Author: Mohamed Naahee

JSC suspends Chief Judge hours after High Court postpones case against JSC

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has announced that the High Court has temporarily suspended the hearings of the case against Judicial Service Commission (JSC) filed by the party’s presidential candidate, former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Nasheed is challenging the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of the three-member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court to hear Nasheed’s criminal trial.

The party’s remarks come just a day after High Court cancelled a hearing of the case in which local media reported that the court was to decide on counter-procedural issues taken by JSC. The JSC has contended that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to look into a matter.

Member of Nasheed’s legal team, Hassan Latheef, told Minivan News on Wednesday that the hearing was cancelled after the judge who was presiding over the case opted to “take leave” for the day.

However, shortly after the cancellation, the JSC declared that the commission had indefinitely suspended the Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef – who also happened to be among the judges presiding over Nasheed’s case against the JSC.

JSC Chair and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla insisted at a press conference yesterday that the disciplinary action had no relation to the former president’s case.

In a press conference held today at the party headquarters, Vice Chairperson of MDP Ali Shiyam said the party saw the High Court’s decision to withhold the hearings until next July as an encouragement for Nasheed and the party to continue its nation-wide presidential campaigning.

Shiyam added that if no further disruptions came from the courts, it would mean an additional strength to the party in their bid to secure the presidential elections in the first round. Shiyam also described the move as an end to the obstructions leveled against Nasheed by the courts and the judiciary.

“President [Nasheed] will not have to halt the campaign and come to Male to appear before the court. That is a new strength, a new encouragement to our campaign,” Shiyam said.

Meanwhile, another member of Nasheed’s legal team, Hisaan Hussain, tweeted that despite the indefinite suspension of Judge Shareef, neither the JSC nor the acting chief judge appointed to fill the vacancy of Judge Shareef would be allowed to reshuffle the judges presiding over the case.

Speaking to Minivan News, MDP Spokesperson MP Imthiyaz Fahmy said the move to hold the hearings was also an assurance to the public and the international community that former President Nasheed would be able to take part in the elections, as was unlikely that Nasheed would be given a criminal sentence.

He added that the party were facing a lot of challenges compared to other political parties who are also campaigning for the election.

“Because of the ongoing case concerning President Nasheed, the party has had to spend equal time and resources on its legal battles while running a nation wide presidential campaign. The MDP is battling with everything including the judiciary, the Prosecutor General and all the injustices faced by ordinary people,” he said.

Fahmy further added that the previous scheduling of Nasheed’s cases and sudden cancellations resulted in severe financial losses to the party, as each campaign event is organised by the hard work of party members across the country.

However, Fahmy also echoed Shiyam’s statement that the suspension of the case marked the end of Nasheed’s legal battle, stating that the High Court’s decision would allow the party to focus its energy on campaigning rather than winning court battles.

The Hulhumle-based magistrate court is currently hearing the case against the former President over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed by the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) during the last days of his presidency.

During the first trials of the hearing, Nasheed’s legal team contested the legitimacy of the magistrate court.

However, in a Civil Court case filed by lawyer Ismail Wisham, which was subsequently taken over by Supreme Court – and to which Nasheed’s legal team also intervened – endorsed the legitimacy of the much-debated Hulhumale Magistrate court.

As soon as the trials resumed, Nasheed’s legal team challenged the legitimacy of the appointment of the three-member judges panel to the magistrate court. The former president’s counsel is arguing that appointing judges to specific cases was not the JSC’s responsibility, but that of the chief judges of respective courts.

Minivan News contacted a High Court media official but was told the court had no comment on the case.

JSC suspends High Court Judge, appoints acting replacement

The JSC has meanwhile appointed Judge Abdul Rauoof Ibrahim as acting Chief Judge of High Court until the JSC concludes its inquiry into complaints filed against the suspended Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef.

Speaking to Minivan News, JSC Media Official Hassan Zaheen confirmed the appointment and said that Judge Abdul Rauoof would be in charge of running the High Court until the JSC concludes its inquiry.

The JSC on Wednesday issued Judge Shareef an ‘indefinite suspension’ following a complaint filed by the remaining judges of the court against him during last year.

The ruling came hours after the High Court suspended hearings against the former President.

A similar case was lodged last April in which eight judges of the High Court’s nine-member bench lodged a case with the JSC against Chief Judge Shareef, for suspending the Hulhumale Magistrate Court’s trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed without registering the case in court.

The suspension coincided with the cancellation of a hearing of a High Court’s case in which Nasheed challenged the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of the three member panel of judges to Hulhumale Magistrate Court.

High Court Chief Judge Shareef was summoned to the JSC earlier this month, almost a year after the complaint was lodged.

According to local media reports, the decision was approved at a JSC meeting today with three votes in favour and one against. Attorney General Aishath Bisham, President’s Member Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem and Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi voted in favour while Public Member Shuaib Abdul Rahman voted against the motion.

Lawyers’ representative Ahmed Rasheed and Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan reportedly abstained while High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed did not participate in the vote.

Speaker Abdulla Shahid and Majlis Member MP Gasim Ibrahim did not attend the meeting.

Shuaib told private broadcaster Raajje TV following the meeting that the decision was made in violation of due process and JSC procedures as a report regarding the allegations against the chief judge was not presented to the commission members.

The motion or petition to suspend Shareef was proposed by Attorney General Bisham, who is yet to receive parliamentary consent for her appointment.

Meanwhile, at the press conference this evening, Justice Adam Mohamed refused to reveal either the details of the vote or the members in attendance despite repeated queries from reporters.

He also refused to state which High Court judge would take over the chief judge’s administrative functions.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) – of which Nasheed is the presidential candidate – described the actions by the JSC as attempts to influence the case filed by Nasheed against the JSC.

“We condemn the actions of the Maldivian courts, which violate the electoral rights of nearly 50,000 Maldivian Democratic Party members. The disruption to President Nasheed’s campaign trip to Raa atoll is an unnecessary, politically motivated challenge,” the party contended yesterday.

“The JSC continues to try and cover up the unconstitutional manner in which they appointed the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court bench through attempts at influencing the judiciary, while the Courts create logistical challenges such as today’s.  However, it does not stop affect the spirit of President Nasheed’s campaign,” said MP Mariya Ahmed Didi.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court cancels hearing on Nasheed’s case against JSC, after judge takes last minute leave

The High Court has cancelled the scheduled hearing set to take place today concerning the case filed by former President Mohamed Nasheed against the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) contesting the legitimacy of the appointment of the three-member panel of judges in his trial.

The JSC has previously contested the High Court’s jurisdictionto rule on the procedural issues noted by Nasheed’s lawyers. The former President is being tried for his detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, prior to his controversial resignation in February 2012.

A High Court official confirmed to Minivan News that the hearing was cancelled but did not state a reason for the cancellation.

However, Nasheed’s legal team member Hassan Latheef told Minivan News the decision to cancel the hearing was made after the judge who was presiding over the case opted to “take leave” for the day.

“[High Court] officials called us and informed that the judge presiding over the case was on leave today, and therefore the hearing was cancelled,” said Latheef.

The cancellation of the hearing came just a few minutes before it was set to begin, much to the dismay of Nasheed, the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s presidential candidate – who had cut short his campaign trip to Raa Atoll to appear for the hearing.

“We are very disappointed over the court’s decision which clearly shows its motive to obstruct Nasheed’s presidential campaign. Due to this [behaviour] Nasheed is barred from having the same opportunities as other candidates to campaign in the elections,” Latheef said, expressing his frustration over the cancellation.

Arguments

During the last hearing in which both the parties argued over procedural issues, Nasheed and his counsel sought to clarify the JSC’s procedural points contending that they were not completely clear.

The High Court judges panel gave Nasheed’s lawyers the opportunity to ask the JSC’s legal representation for clarification, while posing additional questions regarding the same issue themselves.

They then stated that it was unclear why the JSC had asked for the counsel of the Supreme Court in deciding the composition of the bench, and the justification under which the JSC considered the Supreme Court’s counsel to be of the same legal weight as a ruling of the court.

In responding to the questions posed to them, the JSC revealed that the names of the magistrates they had sent to the Supreme Court for their counsel were not the names nominated by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The High Court bench questioned the JSC as to if there was a procedure in place which allowed for the assignment of judges to specific cases.

The JSC responded that there were certain circumstances in which judges can be assigned for specific cases, adding that the commission had done so previously in the past.

The bench further asked the JSC several times as to whether they considered the Supreme Court’s ‘counsel’ a ‘ruling’. The JSC’s legal team confirmed that they did.

The JSC’s legal representation stated that the Hulhumale’ Court Bench had been established under the counsel of the Supreme Court, and that this held the weight of a Supreme Court ruling.

Nasheed’s legal team contested this, stating that ‘counsel’ and a ‘ruling’ of the Supreme Court could not be considered to hold the same strength.

Upon receiving answers for some of the questions posed, Nasheed’s lawyers requested for more time to prepare a response, which the bench granted.

Request for intervention

Meanwhile, former MNDF Male Area Commander retired Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and his legal team have requested to intervene in the ongoing court battle between the former President and the JSC.

The retired Brigadier General is facing the same charges as Nasheed over the detention of Judge Abdulla Mohamed during January 2011, which eventually led to a police mutiny and finally, the controversial resignation of Nasheed from the presidency.

Didi is represented by lawyer Ismail Wisham who previously lodged a case contesting that the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was set up in contradiction of laws dictating the formation of courts. The case was later taken over by Supreme Court which later endorsed the legitimacy of the much debated magistrate court.

In response to the request made by Didi, local media reported that the High Court had claimed it would allow the intervention as soon as it had ruled on the procedural issues raised by the JSC.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police confiscate stashed weapons from house of Fiqh Academy Vice President

Police have confiscated a stash of weapons believed to have used in gang violence under under a staircase in the home of Vice President of the Fiqh Academy, Dr Mohamed Iyaz Abdul Latheef.

According to local media reports, the weapons confiscated included a metal rod, a Kathivalhi (a traditional heavy duty knife used to chop trees), a wig and a face mask.

Speaking to Minivan News, a police media official confirmed that they had found weapons stored at a house in Male’ but would confirm if this belonged to Dr Latheef.

“No arrests or summons have been yet made. But we are currently investigating the case,” said the official.

Speaking to Haveeru, Latheef said the stash was discovered by a tenant who lived in the same residence at around 2:15pm.

“Once we saw those things, we contacted the police. Then the police called us back and requested everyone in the house not to touch them,” Latheef said.

Latheef also told Haveeru that despite the discovery of weapon stash at his own residence, he had not received any physical threats from anybody.

The discovery comes at a time where police have begun taking extra measures in curbing gang violence following four stabbing incidents within 48 hours. Police have said 11 suspects have been taken into custody with regard to the incidents.

In a statement released earlier, police claimed that the 11 individuals, all male suspects between 17 and 27 years of age, were detained on the 9th floor of the Aroodhaage building in Male’ as part of investigations.

The attacks prompted the police to form a special task force consisting of members from the Forensics Directorate, Intelligence and Covert Policing Command, Information and Communication Directorate, Central Operations Command and Technical Police from the Divisional Operations Command of the Maldives Police Service.

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz said members of the task force were now searching for 50 “high-profile” suspects alleged to have had involvement with gang-related activities

“They are a threat to the society. We consider everyone, who had not been punished for a crime they had committed, as a criminal at large,” he told the local media.

The Commissioner of Police previously alleged that politicians were most often responsible for encouraging gang-related activities in the capital island Male’.

The claims echoed the findings of a report into the country’s gang culture published last year by the Asia Foundation that found politicians and businessmen paid gangs to assault rivals, damage property, and in some cases have opponents killed.

Minivan News was unable to contact Dr Latheef for comment at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Sacked Human Rights Minister sues Speaker Shahid for role in alleged “coup d’état”

Former SAARC Secretary General and dismissed Human Rights Minister Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed has filed a lawsuit against the Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid over his decision in February 2012 to declare the presidency vacant.

The suit also asks the court to declare illegitimate the transfer of power following former President Mohamed Nasheed’s controversial resignation.

Saeed, along with her associates, previously attempted to file a similar case at the High Court requesting it rule that former President Mohamed Nasheed’s resignation was obtained under duress.

The group of attorneys claimed that following their assessment of the events that led to the former president’s controversial resignation, several legal inconsistencies and lapses that suggested the transfer of power took place illegally.

However the High Court refused to accept the case claiming that it did not have jurisdiction to look into the matter. However, Dhiyana had at the time contended that she was of the view that High Court did have the jurisdiction.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed resigned following a 22-day continuous anti-government protest led by religious scholars and opposition leaders with the backing of mutinying police and military officers, that began in mid-January 2012. The protest flared after Nasheed’s controversial detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed.

Following his resignation, Nasheed claimed to have been forced to resign under duress, and declared that his government had been toppled in a bloodless coup d’etat.

According to Saeed, the new Civil Court case was a modified version of the case first rejected by the High Court. She also announced the case had been accepted by the Civil Court.

Saeed told Haveeru that it was fundamental in a democratic society for people to have the right to cast their vote. She claimed that people had elected Nasheed for a term of five years, and forcing him to prematurely submit his resignation in a coercive environment was disregarding the right for people to vote and elect their ruler.

Prior to declaring that this right had been grossly disregarded, she argued that it was important for the court declare that President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s ascension to presidency was illegal and that his government therefore was illegitimate.

Speaker’s role

Speaker Shahid recently defected from the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) to Nasheed’s MDP and is currently actively campaigning for Nasheed’s bid for the presidency in 2013.

However Dhiyana Saeed stated that Shahid was the person under the Article 121 of the constitution who was to declare vacant of the office of president, should an incumbent president resign or vacate the office.

“It was the Speaker of Parliament who declared the office of president vacant, be it had he done it knowingly, mistakenly or unknowingly,” Saeed told Haveeru. “This doesn’t mean Shahid committed a criminal offense. It also does not mean that he partook in the events or that he made the decision [maliciously].”

She further contended that Speaker Shahid had failed to look into the circumstances surrounding Nasheed’s resignation before making the declaration.

Saeed told Minivan News on Sunday that she and the counsel have “stopped short of asking for Nasheed’s reinstatement”, claiming that she did not have “the locus standi to ask for a particular relief”.

“If the ruling comes in our favour, it might be possible for Nasheed to institute a second proceeding for reinstatement. As far as this case is concerned, our interest is in the rule of law and invoking constitutional process to uphold the legal order as stipulated by the constitution,” Saeed told Minivan News.

Dhiyana Saeed, formerly a member of current President Mohamed Waheed’s cabinet and one of the earliest critics of Nasheed’s decision to detain Judge Abdulla, has also released a personal memoir explaining her interpretation of Waheed’s ascension to power. In the memoir, Saeed alleged that Nasheed’s political rivals had conspired to assassinate him.

Saeed alleged that the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7 was the result of a premeditated and well-orchestrated plan, and questioned the findings of the Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), which had declared that there was no coup and Nasheed had resigned voluntarily.

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee’s review of the report revealed several concerns including omission of key evidence and witness statements.

Chair of Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee, MP Ali Waheed, claimed the August 2012 report produced by the CNI was “flawed” based on the findings of the committee.

He added that many interviewed by the committee claimed the CNI report lacked “key information they had given [the CNI panel]” while “others claimed their information was wrongly presented”.

Parliamentary review

To support its claims, the parliamentary select committee released audio recordings of all the statements given by the witnesses. These included former police and military chiefs and officers, who claimed that Nasheed had no option but to resign.

Leaked statements to the CNI given by key witnesses of the events, including senior police and military officials, also suggested that the transfer of power took place illegitimately.

In the transcript of the statement given to CNI by MNDF Staff Sergeant Shafraz Naeem – the commander of the riot squad of the Bandara Koshi (BK) Battalion on the day – said that he also believed that Nasheed was ousted in a coup.

“In my view this was a coup. Why? I could see it from the way they handled everything, their attitude, how cool and calm all the officers were. I could tell from how cool General Shiyam was inside the MNDF. They did nothing. This is not how a uniformed officer should behave,” he told the CNI.

Meanwhile former President Nasheed told the CNI that he was forced to resign, as he believed his life was at stake on February 7 if he did not.

“In essence, my statement is very small. I was forced to resign. I resigned under duress. I was threatened. If I did not resign within a stipulated period it would endanger mine and my family’s life. I understood they were going to harm a number of other citizens, party members. They were going to literally sack the town. I felt that I had no other option, other than to resign,” he said.

On September 2012, following the release of the report, a legal analysis of the CNI’s report by a team of high-profile Sri Lankan legal professionals – including the country’s former Attorney General concluded that the report was “selective”, “flawed”, and “exceeded its mandate”.

“The report offends the fundamental tenets of natural justice, transparency and good governance, including the right to see adverse material, which undermines the salutary tenets of the Rule of Law,” observed the report.

The Sri Lankan legal team also contended that “there is evidence to demonstrate that there was in fact adequate evidence to suggest that duress (or even ‘coercion’ and/ or illegal coercion as used by CNI) is attributable to the resignation of President Nasheed.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Elections Commission processing membership forms, but yet to recognise new parties

The Elections Commission (EC) has yet to formally recognise any new parties meeting the minimum membership requirement of 10,000 stipulated in a recent bill, the commission has stated, but is processing membership forms.

Following the passage of Political Parties Act 11 parties – including former President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP) – were removed from the commission’s registry for failing to meeting the minimum membership. It also removed the parties from the list of political parties published on its website.

Speaking to local media, Secretary General of the Elections Commission Ahmed Asim said the commission had begunto process the membership forms submitted by political parties prior to the enactment of the act, based on advice given to the commission by the parliament.

Parliament’s Independent Institutions Oversight Committee has meanwhile instructed the Elections Commission to begin processing the forms submitted by political parties, following a submission filed by the Maldivian Development Alliance (MDA) led by tourism magnate Ahmed ‘Sun Travel’ Shiyam.

According to Asim, President Mohamed Waheed’s GIP and the MDA had both submitted more than 10,000 membership forms to the elections commission at the time the commission announced that parties lacking the required number of members would immediately be dissolved.

“Apart from those two parties, we have been processing membership forms submitted by other political parties. However, we have not yet decided whether to publicise the names of the new parties that attain the 10,000-member mark,” Asim told Haveeru.

The Supreme Court has issued a stay order on the elections commission ordering them not to take any decision that would dissolve any political party prior to the court coming to a decision on the matter. The order was based on a case filed at court by the Attorney General.

Despite President Waheed’s decision to veto the Political Parties bill and to return it to the house, parliament overruled him with an overwhelming super majority of 60 votes.

MPs representing both the government coalition and the opposition alleged that President Waheed had rejected the bill because it involved his personal interests and that his party GIP would be one of the first to be dissolved after the law came into force.

The bill had come under heavy criticism from several smaller political parties including President Waheed’s own party – which at the time had less than 3000 members – claiming the bill was an attempt to destroy the party.

Following the passage of the bill, the Attorney General lodged a case in the Supreme Court requesting a writ of mandamus against the Elections Commission to prevent dissolution of political parties that failed to maintain the required 10,000 members as stipulated in the Political Parties Act.

Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham was reported in local media as stating that the enactment of the Political Parties Act meant political parties that did not have the required number of members would be dissolved without any transitional period.

Following the ratification of Political Parties Act, only five political parties remain registered in the Maldives. Remaining parties include the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and four government-aligned parties” the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Jumhoree Party (JP) and Adhaalath Party (AP).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives divided by “Islamic” and “anti-Islamic”: former President Gayoom

President of the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and former president, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, has claimed the Maldives now dominated by people belonging to the “Islamic” ideology and those belonging to the “anti-Islamic” ideology.

Gayoom’s remarks come shortly after public outrage over former President Mohamed Nasheed’s allegedly “laadheenee”(secular) remarks made during the speech he gave at the University of Copenhagen on the subject of the economics of climate change.

During his address, Nasheed stated the Maldivian population had largely rejected Islamic extremism, and, in a veiled reference to the Adhaalath Party, noted that “the Islamists were never a credible electoral threat.”

Following the speech, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP) and Gayoom’s own party PPM issued statements condemning the remarks Nasheed had made.

Subsequently, a protest was launched by a group of hundreds – thought largely to represent supporters of the government-aligned AP – who in certain cases called to “hang Nasheed to death”.

AP last month publicly pledged its support to President Waheed by announcing plans to form a coalition with his Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP) ahead of elections scheduled for September this year.

Anti-Islamic, anti-national

During a dinner held at Nasandhura Palace Hotel on Monday (April 29) night, Gayoom claimed that those belonging to the laadheenee ideology operated as a foreign organisation to change the country, and that Maldivians needed to decide on where they stood.  The comments were made at a dinner to honour the services of his Gayoom’s daughter Yumna Maumoon, who had resigned from the secretary general position of the PPM.

The former President, who ruled the Maldives unopposed for six consecutive five-year presidential terms, claimed many people believed the country had two political ideologies.

Gayoom added that in his view, these two ideologies were that of those who stood up for Islam and the nation and those who did not.

“These are the two options left on our table. We need to choose from one of these ideologies. We are, by the will of Allah, those who uphold the nation and Islam. PPM represents the aspirations of a nationalistic Islamic state. It is also the same aspirations represented by those who support PPM,” Gayoom said. “Those who are at the other end are anti-national and anti-Islamic people. They are attempting to install their own views among us, trying to transform us into the West.”

Gayoom further alleged that those standing by the anti-Islamic ideology wanted to destroy the independence and sovereignty of the Maldivian people, and “put the country in control of an anti-Islamic organisation”.

“We really need to understand and comprehend this fact. We have to carry out a lot of hard work to prove that our nation comes first, for the sake of this country, for the sake of our beloved people,” he stressed.

Gayoom contended that should the people of the Maldives fail to defend the country from anti-Islamic forces, it would mean the slowly beginning of “imported cultures” that the country was unfamiliar with.

“They will try to bring in another culture. A culture that we are not familiar with, a culture that represents anti-national, anti-religious beliefs and ideologies,” he added.

During his speech, Gayoom also emphasised the importance of ensuring that his half brother Yameen Abdul Gayoom was elected president in September.

Criticism

Both Gayoom’s PPM and the religious conservative Adhaalath Party have attacked Nasheed for his remarks in Denmark.

The Adhaalath Party claimed that Nasheed had misled the Danish audience on extremism in the Maldives.

“Nasheed misled them about the party he fears and envies most, the Adhaalath Party. Nasheed knows very well that the Adhaalath Party is not a party that has no power and influence, unlike what he said in Denmark,” read the party’s statement.

The party accused Nasheed of “placing idols” in Maldivian lands – a reference to the SAARC monuments gifted to the country by other South Asian nations during the 2011 SAARC Summit hosted in Addu Atoll – and of “giving our assets to foreigners” – a reference to the concession agreement to manage and upgrade the international airport granted to Indian firm GMR.

In his address, the former President acknowledged that there was “a lot of xenophobia, Islamic rhetoric and intolerance going on in the Maldives”, and noted the destruction of 12-century Buddhist statues, manuscripts, and other evidence of the Maldives’ pre-Islamic history.

“The vast majority of our society very tolerant people. If all this Islamist rhetoric is removed from official discourse, there will be a much more liberal society. I assure you the rhetoric will be removed from official discourse,” he said.

The Adhaalath Party meanwhile expressed astonishment “that there are a few Maldivians joining [Nasheed] in his work to get another chance to brainwash the Maldivian people. God willing Mohamed Nasheed will not be able to come to power ever again,” the party said.

“Nasheed shamed the nation”: PPM

The PPM similarly condemned Nasheed, claiming his remarks about Islam would disgrace the Maldives in front of other Islamic states.

The party further claimed that it was totally unacceptable for a Muslim to claim that there lay a need for an alternative Quran and the Hadith.

“A former president of a 100 percent Islamic nation speaking in such a fashion, abusing the religion of Islam and mocking Prophet Muhammed is a derogatory act that brings disgrace to the country in front of other Islamic nations,” read the statement.

The PPM alleged that Nasheed during his time as the president had spoken against certain principles of Islam in the bid to appease non-Muslims, such as allowing SAARC nations to gift monuments to the Maldives.

“Bringing a person like Nasheed back to power will be the worst decision people of this country will make, as it will be a huge blow struck against the nation and Islam,” the PPM contended.

Sold out Islam to bring about a coup, says Nasheed

In response to the remarks made by his political rivals, Nasheed addressing a rally held in the island of Bilehdhoo in Faafu Atoll on Sunday night,  claimed that politicians who disguised themselves as religious scholars had “sold out Islam” to topple his democratic government on February 2012.

“There is no greater sin in Islam than to orchestrate a coup,” Nasheed claimed.

“Wearing hats of sheikhs and religious scholars, they have committed a huge sin, an act which is absolutely haram. Today, this country has a haram government. Being a 100 percent Muslim country, we must not let them continue carrying out this haram act in front of our eyes. God willing, we will win this presidential election in one round,” he added.

During his speech, Nasheed spoke of the rhetoric used by political parties had against his administration prior to the contentious transfer of power in February 2012.

“In their ploy to topple our government, they spoke of two things. One is that it was for the sake of religion. In this context, one issue they raised was that the management of Ghiyasudheen School [in Male’] included foreigners. Meanwhile, we can clearly see that even here the principal is a foreigner, the teachers are foreigners.”

“After having preached this against Ghiyasudheen School, today it is the children of these religious scholars who are enrolled to study in that school. [Adhaalath Party MP] Muhthalib’s child goes to that school. The Supreme Court Judges’ children also go to that school. All the religious scholars have their children enrolled in this school, and this is because it is a school where the educational standards are very high,” Nasheed said.

“They toppled our government because we were establishing that school, and yet today their children are enrolled there,” he claimed.

“Maldivians have never accepted that religious scholars should get entangled in worldly political matters. They are pious, righteous people who should be advising people like us on religious matters. It will not do when today they themselves are coming out and drafting laws to govern massage parlours,” Nasheed said.

“All of this is clear to us Maldivians now: a coup d’etat was brought about in the Maldives, and this coup was orchestrated by selling out the religion of Islam.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC asks High Court to expedite case concerning legitimacy of bench in Nasheed trial

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has requested the court expedite the case filed by the defense counsel of former President Mohamed Nasheed, challenging the legitimacy of the three-member bench appointed to his case.

The JSC made the request in a letter sent to the court last week. Lawyers representing the JSC previously requested the High Court dismiss the case, contending that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to preside on the matter.

The JSC appointed the three member panel consisting of Judges Shujau Usman, Abdul Nasir Abdul Raheem and Hussain Mazeed to hear the former president Nasheed’s criminal trial – concerning criminal charges levied against him over the controversial detention Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

However, following the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Hulhumale-based court was legitimate and could operate as a court of law – dismissing Nasheed’s contention that court was formed extra-legally – the former president’s legal team subsequently filed a case at High Court contesting the legitimacy of the bench appointed to hear the case.

Upon accepting the case, the High Court issued a stay order on Hulhumale Magistrate Court to suspend all criminal trials concerning the arrest of the judge, pending a ruling on the legitimacy of the court bench.

Speaking to local media on Monday, JSC Media Official Hassan Zaheen said the commission sent the letter last week.

“We are the respondents of the case and in that capacity, we requested the High Court to speed up the case,” Zaheen told local newspaper Haveeru.

Zaheen claimed the request made to the High Court was “not a new practice” and that the commission had previously made similar requests.

Meanwhile Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has alleged that the JSC sent the letter to High Court in a bid to influence the outcome of the trial.

In a press statement released by the party, the MDP claimed the JSC had instructed the court to immediately make a ruling on the matter.

“If the JSC, as the respondent in the case, felt the case was being delayed, there is nothing wrong in asking the court to expedite the case. However, the MDP believes this is an attempt to influence the outcome of the case, as the JSC is sending its legal arguments in writing rather than speaking about them in the court room,” read the statement.

The MDP condemned the decision and alleged that the state’s judicial watch-dog was acting beyond its constitutional mandate.

The JSC has come under heavy scrutiny over its appointment of the panel of the judges – which several lawyers and members of JSC itself have claimed exceeded the JSC’s mandate.

Among the JSC’s critics include JSC member Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman – the member appointed from among the public.  Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman previously claimed the JSC had arbitrarily appointed three magistrates from courts across the Maldives to Nasheed’s case after dismissing the three names first submitted to the commission by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

“Moosa Naseem (from the Hulhumale’ Court) initially submitted names of three magistrates, including himself. This means that he had taken responsibility for overseeing this case. Now once a judge assumes responsibility for a case, the JSC does not have the power to remove him from the case,” Sheikh Rahman explained. “However, the JSC did remove him from the case, and appointed three other magistrates of their choice.”

Sheikh Rahman stated that the commission had referred to Articles 48 to 51 of the Judge’s Act as justification.

“But then I note here that the JSC breached Article 48 itself. They did not gather any information as per this article. They stated that it was due to the large amount of paperwork that needs to be researched that they are appointing a panel. However, this is not reason enough to appoint a bench,” he said.

Meanwhile, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid – who is also a member of the JSC – stated that he believed that the judicial watchdog had acted unconstitutionally in assigning magistrates to a particular case.

“In deciding upon the bench, the JSC did follow its rules of procedures. As in, it was voted upon in an official meeting and six of the seven members in attendance voted on the matter. The seventh member being the chair, does not vote in matters,” Shahid explained. “However, whether it is within the commission’s mandate to appoint a panel of judges in this manner is an issue which raised doubt in the minds of more than one of my fellow members,”

Other critics of the JSC include United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, who also argued that the appointment of the judges bench was carried out arbitrarily.

“Being totally technical, it seems to me that the set-up, the appointment of judges to the case, has been set up in an arbitrary manner outside the parameters laid out in the laws,” Knaul said, responding to questions from media after delivering her statement in February.

Speaking to Minivan News previously, Kirsty Brimelow QC, one of three UK-based experts on former President Nasheed’s legal team, contended that the prosecution of his case before the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court fell “below international standards for fair trial procedure”.

JSC Media Official Hassan Zaheen was not responding to calls at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Candidates to file for presidential election on July 15: Elections Commission

Candidates for the upcoming presidential elections scheduled for September 7 will be invited to file their candidacy with the Elections Commission (EC) from July 15, the commission has stated.

Along with opposition leader former President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), leaders of several political parties currently aligned with the current government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan – including the incumbent – have publicly announced they will be competing for the office.

Leader of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, Leader of the Jumhoree Party (JP) and business tycoon MP Gasim Ibrahim and Parliamentary Group Leader of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), MP Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom – who won the party’s controversial presidential primary beating rival Umar Naseer – have publicly announced their bids for the presidency.

Speaking Minivan News on Sunday, President of the EC Fuad Thaufeeq said that the opening of the candidacies was not a “new announcement” as the constitution required the commission to announce the presidential election 120 days prior to the end of the current presidential term, which expires in November 2013. Therefore, he said the opportunity to file for formal candidacy needed to be opened on July 15.

“From July 15, all prospective candidates will get a 10-day period to file their candidacy with us. This period will include public holidays as well. So the due date to file candidacy will be July 24,” he said.

According to Thaufeeq, the commission has begun preparations for the presidential poll and is currently working on finalising “regulations” concerning the election which he claimed would be completed within a week’s time.

During the period in which the commission opened the regulation for public commenting, the EC president said it had received significant support from major political parties including the MDP, PPM and DRP.

Apart from the political parties, Thaufeeq also said that local NGO Transparency Maldives had also given very “constructive comments” on the draft regulation.

Transparency recently published a comprehensive pre-election assessment, highlighting vote-buying, political polarisation, and credibility as critical challenges for the 2013 elections.

The election was set to take place “against a context of uncertainty, crises of political legitimacy and unprecedented levels of political polarisation,” the NGO noted.

The Elections Commission has meanwhile revealed that this year’s presidential elections – which will be the country’s second multiparty presidential poll since the formation of political parties in 2005 – will see 31,000 new voters casting their vote.

According to the statistics from the commission, the total number of eligible voters for the election stands at 240,302 – 31,008 more than the number of eligible voters in the 2008 presidential elections (209,294).

The commission in March also opened registration for voters who are currently not residing on the island where they are initially registered to vote, in a bid to increase voter turnout for the 2013 election.

According to the statistics published at the commission’s website, voter turnout for the first round of the 2008 Presidential Elections stood at 85.38 percent with a slight rise in the second round of polling, at 85.58 percent.

The President is elected through a universal suffrage ballot where a candidate must obtain a minimum margin of 50 percent plus 1 vote to secure an election victory. Should any of the candidate contesting in the election failed to get the required number of votes, a run-off election is held after a 20-day period contested by the two candidates with the largest share of votes, to decide the winner.

Former President and the opposition MDP’s presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed predicted that he would win the election in the first round while the remaining government-aligned candidates have maintained the winner of the elections will be decided in a run-off election, where losing parties form coalitions with either of the two remaining candidates.

Despite the claim, the opposition MDP have claimed that they do not plan to go into a power-sharing coalition with parties, elaborating that coalition governments were incompatible with the country’s presidential system of governance.

Nasheed – who was elected as the President in 2008 with the backing of then-coalition of parties “Wathan Edhey Gothah Iththihaadh” which fell apart within the first year of his presidency – previously claimed that he along with all political leaders of the country had tasted the “bitter lesson” of incompatibility of coalition governments and described that the idea of coalition governments contrasted with the spirit of the constitution.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Independent MP Ali Mohamed joins MDP

Independent MP for Noonu Velidhoo Ali ‘Alibe’ Mohamed joined the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) on Thursday, the former ruling party’s Parliamentary Group Leader MP Ibrahim ‘Ibu’ Mohamed Solih has confirmed.

Solih told newspaper Haveeru that MP Ali Mohamed’s membership form would be sent to the Elections Commission (EC) by the end of the day.

MP Ali Mohamed’s signing has given new strength to the party, Solih added, and expressed confidence that the MDP would get a majority of votes from the new MP’s constituency.

MDP won four out of five island council seats in Velidhoo in February 2011. At a recent rally on the island, a large number of youth signed for the MDP during a visit by former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Solih told Haveeru that the party was confident of winning a majority in Holhudhoo as well, the other island island in MP Ali Mohamed’s constituency.

Ali Mohamed – who is among senior MPs who chairs parliamentary sittings in the absence of both the speaker and deputy speaker – was elected to parliament on a DRP ticket.

He resigned from the party in mid-2011 and began working as an independent MP. Ali Mohamed voted with the MDP to pass the previous administration’s tax bills.

He however voted against the MDP to appoint Jumhooree Party (JP) presidential candidate and MP Gasim Ibrahim to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

Solih meanwhile suggested that several politicians were closely observing the changing political landscape, predicting that more MPs would join the MDP in the near future.

Ali Mohamed’s signing to MDP comes shortly after Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid also made the switch from the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).

Addressing MDP supporters at his first rally, Shahid said he joined the opposition to “prevent the window to democracy from being closed”.

“As our hearts yearned to stay in these gardens for good, an attempt was made to try and close this window. An attempt was made to extinguish that glow of hope in people’s hearts. It was the courageous members of MDP who obstructed the powerful forces that tried to close this window to democracy.” Shahid said during the rally held by MDP to announce his arrival.

“Today, I am here with all of you brave, steadfast warriors to prevent that window from being closed,” he added.

Earlier this month, local media speculated that a number of MPs were on their way to join the opposition, including MPs Alhan Fahmy (Independent), Abdulla Abdul Raheem (JP), Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed (DRP), Ali Azim (DRP) and Hassan Adil (JP).

Minivan News was unable to confirm the reports at time of press as none of the MPs were responding to calls.

MDP Spokesperson MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor previously speaking to Minivan News claimed that “a re-alignment in favour of the opposition was definitely happening”.

“I can confirm for you as I am a parliamentarian myself that several parliamentary groupings who previously stood behind the old dictatorship are slowly dismantling now. They have now started to realise that backing an old dictatorship is wrong,” said Ghafoor at the time. “I can guarantee you that a re-alignment is definitely happening and dismantling of the old dictatorship is imminent.”

Ghafoor however declined to reveal any names.

Following the signing of MP Ali Mohamed and Speaker Shahid, the number of MPs representing the opposition MDP now stands at 31, eight short of a simple majority in the 77-member house.

Parliament breakdown by party (prior to rumoured defection of five DRP MPs):

MDP 31

PPM 19

DRP 10

JP 3

PA 1

DQP 1

Independent – 10

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)