Author: JJ Robinson

Court orders former President Nasheed confined to Male

The Hulhumale Magistrate Court has ordered that former President Mohamed Nasheed be confined to Male’, ahead of a court case concerning his detention of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed while in office.

“It’s a notice to the accused issued by the Hulhumale’ court and restricts his movements to Male’ City. The notice says he can only travel out of Male’ City with the prior permission of the Hulhumale’ Court,” said Chairperson of Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Mariya Ahmed Didi.

Meanwhile, Nasheed was also summoned to the Civil Court on October 2 accused of defamation, for allegedly calling Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim a “traitor”. Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz has filed a similar case.

The restriction on Nasheed’s movements comes days before the party is due to begin its election campaign in the southern atolls, and days after Nasheed’s return from the UK where he met Foreign Secretary William Hague and spoke at the Royal Commonwealth Society.

“This is very serious for us as a party, because we have a huge campaign coming up in the south, from October 1-13,” explained the party’s spokesperson, Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, observing that a third of the party’s MPs also faced court action.

“We plan to visit most of the islands in the southern two provinces, and it’s all been scheduled. This all looks very ‘Myanmar’ – using the courts and administrative manipulation to restrict political party activity. At a time when President Waheed is lobbying the Commonwealth to remove the Maldives from its human rights watch-list, his regime has detained the leader of the opposition.”

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad told Reuters that the ruling was a judicial matter and that the government would not interfere.

However Ghafoor contended that while “Waheed likes to hide behind the fig leaf of judicial independence, the UN Human Rights Council, Amnesty International and other NGOs have highlighted that the judiciary is bias and effectively controlled by elements in the regime.”

The Department of Judicial Administration has meanwhile told local media that the travel ban was routine for defendents in upcoming court cases.

“It is standard procedure followed by all courts to necessitate those accused in a case to obtain permission from the relevant court to leave the country under Article 23 and 24 of the Court regulation,” a court official told Haveeru.

Nasheed, together with former Chief of Defense Forces Moosa Ali Jaleel, retired Brigadier-General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad, are accused of illegally detaining Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed during Nasheed’s final days in office.

Nasheed’s government accused the judge of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, having links with organised crime and “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist” so as to protect key figures of the former dictatorship from human rights and corruption cases.

Nasheed justified the judge’s arrest based on his constitutional mandate to protect the constitution, after the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) complied with an injunction from the civil court preventing further investigation of the judge for ethical misconduct, and the failure of Parliament’s Independent Commissions Committee to hold the judicial watchdog accountable.
The then-opposition began nightly protests over the matter, while the government sought assistance from the UN and Commonwealth for urgent judicial reform. However Nasheed resigned on February 7 amid a police and military mutiny the day after the Commonwealth team arrived.

General Didi, who was serving as the Male’ area commander at the time of Judge Abdulla’s arrest, penned his “premature” resignation” after 32 years of service in the military upon the Prosecutor decision to prosecute him.

Ex-Chief of Defence Force Jaleel had also retired following the controversial transfer of power on February 7, while Colonel Ziyad has maintained he would be present in his uniform to defend himself in the court.

The case was sent to Hulhumale Court rather than the Criminal Court in Male’ due to apparent concerns over a conflict of interest, however it was initially rejected by the court on the courts it did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case.

The court was obliged to accept the case on resubmission by the Prosecutor General after a High Court appeal. Despite the case being sent to Hulhumale, the trial is to be held in the Justice Building in Male’.

Nasheed has specifically been charged with violating Article 81 of the Penal Code, which states that the detention of a government employee who has not been found guilty of a crime is illegal.

If found guilty, Nasheed will face a jail sentence or banishment for three years or a Rf 3000 (US$193.5) fine, a sentence that would bar him from contesting the elections.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

ACC approaches Finance Committee over Nexbis system

The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has told Parliament’s Finance Committee that the deal with Malaysian mobile security provider Nexbis will cost the Maldives MVR 2.5 billion (US$162 million) in potential lost revenue over the lifetime of the contract.

The border control system is now up and running at Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), after a Supreme Court ruling in early September favouring Nexbis ended almost two years of efforts by the ACC to block the project.

Under the ‘build operate and transfer’ (BOT) agreement with Nexbis, the government is obliged to pay Nexbis US$2 for every foreign passenger processed and US$15 for every work permit for the 20 year lifespan of the contract. Nexbis remains responsible for the upgrading, servicing and administration of the system.

Former Immigration Controller Abdulla Shahid has expressed concern over both the cost and necessity of the project, calculating that with continued growth in tourist numbers Nexbis would be earning US$200 million in revenue over the 20 year lifespan of the agreement.

At five percent, royalties to the government would come to US$10 million, Shahid said, when there was little reason for the government not be earning the revenue itself by operating a system given by a donor country.

“The option was there to establish the system for free,” stated ACC President Hassan Luthfee, revealing that the US government had offered a free system in 2009.

“Even the Indian government had offered to do it for free. On the other hand this could have been done for MVR2.3-2.5 million. So we can’t believe that this should be done at such a high cost,” Luthfee told the committee.

Other contentions raised by the ACC included a “questionable” project evaluation, which the commission alleged violated protocols of the National Planning Council.

“The National Planning Council’s protocols say that anything passed by the council cannot be changed by any other relevant institution unless it is sanctioned by the Council itself or the ministerial cabinet. But without following the said two protocols, Immigration made major changes to the proposal,” ACC’s investigation officer Mohamed Sodig was reported as saying in local media.

Evaluations and bid criteria had been unclear, the ACC alleged, further claiming that the validity of the Nexbis bid had been 90 days which had expired at the time the price bids were opened.

“We tried to determine whether the validity of the proposal or bid of Nexbis had been extended. However, we failed to find a single document that had done so, and marks had been given for Nexbis’ price bid,” Sodig was reported as stating.

The commission also claimed that minutes for one government meeting to discuss the project had taken place during prayer time on Friday October 15, 2010, which the commission claimed was “highly suspicious in a 100 percent Muslim country”.

The ACC also contended that the charging of a fee for passengers and foreign workers constituted a tax and was in violation of Article 97 of the constitution, requiring parliamentary approval for new or altered taxation. In an apparent precedent, a similar ruling from the Civil Court in late 2011 overruled airport developer GMR’s ability to levy an Airport Development Charge (ADC), despite this being stipulated in the developer’s concession agreement with the government.

The Supreme Court has meanwhile cleared the way for the border control project, invalidating an earlier injunction from the High Court.

The move prompted complaints from the ACC, which expressed concern and frustration over the decision stating that it has put the commission in a state of limbo and deprived it of purpose.

“If this institution is simply an investigative body, then there is no purpose for our presence,” he said. “Even the police investigate cases, don’t they? So it is more cost effective for this state to have only the police to investigate cases instead of the ACC,” Luthfee said at the time.

Outside the dispute over its legality, with the project now running the collection of biometric data by immigration allows the government to identify people without paper documents – useful in a country where a third the population are imported workers, and where the confiscation of passports by employers is common practice.

The reaction from tourists to the new system has however been mixed.

“The immigration process now takes a lot of time to complete because they must now take fingerprints and pictures of people entering the country,” observed a German visitor.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Radicalisation threatens tourism, Nasheed tells UK press

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has told UK media that growing concessions towards Islamic radicalisation in the Maldives could threaten the country’s upmarket tourism industry.

“I think that is the direction we are going. They are talking about alcohol-free resorts, about getting non-drinking tourists to come in from Iran. I can easily imagine holidaymakers being prosecuted for kissing in public, as in some Muslim countries,” Nasheed told the UK’s Telegraph newspaper.  The former president also noted recent calls from the country’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs to ban mixed-gender dancing, and dancing by adolescent girls.

“If the country is being radicalised every day, then the staff in the resorts, and their families, are being radicalised also. That must have some impact on the resorts in the medium and long term,” Nasheed warned.

The current government this week said it would reject any such proposed ban on mixed-gender dancing, telling international media that the Maldives remained a “very tolerant society”.

Speaking to the UK’s Independent newspaper, Nasheed said he “feared that anti-Western feeling had dramatically increased recently within the country – fuelled by political instability – with the potential for attacks.”

“I don’t know why they haven’t blown up anything in the Maldives,” Nasheed told the paper. “Right now [maybe] they are thinking that strategically it isn’t good for them to do anything in the Maldives. Maybe they are using our national accounts. Maybe they are using our banks. Maybe it is a good place for recruitment.”

Nasheed observed that Maldivian nationals had been found to have been connected with al-Qa’ida attacks in Pakistan and India, and said he had had regular meetings with Western intelligence agencies during his time in office.

The international community had, he said, “thought that the game was over as soon as [the former president, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom] was gone. But there is such a great need to build political parties, to support an independent judiciary, to install more liberal ideas.”

“We need to come up with a narrative other than the radical Islamic narrative because that is the only one there is at the moment. Unless we are able to understand the mistakes that have been made in the Maldives, we are bound to see the same thing happening elsewhere in Arab Spring countries.”

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad and Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb were not responding to calls at time of press regarding the comments.

Religious rhetoric has a become a fixture of the Maldives’ political landscape, most significantly when the disparate former opposition last year found common cause on December 23 by holding a mass rally against Nasheed’s perceived liberalism.

During President Mohamed Waheed’s first public rally as leader in late February, he declared: “Be courageous. Today you are all mujaheddin [those who fight jihad] who love the nation. We will overcome all dangers faced by the nation with steadfastness.”

“We will not back down an inch. Today, the change [in power] in the Maldives is what Allah has willed. This did not happen because of one or two people coming out into the streets. Nobody had been waiting for this. Nobody even saw this day. This change came because Allah willed to protect Islam and the decent Maldivian norms,” Waheed stated.

Earlier this week the religious Adhaalath party added to the coalition government’s rhetoric against Indian infrastructure giant GMR, calling for a “national jihad” to take back the airport from the developer.

The resort industry, famed and marketed for idealising Western hedonistic excess, has traditionally kept a safe distance from religion and politics. Technically under the Constitution, no law can be enacted against a tenet of Islam, which potentially affects those relevant to the import, sale and service of products such as pork and alcohol. The resort islands are classified as ‘uninhabited’ under Maldivian law.

Following the December 23 rally, Nasheed temporarily met one of the gatherings’ demands – the closure of spas – and applied it to the entire country, not just its inhabited islands.

While the Maldives Association of Tourism Industry (MATI) began legal action, Nasheed demanded the Supreme Court decisively state once and for all whether the Maldives could import pork and alcohol without violating the nation’s Shariah-based constitution. It declined to do so.

Following the transfer of power on Feburary 7, Nasheed’s opponents – some of them resort owners – continued to challenge him on religious grounds.

Leader of the Jumhoree Party (JP) Gasim Ibrahim, a local resort tycoon, in August reportedly called for a “jihad” to protect Maldivian society from “Nasheed’s antics”.

“The time has come to undertake a Jihad in the name of Allah to protect our religion, culture and nation. Such a sacrifice must be made to restore peace and stability in the nation,” Gasim declared.

Meanwhile, according to 2011 customs records, Gasim’s Villa Hotels chain – including the Royal, Paradise, Sun, and Holiday Island resorts, that year imported 121,234.51 litres of beer, 2048 litres of whiskey, 3684 litres of vodka and 219.96 kilograms of pork sausages, among other commodities considered haram (prohibited) under Islamic law.

“Un-Islamic behaviour is un-Islamic behaviour whether it is in Malé or in a resort,” Nasheed observed to the Telegraph.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

GMR leadership to visit Maldives as government parties escalate nationalisation rhetoric

Board members and the head of Indian infrastructure giant GMR, G M Rao, are due to visit the Maldives later this week in a bid to resolve tensions with the government over the company’s development of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

The upcoming visit follows a meeting between Rao and former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom at a hospital in India where Gayoom’s wife was being treated. Gayoom also recently met with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

GMR won a 25 year concession agreement to develop and manage the airport during the Nasheed administration. The opposition at the time challenged the government’s privatisation and threatened to renationalise the airport should it come to power.

Following the controversial transfer of power on February 7, the unity government under President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has swung between issuing reassurances within diplomatic circles that Indian investments in the country would be protected, while locally stepping up nationalisation rhetoric.

Some of the dissent has blurred the line between business and politics.

Leader of the government-aligned Jumhooree Party (JP), resort tycoon Gasim Ibrahim, urged the government in local media 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.

Contentious airport development charge

One of the government’s disagreements with GMR concerns the charging of a US$25 Airport Development Charge (ADC) on outgoing passengers, as stipulated in the concession agreement.

During the last months of the Nasheed administration, the opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) filed a successful case in the Civil Court blocking this fee from being charged on the grounds that was effectively a tax which had not been approved by parliament. DQP leader Dr Hassan Saeed, now President Waheed’s special advisor, and DQP Vice-President Dr Mohamed Jameel – the new Home Minister – justified their disapprobation while in opposition by publishing a pamphlet in Dhivehi (English translation).

The pamphlet described the deal as “paving the way for the enslavement of Maldivians in our beloved land”, and warning that “Indian people are especially devious”.

To abide by the court decision, Nasheed’s government agreed to subtract the ADC from its concession revenue while it sought to appeal.

Following February 7 the opposition inherited that  compromise and in the first quarter of 2012 received only US$525,355 of an anticipated US$8.7 million.

With no resolution, in the second quarter of 2012 the government was presented with a bill for US$1.5 million, due to a shortfall in airport income. The loss of revenue comes at a time when the country is facing a crippling budget deficit, a foreign currency shortage, plummeting investor confidence, spiraling expenditure, and a drop off in foreign aid.

GMR publicly offered to resolve the ADC dispute by exempting Maldivian nationals from paying the fee, but has otherwise kept its negotiations largely behind closed doors.

In a statement at the time, GMR noted that the government received US$33 million in 2011 from airport concession fees, “three times the money the government ever made in a year [from the airport] before privatisation.”

Following construction of the new terminal in 2015 – including “a state-of-the-art 600,000 square foot integrated Passenger Terminal and a 20,000 square foot VIP terminal, and various other airside and landside developments,” expected revenue from the airport to the government was expected to reach US$50 million per year, GMR observed, and almost US$100 million from 2021 as passenger numbers increased.

“In effect, GMR Male’ International Airport Limited’s contribution to the government would be over US$2 billion over the concession period of 25 years, which will make a very significant contribution to the economy of the Maldives.”

The government’s airport company, Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL), complained that it was now facing bankruptcy as a result of the ADC deduction, and insisted that it could make MVR 60 billion (US$3.9 billion) over 25 years by developing and operating the airport on its own. It did not clarify where the investment would come from.

If the government considered GMR’s public offer, it made no sign. Instead, the Transport Minister backed MACL in ordering GMR to pay back the money deducted.

MACL Managing Director Mohamed Ibrahim had told local media that MACL’s agreement with GMR under the previous government to deduct the ADC payment was “null and void”.  He told reporters that the deal was no longer relevant as it had been agreed by the former MACL chairman, who had been replaced under the new government.  Ibrahim contended that charges could therefore no longer be deducted from GMR’s concession payment.

“We had informed [GMR] that the letter from the former Chairman of MACL was now invalid and hence must not be followed. In addition we had also informed that no deductions can be made from the concession fee,” he told local newspaper Haveeru.

The matter has now been sent to the Singapore court of arbitration, as per the concession agreement.

Escalation

The stand-off escalated in early August following a stop work order on the new terminal development, after the government alleged there were missing planning permissions from the Civil Aviation Authority.

“When the government decides that a project be stopped, we will make sure this happens,” said President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza at the time. “GMR have not discussed the construction with relevant authorities,” he claimed.

In the past week the government and assortment of former opposition parties now in power have stepped up their campaign to pressure the airport developer, with cabinet ministers holding a press conference during which they accused the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC) of “negligence” and “irresponsibility” in conducting the original bidding process.

The IFC dismissed the allegations: “The IFC’s advice complied with Maldivian laws and regulations and followed international best practices at each step of the bidding process to ensure the highest degree of competitiveness, transparency and credibility of the process,” the organisation stated.

Attorney General Azima Shukoor then announced she had asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether it had jurisdiction over the airport agreement.

“It is against the International laws and the United Nations Charter that any action that undermines any sovereign right of a sovereign state, it is clear that courts of a sovereign nation has the jurisdiction to look into any matter that takes place within the boundaries of that state as according to the constitution and laws of that state,” read a statement from the court.

“Even though a contract has an arbitration clause giving right to arbitrate in a foreign court does not limit a local courts jurisdiction to look into the formed contract, and it is clear that such limitations are in violation of UN Charters principles of sovereign equality, principle of sovereignty non intervention within domestic jurisdiction, principle of self determination rights,” the Supreme Court said, in an apparent affirmative.

Investor confidence

Meanwhile, the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) this week revealed President Waheed’s response to its letter requesting details of the implications of exiting the concession agreement with GMR – an apparent fee of US$700 million, although Minivan News understands that even if the government were to produce the money, under the concession agreement it would also be required to prove ‘public interest’ in the Singapore court of arbitration.

According to the DRP, President Waheed advised that it would be “extremely difficult” to make the payment given the country’s economic circumstances, and that cancelling the agreement would furthermore have a negative impact both on perception of the Maldives as a favourable destination for foreign investors, and Maldives-India relations.  Dr Waheed emphasised that the decision was ultimately one for the political parties in the unity government.

The following day, DRP MP Ali Azim called on President Waheed to resign, claiming that it was up to him to reach a decision.

“If Waheed is finding it too hard to come to a decision on the matter of GMR, he ought to resign immediately,” Azim told local media.

“Each of these parties have someone who is looking forward to running in the 2013 elections. Whether it be Gasim, Yameen or Thasmeen, they are all just waiting for 2013 to come around. Now if Waheed’s going to ask these men for advice, then he’s going to get tricked, isn’t he?” predicted the MP.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Marine biologist discovers turtle, shark slaughter in Maldives’ UNESCO biosphere reserve

A marine biologist working in the Baa Atoll UNESCO Biosphere Reserve has reported the discovery of the remains of a baby shark and endangered sea turtle barbecue on the uninhabited island of Funadhoo, one of the country’s 14 priority nesting beaches legally protected under Maldivian law.

Marine biologist with local environmental consultancy Seamarc, Sylvia Jagerroos, was participating in a beach clean up on August 24 with local people when the group came across the scene.

“We had removed fishing lines, nets, and other marine debris and of course all the garbage from the beach. This consisted mainly of plastic bottles, and that day we found many red bull cans,” she said.

The group then discovered the slaughtered remains of a large, one metre adult nesting green turtle and 2-3 newborn lemon sharks, “still smoking on the barbecue”, surrounded by smashed eggshells.

“We found where the killing took place, there was a lot of blood in the sand, and maybe what was the trace of the turtle crawling to try and nest. I don´t know if she was killed before or after the nesting. I didn’t find any nest, so if there was one then probably all the eggs were eaten already,” Jagerroos said.

“I went snorkeling and found the remains of the turtle in the nearby waters, including the head. Some bones and flippers, were discarded a couple of meters from the barbecue. I also found the remains of baby lemon sharks on the barbecue. The lemon sharks was a newborn sized only around 50-60 cm, the meat had been removed and eaten. My theory is that they saw the green turtle nesting and killed her immediately, while slaughtering and throwing in the pieces in the ocean. The baby sharks were attracted to the smell and since they swim in very shallow waters it’s a piece of cake to catch them.”

Jagerroos noted that the Maldives had proclaimed itself the world’s second shark sanctuary in March 2009.

“For a marine biologist to find a juvenile sickle fin lemon shark on the grill when this creature is listed as “Vulnerable on the red list” with the World Conservation Union (IUCN), and is already extinct in many nearby countries, hurts,” she said.

The catching and consumption of turtles is banned across the Maldives, and turtles – together with many other species – are especially protected in the biosphere reserve.

However turtle eggs are considered a local delicacy and can fetch up to MVR 10 each – a single nest can contain between 100-200. The practice is generally not illegal, but is prohibited on the country’s nesting islands.

Marine biologists working on resorts in the atoll have also privately complained of boatloads of local poachers sneaking onto the islands at night without lights or noisy engines, after hearing of the discovery of a nest of eggs. In some instances, resorts have been forced to post security guards to protect the nests from poachers.

Baa Atoll was in June 2011 added to the UN body’s global list of biosphere reserves after five years of lobbying by the government, placing it in the company of world famous sites such as the Komodo in Indonesia, Uluru (Ayer’s Rock) in Australia and the Galapagos Islands.

The Baa Atoll Biosphere Reserve was officially launched alongside with Baa Atoll Conservation Fund by President Mohamed Waheed in July 2012 at a ceremony in the atoll’s capital of Eydhafushi. At the ceremony, the UNDP presented a cheque for US$250,000 as a contribution to the fund, on behalf of the Global Environment Facility (GEF).

Jagerroos said the team had called the Environmental Protection Authority’s (EPA) ranger at Hanifaaru Bay – a world famous habitat for mantas and whale sharks – “and he said they’d look into it. But they’d have to patrol the whole area – it’s too big,” she acknowledged.

Director General of the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) Ibrahim Naeem said he was not aware of the incident or that it had been reported to the Hanifaaru Bay ranger, and referred Minivan News to the Ministry of Fisheries which he said was responsible for sharks and turtles.

“It is not allowed to catch and eat turtles. There is no such ban for eggs. Even in the biosphere there are actions that are allowed,” Naeem said.

Minivan News is seeking comment from the Ministry of Fisheries.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

CNI report “turning point for the Maldives to leave the past behind”: McKinnon

The Commonwealth Secretary-General’s Special Envoy to the Maldives, Sir Donald McKinnon, has described the report by the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) as a “turning point for the country to leave the past behind and move forward.”

The report, focused on the events of February 6 to 8, claimed there was no evidence to support allegations by former President Mohamed Nasheed that he was ousted in a coup d’état, that his resignation was under duress, or that there was any mutiny by the police and military. It also urges action be taken against police for human rights abuses committed on February 6-8.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed accepted the report, subject to reservations, but criticised it as leaving the Maldives “in a very awkward, and in many ways, very comical” situation, “where toppling the government by brute force is taken to be a reasonable course of action. All you have to do find is a narrative for that course of action.”

In a statement, McKinnon said “The Commission’s report provides key recommendations on issues that need to be addressed to strengthen democratic practice in Maldives. I am heartened to hear the commitment of the government to take forward key reforms to strengthen democratic institutions.”

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel has meanwhile said responsibility for investigating and taking action against police lay with the Police Integrity Commission (PIC).

However President of the PIC Shahinda Ismail has publicly expressed concern over the commission toothlessness.

Article 44 of the Police Act states that any parties handed recommendations by the PIC can choose not to act on them if they inform the commission of the decision in writing.

“[Jameel] is not really bound by the act,” Ismail said, stating that this clause had already resulted in the Home Minister ignoring recommendations forwarded to him.

The PIC chair gave the example of a case involving police officer Ali Ahmed, whom she said had been adjudged unfit to continue to serve by the commission. Shahinda claimed the case had been forwarded to the Home Minister.

“I know for a fact he is still a policeman and was promoted after this incident” she said.

“It is really upsetting – a huge concern – for me that the police leadership is showing a trend where unlawful officers are acting with impunity. This can only lead to further violence.”

Amnesty International – which has published its own report into police brutality and human rights violations of February 6-8 – echoed Ismail’s concerns. The report was slammed by Home Minister Jameel as “biased” and “one-sided”.

“Government officials have frequently shrugged off their own responsibility to address human rights violations, saying it is the purview of the Human Rights Commission (HRCM) and the PIC,” said Amnesty’s researcher in the Maldives, Abbas Faiz.

“Without an end to – and accountability for – these human rights violations, any attempt at political reconciliation in the Maldives will be meaningless,” Faiz said.

In his statement, McKinnon urged that “Democracy is not just the responsibility of the government, but also of every institution and all citizens. Democracy is not a destination, but a journey. I hope that every institution, political party and individual citizen will make it their business to be part of that journey.”

The Maldives meanwhile remains on the agenda of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the international body’s democracy and human rights arm. The matter is expected to be reviewed at the group’s meeting on September 28-29.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Failure of judiciary, JSC and parliament justified detention of Abdulla Mohamed, contends Velezinee in new book

Former President’s Member on the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) Aishath Velezinee has written a book extensively documenting the watchdog body’s undermining of judicial independence, and complicity in sabotaging the separation of powers.

Over 80 pages, backed up with documents, evidence and letters, The Failed Silent Coup: in Defeat They Reached for the Gun recounts the experience of the outspoken whistleblower as she attempted to stop the commission from re-appointing unqualified and ethically-suspect judges loyal to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, after it dismissed the professional and ethical standards demanded by Article 285 of the constitution as “symbolic”.

That moment at the conclusion of the constitutional interim period marked the collapse of the new constitution and resulted in the appointment of a illegitimate judiciary, Velezinee contends, and set in motion a chain of events that ultimately led to President Mohamed Nasheed’s arrest of Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed two years later.

Nasheed resigned on February 7 after mutinying police and military officers joined forces with opposition demonstrators, who had been accusing Nasheed of interfering with the ‘independent’ judiciary in his arrest of the judge, and demanding not to be given ‘unlawful orders’.

The Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) report found that there was no evidence to support Nasheed’s claim that he was ousted in a coup d’état, and that his resignation was under duress and the events of the day were self-inflicted.

“The inquiry is based on a false premise, the assumption that Abdulla Mohamed is a constitutionally appointed judge, which is a political creation and ignores all evidence refuting this,” Velezinee stated.

“Judge Abdulla Mohamed is at the centre of this story. I believe it is the State’s duty to remove him from the judiciary. He may have the legal knowledge required of a judge; but, as the State knows full well, he has failed to reach the ethical standards equally essential for a seat on the bench.

“A judge without ethics is a judge open to influence. Such a figure on the bench obstructs justice, and taints the judiciary. These are the reasons why the Constitution links a judge’s professional qualifications with his or her moral standards,” she states.

The JSC itself had investigated Abdulla Mohamed but stopped short of releasing a report into his ethical misconduct after the Civil Court awarded the judge an injunction against his further investigation by the judicial watchdog.

“There is no legal way in which the Civil Court can rule that the Judicial Service Commission cannot take action against Abdulla Mohamed. This decision says judges are above even the Constitution. Where, with what protection, does that leave the people?” Velezinee asks.

“The Judicial Service Commission bears the responsibility for removing Abdulla Mohamed from the bench. Stories about him have circulated in the media and among the general public since 2009, but the Commission took no notice. It was blind to Abdulla Mohamed’s frequent forays outside of the ethical standards required of a judge. It ignored his politically charged rulings and media appearances.

“Abdulla Mohamed is a man who had a criminal conviction even when he was first appointed to the bench during President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s time. Several complaints of alleged judicial misconduct are pending against him. The Judicial Service Commission has ignored them all. What it did, instead, is grant him tenure – a lifetime on the bench for a man such as Abdulla Mohamed. In doing so, the Judicial Service Commission clearly failed to carry out its constitutional responsibilities. It violated the Constitution and rendered it powerless. Where do we go from there?”

Parliament, Velezinee states, was the body responsible for holding the JSC accountable.

“The Majlis knew the threat Abdulla Mohamed posed to national security and social harmony. The Majlis was also aware of the Judicial Service Commission’s failure to carry out its constitutional responsibilities and its efforts to nullify constitutional requirements.

“Concern had been shared with the Majlis that the Judicial Service Commission had committed the ultimate betrayal and hijacked judicial independence. The Majlis failed its Constitutional responsibility to hold the Judicial Service Commission accountable for any of these actions. The Majlis had violated the Constitution and rendered it powerless. Where to from there?”

Ultimate responsibility for upholding the constitution fell to the President, Velezinee states.

“Democratic governance can only function if the entire system is working as an integral whole; it is impossible if the three separated powers are failing in their respective duties.

“Under the circumstances – once it was clear that Abdulla Mohamed was an obstruction to justice and a threat to national security, and once it became apparent that neither the Judicial Service Commission nor the Parliament was willing to hold him accountable – the only authority left to take control of the situation was the Head of State.”

With the return to power of Gayoom’s autocratic government behind President Mohamed Waheed’s “fig leaf of legitimacy”, the judiciary continued to be subject to influence, Velezinee writes.

“The judiciary we have today is under the control of a few,” she wrote.

“This was an end reached by using the Judicial Service Commission as a means. Most members of the Judicial Service Commission betrayed the Constitution, the country, and the people. They broke their oath. There is no room for free and fair hearings. And most judges do not even know how to hold such a hearing.”

“For democracy and rule of law to be established in the Maldives, and for the right to govern themselves to be returned to the people, they must have an elected leader. And the judiciary, currently being held hostage, must be freed.

“Article 285 of the Constitution must be fully upheld, judges reappointed, and an independent judiciary established,” she concludes.

Download The Failed Silent Coup (English translation by Dr Azra Naseem)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives’ political situation “very positive”: new US Ambassador

New US Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives, Ambassador Michele J Sison, on Sunday presented her credentials to President Mohamed Waheed Hassan, and met with the Maldivian press.

Ambassador Sison replaces Ambassador Patricia A Butenis. She was previously US Deputy Ambassador in Iraq, as well as Deputy Ambassador in the United Arab Emirates.

She has also worked as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of South Asian Affairs, providing broad policy oversight of US relations with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka.

Ambassador Sison on Sunday morning met with President Waheed, Vice President Waheed Deen and Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dunya Maumoon, and said she looked forward to meeting the Foreign Minister at a later stage.

“I have been reading about the Maldives for quite some time and am impressed by the warm welcome I received this weekend,” she said.

Asked for her early impressions of the country’s political situation and stability, Sison said it was “very positive. You have democratic institutions in place, you have a vibrant and dynamic media, all of the ingredients are there.”

“What troubles me, and I’m sure troubles the Maldivian people at this point, is that recent events have contributed to a slowdown in the normal political life of the country – for example the vital work of the Majlis. I know we all want to see the political system able to proceed so that important legislative drafts can be discussed and debated and normal political life moves forward in a productive manner.”

Sison said she was encouraged by the work of the current leadership dialogues, “which have the potential for real progress as the country moves towards elections, and I hope will smooth the way for the Majlis to move forward.”

Sison confirmed that she had read the report produced by the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) into the circumstances surrounding February 7’s controversial transfer of power, and noted that the US had “very publicly welcomed the release of the report.”

“I did receive a copy and highlight the summary for my staff. It was a subject of intense interest in Washington,” she said.

Sison said the US had “publicly commended the commission’s co-chairs for their leadership and commitment to a thorough and what we feel was an inclusive review process.”

“We consistently called for all Maldivians to respect the findings of the report. Now we look forward to the implementation of the recommendations and call on all to respect the findings and exercise restraint, and continue the vibrant political expression in the Maldives and channel it in a productive and non-violent manner.”

Sison however refrained from stating whether this stance meant the US would back the Maldives’ government’s bid to be removed from the agenda of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the Commonwealth’s human rights and democracy arm.

“I know that the issue is very topical right now, and I’ve [received] various views from political actors and will continue to seek input,” she said.

Asked whether the US was concerned about a broad shift in Maldivian foreign policy from Western allies towards China, Sison responded that “a very simple answer is that the US, as a friend of the Maldives, is encouraged that Maldivian foreign policy is growing in terms of representation and cooperation.”

In her address, Sison noted that key areas of bilateral cooperation would include “furthering the hopes and dreams of youth and women. I really do believe that the US has a useful role to play in the Maldives, particularly in the maritime security, economic and education sectors.”

She announced the imminent arrival of a senior US educator who would be working with the Ministry of Education “on curriculum development and the general professional development of Maldivian educators.”

Ambassador Sison also remarked on the US’s training of the Maldivian police, which she noted would be “very visible this month” as the trainers focused “on the importance of community policing and protection of human rights.”

The US is currently providing US$7.1 million towards an integrated water resource system on Lhaviyani Hinnavaru and Haa Alif Dhihdhoo islands.

It is also contributing US$20,000 in funding towards cultural preservation and the restoration of pre-Islamic artifacts in the National Museum, which were destroyed by a mob that broke into the building amid February 7′s political turmoil.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Reporters Without Borders condemns arbitrary arrest of journalists for taking photos

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned the growing number of arbitrary arrests of journalists by the Maldives Police Service.

In a statement, the press freedom NGO said it “deplores the repeated obstruction of media personnel in the course of their work and urges the government to put a stop to arrests designed to intimidate journalists and encourage self-censorship.”

The statement follows the arrest and detention of Minivan News journalist Ahmed Naish on August 30 while reporting on the arrest of a demonstrator. The area was not barricaded or otherwise designated off-limits by police.

Police Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef informed Minivan News at the time of the arrest that Naish had been arrested for “obstructing police duty.”

“Riot police known as Special Operations (SO) stopped Naish at 5:30pm in the Malé district of Sosun Magu as he was photographing them arresting a young demonstrator,” RSF reported.”They asked him for his press pass, which he did not have on him at the time, and, after refusing to accept his business card as identification, handcuffed him and led him away.”

“My hands were tied behind my back with a clip and the SO officer who did so kept tightening it,” Naish said, in his account to RSF. “Another officer kept pinching my arms and hitting my ankles with his boot, telling me to walk faster.”

More people were arrested, including two who had been taking photographs or videos of the police, RSF reported.

“They were bundled into a vehicle and taken to police headquarters and then transferred to a detention centre on Dhoonidhoo, an island just to the north of the capital,” the statement read.

“They took my personal belongings (…) I was then photographed and taken before an investigating officer who informed me that I was arrested for obstructing police duty and causing public disorder. I refused to sign the arrest form because, in addition to stating a false reason for the arrest, the place of arrest noted in the form was incorrect,” Naish informed RSF.

“After being placed in a large cell with other people arrested during the demonstration, Naish asked to see a doctor because his wrists were swollen,” read the RSF statement. “The doctor sprayed his wrists and gave him a painkiller. He was then allowed to speak to two lawyers and described to them the circumstances of his arrest.”

“I talked to seven people who were arrested similarly for taking photographs. However all were accused of obstructing police duty, disobeying orders and causing loss of public order,” Naish stated.

At around 2:00am he was moved to a large cell where 25 other people were already being held. He was finally released without charge the next afternoon, after being held for about 24 hours, RSF stated.

“I found out later than government-aligned private broadcaster Villa Television showed footage of my arrest, which would have confirmed that the police lied about the place of arrest. It would also show that I was not jeopardising public order,” Naish told the NGO.

Naish added that journalist Ali Nahyk with Minivan Radio 97FM – a station unaffiliated with the Minivan New online website – was arrested on 31 August for similar reasons.

“Maldives is ranked 73rd out of 179 countries in the 2011-2012 Reporters Without Borders press freedom index, which was compiled before February’s turmoil, when President Mohamed Nasheed was forced to resign and Vice-President Mohammed Waheed took over. The media situation has worsened dramatically since then,” RSF observed.

“RSF reminds the authorities that arbitrary arrest violates article 46 of the Maldivian constitution, which says: ‘Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained, arrested or imprisoned except as provided by law by the People’s Majlis [parliament] in accordance with the article 16 of this constitution’.”

The organisation noted that media and netizens had “played an important role during the Nasheed administration’s ouster in February, photographing and filming aspects of the accompanying crackdown that embarrassed authorities.”

Bystander arrested for recording an arrest:

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)