PR Week.

Head of the agency Nick Leonard told PR Week that the account had concluded upon reaching the end of its time frame.

Ruder Finn was selected in April by the new government to improve the Maldives’ international image, following widespread negative media coverage of February 7’s controversial transfer of power, at a reported cost of £93,000 per month (US$150,000).

Rumours in August that the contract had ended after six months were unconfirmed. Ruder Finn’s Senior Vice President and Ethics Officer Emmanuel Tchividjian at the time referred Minivan News to the government, “as we do not comment publicly on contracts that we have with our clients.”

In July, a small group of protesters gathered outside the PR firm’s London offices to mark Maldives Independence Day, including President Mohamed Waheed’s brother, Naushad Waheed Hassan.

The protest saw placards bearing slogans ‘Islamophobes and dictators’, ‘Ruder Finn: no client too toxic’ and ‘Gold medallists of spin: Ruder Finn’, according to PR Week.

Former International Spokesperson for the President’s Office, Paul Roberts, told Minivan News that a source inside Ruder Finn had revealed that the agency considered President Waheed “a lost cause from a PR point of view”.

“They said that the senior people in Ruder Finn worried that representing the Maldives government had damaged the company’s brand,” Roberts said.

Ruder Finn’s previous work includes the Philip Morris campaign disputing the health hazards of smoking, and publicising the release of the anti-Islamic film ‘Fitna’.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad confirmed that Ruder Finn had ceased working with the Maldivian government, but did not elaborate on the reason.

Journalist and climate activist Mark Lynas, formerly Nasheed’s climate advisor, has previously argued that the appointment of a such a large PR agency was counterproductive as it made journalists “doubly suspicious”.

The original request for proposals (RFP) document issued by the MMPRC on April 9 stated that the successful agency would be required to target stakeholders in the UK, USA, Commonwealth countries, “all relevant EU institutions”, academic institutions and NGOs, “arrange 1:1 meetings with influential and open minded potential champions”, and “arrange briefings to build links at various levels with the UK, US, Commonwealth and major European governments.”

The agency will “feed in academic arguments to those identified”, and “determine champions who are willing to speak publicly on Maldives”, in a bid to “Rally an alliance of support for the Maldives”.

Locally, the chosen company will be required to “assist with the roll out of policy and other announcements to media, parliamentarians,government, NGOs and others.”

Minivan News also sought clarification from Maldives Marketing and Public Relations Corporation (MMPRC) head Mohamed Maleeh Jamal, but he had not responded at time of press.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

President’s Special Advisor appeals to Indian PM to terminate GMR contract, warns of “rising extremism”

Special Advisor to President Mohamed Waheed and leader of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), Dr Hassan Saeed, has appealed to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh urging him to terminate the Maldives’ airport development contract with Indian infrastructure giant GMR.

GMR signed a 25 year concession agreement with the former administration to develop and manage Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA). Saeed’s DQP was vocally opposed to the deal while in opposition.

In a self-described “candid” letter to Singh dated September 19, obtained by Minivan News, Saeed claimed that “GMR and India ‘bashing’ is becoming popular politics”, and warned that “as a result, “the Maldives is becoming fertile ground for nationalistic and extremist politicians.”

“I want to warn you now that there is a real danger that the current situation could create the opportunity for these extremist politicians to be elected to prominent positions, including the Presidency and Parliament on an anti-GMR and anti-India platform,” Saeed informed Singh.

“That would not be in the interests of either the Maldives or India. You are well aware of the growing religious extremism in our country,” Saeed stated, in an apparent turnaround from the party’s former position.

Months prior to the downfall of Nasheed’s government in February, Saeed’s DQP published a pamphlet entitled ‘President Nasheed’s devious plot to destroy the Islamic faith of Maldivians’, which accused Nasheed of “working ceaselessly to weaken the Islamic faith of Maldivians, allow space for other religions, and make irreligious and sinful behaviour common.”

Specific allegations in the pamphlet against Nasheed’s administration included “fostering ties with Jews”, “holding discos”, “dancing”, permitting the consumption of alcohol, fraternising with “Christian priests”, characterising the Maldives as “a nest of terrorists and Maldivian scholars as terrorists”, failing to condemn comments by UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay opposing “Shariah punishments like flogging fornicators”, permitting senior female diplomats and party officials to wear skirts, and attending the Miss France 2011 Beauty Queen pageant on the night of the Holy Hajj.

“Nationalism and extremism in India’s backyard is not good for India or our small country,” Saeed informed Prime Minister Singh, in his letter.

Saeed went on to accuse GMR of extensive bribery, including the payment of “millions of dollars to buy MPs to get a parliamentary majority for the then ruling Maldivian Democratic Party”.

He claimed that “politicians and MPs who end up in GMR’s pocket keep silent but no one – with the exception of former President Nasheed and his key associates – have defended the indefensible GMR deal in public.”

“When politicians and legislators are unable to debate openly such important national issues and address them in an appropriate manner the public starts to look for alternative voices,” Saeed claimed.

“I fear that the only viable alternative for them appears to be nationalist and religious leaders, which could turn a bad situation ugly.”

Saeed advised Prime Minister Singh that “due to the negative connotations of the GMR issue, many positive elements of our relationship such as the vast amounts of grants and loans by India to the Maldives go unnoticed.”

Maldivian Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad in late October warned that the Maldives would be unable to pay state salaries 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 2012 as part of a US$100 million standby credit facility signed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in November 2011.

“Indians and the Indian government may find it difficult to understand the growing anti-Indian sentiments here in the Maldives in spite of the vast amount of aid and loans we receive from you,” Saeed informed Prime Minister Singh, and complained that all bilateral talks with India now “start with and end up on the subject of the GMR issue.”

“As a result many other crucial discussions are delayed or are tied up with GMR. Normally straightforward issues such as simplifying the Indian visa for Maldivians end up being tied into the GMR issue,” Saeed said.

Longstanding opposition

A second pamphlet produced by Saeed’s DQP while it was in opposition criticised GMR as “paving the way for the enslavement of Maldivians in our beloved land”, and warned that “Indian people are especially devious”.

“Maldivians feel our respect is taken for granted, our sovereignty infringed and that India is developing a ‘big brother’ approach to relations with us,” Saeed wrote to Singh on September 19.

“The Indian Foreign Secretary’s visit to our country in February [2012] failed to resolve the political crisis largely because India is no longer seen as a friendly and fair neighbour who could broker an honest and fair deal. It cannot help India’s international reputation to be seen as unable to resolve a crisis in its own backyard.”

Saeed furthermore informed Prime Minister Singh that “the Indian diplomatic corps in the Maldives appears to be so passionate in protecting GMR interests that one often gets confused as to whether they are GMR employees or diplomats representing the Indian government.”

The remarks echoed controversial comments by President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza at an anti-GMR rally on Friday – during which Riza accused Indian High Commissioner D M Mulay of protecting GMR’s interests and being “a traitor and enemy of Maldives and Maldivian people”.

Saeed claimed in his letter that “increasingly Maldivians believe that the unfair treatment of the Maldives by the Commonwealth is connected with GMR and India.”

“It appears to many Maldivians that Indian officials are using international leverage and contacts to influence Commonwealth governments and forcing the way the Maldives is governed, thus impinging on our sovereignty. Some Indian diplomats continuously remind our senior government officials that the Maldives would be removed from the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) agenda the moment the GMR issue is resolved,” Saeed claimed.

Growing tensions

For its part, GMR has downplayed its confrontation with the new government. However it admitted last month to India’s Business Standard publication that “public statements and press conferences of some government ministers and coalition party leaders are clearly aimed at arousing public sentiments against GMR and creating undue challenges for us.

“To gain political advantage, some elements of the government itself have started hampering the smooth functioning and development of the airport,” the company added.

The most recent surge of tension follows the company’s forwarding of a US$2.2 million bill to the government’s side of the contract – the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL).

The negative balance was the result a civil court case filed by Saeed’s DQP during the Nasheed administration, which blocked the company from levying an airport development charge (ADC) as stipulated in its concession agreement.

The Civil Court ruled in the DQP’s favour. Opting to honour the contract, the Nasheed administration instructed the company to deduct the ADC from its concession fees while it sought to appeal the matter.

The new government – which included the DQP – inherited the problem following the downfall of Nasheed’s government on February 7. In the first quarter of 2012 the government received US$525,355 of an expected US$8.7 million, after the deduction of the ADC. That was followed by a US$1.5 million bill for the second quarter, after the ADC payable eclipsed the revenue due the government.

Combined with the third quarter payment due, the government now owes the airport developer US$3.7 million.

Saeed concluded his letter to Prime Minister Singh by suggesting that India “assist us in terminating the GMR contract as soon as possible, well before the 2013 presidential election.”

Download the complete letter (English)

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Televised allegations by President spokeperson against Indian High Commissioner spark diplomatic incident

Additional reporting by Mohamed Naahii and Mariyath Mohamed.

The government has distanced itself from comments made at a rally on Friday by President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza, after his attacks against Indian High Commissioner D M Mulay were picked up and widely reported in Indian media.

During a rally organised by parties of the ruling coalition, calling for the seizure and nationalisation of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) from Indian infrastructure giant GMR, Riza described Mulay as a “traitor and enemy of the Maldives and the Maldivian people”, accusing him of taking bribes and threatening the government.

“Trade between the Maldives and India reaches billions. Indian tycoons have the biggest share in Maldives tourism. Indian people are deepest in Maldivian business. We have to protect the businesses of those who import and sell potatoes and onions from India. We also have to protect the businesses of those who import gravel and sand from India. It should not be GMR that [Mulay] should take into account,” Riza declared.

Riza alleged that Mulay had been using his influence as the High Commissioner to threaten the Maldivian government, following the calls against GMR.

“Today, like someone who has chilli smoke on his eyes, like someone who has ants at his feet who is threatening us Maldivians, the Indian ambassador here has forgotten what his job here in Maldives is. We are not in the mood to allow him to commit the crimes he is committing in our country,” he told to crowd.

“I saw two folks who work in the Indian embassy go out of [this gathering] talking to a Bangladeshi. They asked him to take photos of the gathering. When this Bangladeshi was here taking photos, I confronted him and asked who are you to take photos? He then said his name was Aboobakr. I told him to leave immediately, just the way I am saying GMR must also leave immediately,” Riza said.

Riza added that the Maldives and India will always remain “good friends” and that the people of Maldives are so interconnected with Indians, but the “problem is that there are a few Indian traitors who take bribes”.

“A diplomat’s job is to work for his country and people and not to protect the interests of one private company… He is a traitor and enemy of Maldives and Maldivian people. We don’t want these kind of diplomats on our soil,” Riza said.

“Today we are also calling on for something else. On the day when we get GMR out of the Maldives, Mulay must also get out of here!”

Following several nights of poorly-attended rallies at the artificial beach, Minivan News observed more than a thousand present on Friday.

Noticing an expatriate in attendance reading a copy of local Dhivehi newspaper Haveeru, Minivan News asked what he was doing: “Boss asked me to look Maldivian,” the expatriate replied.

Riza’s comments were widely reported in Indian media.

Television channel Times Now described the “vicious targeting of the Indian envoy as leaving “a bitter taste”, and sparking a “huge diplomatic row”.

At time of press the story had also been picked up by the Hindu and the Indian Express.

Indian response

The remarks were quickly met with concern and condemnation by the Indian High Commission, which issued a statement dismissing the Presidential spokesperson’s allegations as being “against the diplomatic protocol”.

“We have told the government of Maldives that settling issues of huge mutual interest cannot be done on public space or on stage. This has to be done through discussion,” the High Commission said in a statement.

The Indian High Commission also made it clear that India would safeguard its interests including the investments of Indian companies.

“Similarly, all agreements signed by the previous governments will also be safeguarded and as such we have expressed our concern in very strong words to the government of Maldives. And we have also conveyed that India would safeguard the country’s interest, including these related to our investment,” it added.

The statement noted that the government’s issues with GMR were now the subject of arbitration in Singapore.

“If arbitration fails they (GMR and the government of Maldives) could find mutually accepted recourse either by going to the court of law or may be finding other mechanism available,” the High Commission stated, noting that President Waheed had personally given assurances to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that all the Indian investments, including GMR, would be protected and safeguarded.

“Our relations have been very strong and lot of goodwill have been invested in it. India is the Maldives’ largest investment partner, India is the largest technical and capacity building partner. India’s trade, aid and development partnership is also the biggest one,” the statement concluded.

Maldivian government retreats

Following complaints from the Indian government, the Maldivian government issued a statement on Saturday dissociating itself from comments made by Riza “and some other government officials, at a gathering held last evening against the involvement of GMR in the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport.”

“The gathering was organised by certain political parties including some members of the public. The views expressed at the gathering by Mr Abbas Adil Riza, though his own views, are regrettable, and do not reflect the views of the Government of Maldives, particularly those made against the Indian High Commissioner to the Maldives Mr D. M. Mulay,” the statement added.

Media Secretary of President’s Office, Masood Imad, told local newspaper Haveeru that Riza could have made the statements in a more “diplomatic way” and added that the Ministry of Foreign affairs has begun looking into Riza’s statements.

Political parties on both sides of the political divide, including the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) and even Riza’s own Jumhoree Party (JP), condemned his remarks.

The DRP in a statement claimed that party was of the view that the government and President Waheed should both apologise to Mulay and that such concerns should be raised in a more “ethical” and “diplomatic” manner.

JP Leader Gasim Ibrahim stated that Riza’s comments “go against the international standards of diplomacy, we are saddened by it and condemn it.”

The MDP also released a statement condemning Riza’s remarks, adding that the “baseless criminal accusations” were “highly concerning”.

“These undiplomatic, irresponsible, vulgar statements made towards a high-ranking diplomat of a neighbouring nation were initiated by the President’s spokesperson at a public gathering that was televised nationwide. MDP further condemns in the strongest terms, the similar public statements made by the president of a political party and by other political leaders at the gathering,” the party said.

However the MDP also has a track record of making accusations against Mulay.

MDP Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik and former Former National Security Advisor Ameen Faisal in May alleged that Mulay had played down the tumultuous political turmoil and change of government on February 7 as an “internal matter”, despite being able to “see what was happening from his window. The whole coup was being telecast live. As a diplomat, he should’ve known that the whole country was in chaos.”

“[Mulay] became so powerful that he started behaving like the prime minister and not a high commissioner,” said Manik.

“In early 2011, we felt that Mulay was drifting away from the MDP. He wanted to meet leaders of opposition parties. He wanted to be invited to all official functions that took place in Maldives. He was invited to many government functions, but not all. We found that a lot of companies were coming [to the country] for business through Mulay. We were floating tenders for big projects. He would act like a middleman,” Manik alleged to Open magazine.

“Mulay would visit various [Maldivian] islands with his Indian friends, many of them businessmen. The government did not know who they were. Mulay has good connections with opposition parties, particularly Gayoom’s party,” he further claimed.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs responded at the time: “We do not think it is appropriate to bring our High Commissioner into the discourse. He enjoys our full confidence,” while Mulay himself at dismissed the allegations as “completely baseless, a flight of fancy.”

Cash-strapped Maldives turns to India

Friday’s diplomatic incident follows urgent warnings from Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad in late October that the Maldives would be unable to pay state salaries 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 at the time that he believed the loan was being delayed due to the ongoing controversy over GMR’s development of INIA.

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 Rf443.7 million (US$28.8 million), to be disbursed in monthly instalments over 12 months from July.

The overall deficit for government expenditure has already reached over MVR 2billion (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 this increased expenditure in the face of a pre-existing deficit represented the government “ignoring reality.”

Foreign investment concern

GMR is not the only Indian company to have expressed concern over political interference derailing their substantial investments in the country, according to a recent report in India’s Business Standard publication.

Officials involved in the Apex Realty housing development project – a joint venture between developers SG18 and Indian super-conglomerate TATA – told the Standard that the government was attempting to take over the site in Male’ given to the company, with the intention of building a new Supreme Court.

“A recent meeting held with the Maldivian Housing Minister is said to have ended abruptly with officials from the firm and the Indian High Commission being asked to leave,” the Standard reported.

GMR has meanwhile been forced to halt construction of the new terminal by the new government. Assorted parties now in the ruling coalition had opposed the handling of its concession agreement to manage and develop INIA while in opposition.

The company has previously sought to downplay its issues with the government in the media, however “public statements and press conferences of some government ministers and coalition party leaders are clearly aimed at arousing public sentiments against GMR and creating undue challenges for us,” the company told the Standard.

“To gain political advantage, some elements of the government itself have started hampering the smooth functioning and development of the airport,” the company added.

The comments follow a US$2.2 million bill handed to the government’s side of the airport contract – the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) – following a third quarter in which the airport developer deducted the airport development charge (ADC) stipulated in its contract from concession fees due the state – the consequence of a Civil Court ruling in September won by the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) while in opposition.

Combined with the third quarter payment due, the government now owes the airport developer US$3.7 million.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Q&A: Kirsty Brimelow, QC

Kirsty Brimelow QC is one of three UK legal experts on former President Mohamed Nasheed’s legal team. The new government has pursued criminal charges against Nasheed for his decision to detain Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, charges Nasheed contends are a politically-motivated attempt to prevent him from contesting the 2013 Presidential elections.

Brimelow is an experienced criminal law specialist with expertise in international human rights, and has worked in a number of small island states including Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago.

JJ Robinson: How much background knowledge did you have on the political situation in the Maldives prior to deciding to join Nasheed’s defence team?

Kirsty Brimelow: Very little other than the usual views of the Maldives as beautiful islands for romantic holidays – I had never been here before. I had heard about the climate change aspect of Maldives at the time of the Copenhagen summit – it was something I remember reading about. I thought that it would be terrible if Male’ was under water in 20 years.

JJ: How much had you followed the February 2012 transfer of power?

KB: No I hadn’t followed it. When I was contacted [to join Nasheed’s legal team] I looked it all up. I don’t know if it was reported in English newspapers. I don’t remember reading anything about it. At the time the news was dominated by news of Syria and starvation in the world’s youngest democracy, Sudan. I think they dominated the headlines, and the London Olympics more than anything else that was going on.

JJ: What was behind your decision to join Nasheed’s legal team?

KB: As an international lawyer there is a real interest in how rule of law operates in different jurisdictions. In recent years I’ve done a lot of work in small island states – I am Legal Advisor to the Constitution Commission of Fiji, I worked in Trinidad and Tobago as part of the team defending the chief justice, and was appointed Counsel to a Commmision of Inquiry into a massive international fraud inquiry in Antigua. I have also worked in Jamaica.

I suppose I am interested in the Maldives as a new democracy, and how that struggle is being played out. I am also really interested in the Maldives both as international and human rights lawyer. I have real interest in fairness of procedures and that there are independent and impartial judges. No court system can operate if you have biased judges, or judges who are of a standard such that justice cannot be carried out.

JJ: How much do you know about the Maldivian judiciary and its condition?

KB: I’ve read a couple of reports which have the same conclusion – that the judiciary is not functioning at a level that can deliver justice. But I read these reports as background – I have really been concentrating on this specific case.

JJ: The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) have made a case on the basis of challenging the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Magistrate Court where Nasheed is being tried, rather than defending the specific charges against him. Do you think this is a good approach, and can you argue that in court: “I don’t respect your legitimacy, your honour”?

KB: There are different arguments going on at the moment. The high court application [regarding the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Court] is a legitimate argument accepted as such by the Attorney General. It is a jurisdictional public law matter now removed from criminal law.

The validity of the jurisdiction of courts is fundamental – people can’t just set up their own courts because they feel like it, and they can’t just put in who they like as judges of that court. It has to be done in a transparent and independent way in order for the courts to have any respect.

JJ: Why should courts care about the respect of the public?

KB: The general public in any democratic society cares about its justice system because that underpins its democratic society. If you think your justice system is corrupt – that whatever evidence you have when you’re in court will be ignored because you have a corrupt system – then that is bad for democracy.

Democracy can’t survive with a corrupt justice system. I think people do care about that. But obviously the select people who want to keep it corrupt, don’t.

JJ: This is the first time there has been foreign legal representation applying to appear in the Criminal Court, as far as I’m aware. Are you allowed in?

KB: At the moment there is apparently a policy that says you have to be Maldivian and/or married to a Maldivian to appear in court. It is very restrictive. It is going to be a matter we are going to challenge.

It obviously depends on the particular country, but most small island states have developed a system where foreign lawyers are able to practice within that system on a case by case basis. For example I have appeared [in court] in the Caribbean. The reason is that the smaller the place the smaller the pool of lawyers, and the bigger the case, the more political difficulties and influences that could be brought to bear on people from that society. So if you bring someone in from outside it can bring the balance back.

It is also a good way to increase knowledge and expertise. For example my knowledge is based on international human rights law, whereas if you are practicing in a small state you don’t have that comfort of being able to specialise. International law is not foreign law – it is part of the law of the Maldives, and to develop it you need that knowledge running through [the system]. The way you do that is allow international lawyers.

The Maldivian lawyers I’m working with are keen to make the application so that I could represent President Nasheed in court together with them. It would be their application on my behalf.

JJ: Dhivehi can make the country quite inaccessible to outsiders – to what extent is that a challenge in this case?

KB: Of course it’s a challenge and as to how it would operate [in court], nobody’s ever tried it before. As far as I understand English is widely spoken fluently, and i’m told many Maldivians prefer to speak English. Obviously it would have to be translated in court – but that happens in many jurisdictions with no difficulty. I don’t see it as meaning that the position would be impossible – there would have to be systems in place.

JJ: The judges on the panel hearing Nasheed’s trial were appointed by the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), and include two of Nasheed’s direct political opponents – Jumhoree Party Leader Gasim Ibrahim and Speaker of Parliament, Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) MP Abdulla Shahid. In this environment, and given the politicisation of the case, is it reasonable to expect that Nasheed can have a fair trial at all in the Maldives?

KB: I think at present if the trial were to go ahead in the Hulhumale Court, as presently constituted, there are real issues as to whether there is any chance at all as to whether Nasheed will have a fair trial. There are real issues and real concerns.

JJ: What is the approach then? The MDP has challenged the court’s legitimacy, but what about defending Nasheed’s decision to detain the Chief Judge of the Crimnial Court? Would you advise defending these charges or lean towards challenging the court’s legitimacy?

KB: Nasheed at his recent rally said that based on the evidence served against him, he should be acquitted.

The trial has two aspects: there are real issues as to fairness and those aspects fall into two categories, which relate to the court itself, which will be argued further, and the second aspect relates to the ability of President Nasheed to properly defend himself. I can’t go into details because those submissions have not been made to the trial court.

JJ: How similar are the challenges in the Maldives compared to other small island states?

KB: Each place is very different – but a common thread is the real difficulty getting a neutral tribunal to consider the evidence. Most countries have a problem where so much is in the newspapers already that people have formed opinions by the time the matter comes to court. In fact the trial is run in the newspaper, usually against the defendant, who isn’t in a position to present his defence in the newspaper as well, so it becomes one-sided and by the time the case comes to court people have the view that the person is guilty.

That would not happen in a larger jurisdiction where there are all sorts of laws to prevent people coming to court with a closed mind. That’s a problem here.

The Maldives has specific problems, such as those documented issues in relation to the judiciary, and those issues are quite extreme and are not found in many other small island states I’ve worked in. Many of those states such as Jamaica have a strong judiciary.

JJ: What would be some of those concerning issues?

KB: I don’t want to be upsetting the trial. I can quote from the reports though. Things like the statistics of those serving in the judiciary with criminal convictions and so on. It must be a concern to a fair minded observer as to what sort of justice is being dispensed if you are appearing before someone with criminal convictions, for example. That kind of thing is what I mean.

JJ: To what extent do you think the trial of Nasheed could be a catalyst for judicial reform in the Maldives?

KB: I think it is an important trial for the Maldives, and it could be a catalyst for reform in that the issues which are being raised are fundamental to a functioning justice system, and they are serious, so it should at the very least trigger debate in parliament in a democratic country.

There has to be a robust system which will regulate judges objectively, so someone coming to court can have faith in the system. If there is no check on judges in terms of their independence and honesty, as well as ability, then the courts just simply become a means of reaching a preordained result that everyone has already predicted.

Then quite simply it is not a justice system – it is a figleaf. Everything else flows from that – stability, fairness in terms of elections, parliament; if you’ve got a vacuum in your justice system you quite simply don’t have democracy.

You have to have a robust system to deal with complaints [against the judiciary]. In international law and particularly the Convention of Civil and Political Rights it sets out that privileges and immunities for judges can only go so far, and that they are not meant to stretch to afford protection ‘no matter what’.

My interest is in fair trial procedures, and that fair trial rights are upheld. There are real issues in this case, which is why I’m part of the legal team.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Indian investors concerned about government’s political interference: Business Standard

Indian companies operating in the Maldives are expressing concerns over political interference they claim is derailing their substantial investments in the country, reports India’s Business Standard publication.

After being elected in 2008, former President Mohamed Nasheed moved the Supreme Court into the opulent palace of his predecessor, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, opting for the less lavish building of Muleaage as the Presidential residence.

“A recent meeting held with the Maldivian Housing Minister is said to have ended abruptly with officials from the firm and the Indian High Commission being asked to leave,” the Standard reported.

President Mohamed Waheed’s Media Secretary, Masood Imad, confirmed to the publication that the meeting had taken place, and said the minister had given them time, even though it was “unannounced”.

“I am told that the meeting continued for about an hour. TATA Housing officials were raising issues that were not in the contract but the Minister accommodated most of the issues. Most of the issues discussed were procedural,” Masood was reported as saying.

A source involved in the deal confirmed to Minivan News that the government had offered land in Hulhumale’ to the developers as an alternative to the agreed site in Male’. However, the same source said the developers felt the change would affect the financing of the project.

Minivan News was awaiting a response from the Indian High Commission at time of press.

GMR grievance

Indian infrastructure giant GMR has also raised concerns about the new government’s handling of its concession agreement to manage and develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), signed with the former administration.

“To gain political advantage, some elements of the government itself have started hampering the smooth functioning and development of the airport,” the company added.

Moreover, the government was passing new laws and policies that were harming its interests.

“GMR was granted required approvals and licenses to operate Arrival Duty Free on December 30, 2011. We made huge investments in development of arrival duty free area. However, the government later revoked the licence citing that earlier the licence was given in error,” the company told the Standard.

“Similarly, On April 23, 2012, the GoM (Government of Maldives) passed an amendment to Business Registration Bill to restrict any foreigner to carry on Duty Free business, cargo clearance business, and bonded warehouse business at the airport. This step is clearly directed against GMR.”

The comments follow a US$2.2 million bill handed to the government’s side of the airport contract – the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) – following a third quarter in which the airport developer deducted its contractually-mandated airport development charge (ADC) from concession fees due the state.

Combined with the third quarter payment due, the government now owes the airport developer US$3.7 million.

The US$25 ADC, stipulated in the developer’s concession agreement signed with the Nasheed government, was to be levied on all outgoing passengers at INIA.

However, the former opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) – now part of the coalition government – in late 2011 filed a successful case in the Civil Court challenging the legality of the charge on the grounds that it was a tax not approved by parliament.

Nasheed’s government instructed MACL to deduct the ADC from the concession fees due the government while it sought to appeal. However soon afterwards Nasheed resigned in controversial circumstances, handing power to his Vice President, who swiftly replaced much of the government with appointments from the former opposition.

Speaking to the Standard, Masood said that the government “will not target any investment, Indian or otherwise unduly. The assurances given by the President securing foreign investments in Maldives are valid and stand true.”

However Attorney General Azima Shukoor told media this morning that “After the necessary research, we have said that the GMR agreement causes financial loss to the state.”

She expressed confidence that the government would win the case in the Singapore court of arbitration, the next hearing of which is to be held on November 19.

“I would like to point out that the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) still hasn’t finished the complete investigation into the GMR matter. This also presents difficulties for us, she said.

“I have met with the heads of ACC and Auditor General two, three times. I can’t say anything about the investigations. But I haven’t heard back anything after I shared the information I had available with them.”

Other elements of the government have also persistently called for the airport’s nationalisation.

DQP Leader Dr Hassan Saeed, now Waheed’s Special Advisor, at the launch of a book (in Dhivehi) last month criticising the airport development, said that the “only way to reclaim the airport from GMR” was to invalidate or cancel the concession agreement.

Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel – also a DQP member – said at the launch that it was the “duty of the most capable people in the country” to step forward and help “liberate” the nation from “grave problems” during the current “difficult times”.

The religious Adhaalath Party, likewise aligned with the current government – in September called for a “national jihad” to nationalise the airport development.

Another government-aligned party, the Jumhoree Party (JP) headed by resort tycoon, media owner and member of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) Gasim Ibrahim, has also called for the nationalisaiton of the airport.

In September Gasim urged the government in to reclaim the airport, even at a cost of US$700 million, as it was worth “a thousand times more”.

Gasim’s comments followed GMR’s decision to suspend the credit facility for his Villa Air airline, due to unpaid bills totaling MVR 17 million (US$1.1 million) for fuel, ground handling and passenger service fees.

In late September GMR sponsored the inaugural Maldives Travel Awards, held on Gasim’s Paradise Island resort.

Paradise won the title of ‘Leading Business Hotel’, while Gasim’s Villa group of companies also picked up an award for ‘Leading Domestic Airport’. Gasim himself received a ‘Lifetime Achievement’ award.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)