Police reject claims that assault of Raajje TV journalist was politically motivated

Police have dismissed claims that an attack last month on a senior reporter for private broadcaster Raajje TV was politically motivated.

Journalist Ibrahim Waheed (Aswad) was left requiring major surgery abroad after he was beaten unconscious with an iron bar while riding on a motorcycle near the artificial beach area of Male’ on February 23. He was reported at the time to be on his way to see two Maldives Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) journalists who were admitted to hospital after being attacked.

National media bodies have since raised concerns about a growing number of attacks on journalists. The same bodies have also claimed that reporters and other media figures needed to be more professional in order to ensure similar incidents and attacks can be better “contained and controlled” in future.

The police’s Head of Serious and Organised Crime Department Mohamed Daud declared at a press conference today that Aswad’s assault should not be viewed as a politically motivated attack, or an attempt to silence national media.

The claims were made as police announced that two suspects – an 18 year-old and 21 year-old – had been arrested in connection to what was believed to be a “planned” attack on Aswad.

Daud told local media that both suspects had criminal records and were believed to belong to “groups” based in the capital, though no further details were provided as police continue their investigations.

Speaking following the press conference, Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef today told Minivan News that with investigations continuing into Aswad’s attack, no motive had so far been established.

Following the arrest yesterday (March 12) of a second suspect in connection to the attack, Haneef added that the police investigation had so far found no evidence to imply a political motivation or that Aswad had been assaulted due to his role as a senior reporter for Raajje TV.

Targeted attack

Addressing Daud’s claims today, Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) President Ahmed ‘Hiriga’ Zahir said he would not speak contrary to the police view on the case. However, he maintained that Aswad had been specifically targeted by his attackers.

“We cannot investigate the matter ourselves, so I cannot go against what the police have said. However, what I know is that Aswad is a journalist and he was attacked whilst out on a motorbike,” he said. “It was a targeted attack.”

The attack on Aswad was the most serious incident of violence against a journalist in the Maldives since July 2012, when a group of alleged Islamic radicals slashed the throat of blogger Hilath Rasheed. Rasheed, who had been campaigning for religious tolerance, narrowly survived and has since fled the country.

Aside from the attack on Aswad, Hiriga continued to express concern at what he believed were a growing number of attacks on journalists of late, notably following recent anti-government demonstrations in the capital.

Just last week, a journalist for private media group Sun and a cameraman from broadcaster Villa Television (VTV) were attacked near to the residence of former President Mohamed Nasheed during coverage of his arrest.

Two Television Maldives (TVM) journalists were also attacked with an irritant while covering protests on Sosun Magu in Male’ on the same night Aswad was assaulted.

“Too many opinions”

Following Aswad’s attack, National media bodies including the MJA last month called on journalists to act more professionally to prevent future confrontations between themselves and the public.

Senior figures from both Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) and Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) said that journalists needed to act in a more professional manner in order to help prevent future confrontations between the public and reporters.

MBC Vice President Mohamed Shahyb told Minivan News that journalists have been targeted because “hatred has been building” towards them over a long period of time.

“Some journalists are not doing their work professionally in the Maldives.  The biggest problem is that they do not have much education or training [in journalism] and because of that they write anything,” Shahyb told Minivan News. “If the professional standard can be maintained, similar incidents can be contained and controlled.”

The MBC Vice President claimed that there are “too many opinions” leaking into news reports and that politicians need to start “pointing their fingers” at journalists who are not working in the correct manner.

“Social networking is also a big problem. Even if they work professionally, they then go onto social media sites and start expressing their own personal feelings, this is an issue,” Shahyb said.

MJA President, Ahmed ‘Hiriga’ Zahir, expressed similar concern, adding that journalists need to be more impartial with their reporting.

“We need to encourage media to be more objective. When we listen to the TV or radio we can’t tell the difference between an opinion piece or the actual news itself.”

Zahir has also requested the media to act more professionally and stop “spreading hatred”, while calling for police to give greater protection to journalists.

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik has also of late called on the media to “encourage stability, unity and harmony” in the country, adding that those responsible for the attacks will be brought to justice.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Documents from JSC show Gasim is lobbying Hulhumale’ court bench: MDP

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has alleged there is evidence to support claims that parliament’s member to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), Gasim Ibrahim, has influenced the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court bench.

The party’s comments follow a recently submitted motion by MDP Parliamentary Group Member Ibrahim ‘Bondey’ Rasheed to remove Gasim – who is also the leader and presidential candidate of Jumhoree Party – from the JSC.

Rasheed accused Gasim of influencing the legal processes in place to make judges accountable, adding that it “is not right” for a party president to sit on the JSC, local media reported.

Speaking to Minivan News today, MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor claimed that Parliament’s Independent Commissions Oversight Committee had received documents from the JSC, showing that Gasim had been lobbying the Hulhumale’ Court bench.

The JSC was responsible for both creating the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court in which the former President of the Maldives and leader of the MDP, Mohamed Nasheed, is currently facing trial, and appointing the panel of judges hearing the case.

The MDP have maintained that the charges against Nasheed are a politically motivated attempt to bar him from the election in September – in which Gasim is also competing.

“The oversight committee received a total of 18 documents and a number of minutes from the JSC. The documents show that a magistrate [from Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court] had originally proposed a bench of judges for the court to the JSC on September 2, 2012,” Hamid claimed.

According to the MDP Spokesperson, the JSC had responded to the proposal by letter on September 4, calling for the aforementioned magistrate to “not do anything”.

“On the same day [September 4, 2012], The JSC then held a meeting at 12:30 whereby they proposed a new bench before ratifying it and sending it to the Supreme Court for approval.

“The JSC received the approval from the court on the same day and the bench proposed by the magistrate was never even discussed,” he added.

Responding to the MDP’s claims, JP Spokesperson Moosa Ramiz stated that Gasim had “every right” to sit on the JSC under the Maldivian constitution.

“Actually Mr Gasim is the JSC member not on behalf of the Jumhooree Party, but is there from the people’s majilis, so there are no more comments from the party on this matter,” Ramiz stated.

Gasim Ibrahim was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Local media reported on Tuesday (March 12) that Ramiz had claimed the MDP’s motion to remove Gasim from the JSC was an attempt to tarnish Gasim’s reputation and “good name”.

Furthermore, Ramiz was quoted as saying that the slanderous statements made by the MDP were done because they feared Gasim’s popularity as a presidential candidate.

The parliament secretary general confirmed to local newspaper Haveeru that the motion to remove Gasim from the 10 member JSC had been received.

Last month, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul raised concerns over the politicisation of the JSC.

“I have heard from numerous sources that the current composition of the JSC is inadequate and politicised.

Because of this politicisation, the commission has been subjected to all sorts of external influence and consequently has been unable to function properly,” Knaul stated last month.

Knaul said that she believed it best for such a body to be composed of retired or sitting judges, adding that it may be advisable for some representation of the legal profession or academics to be included.

However, she maintained that no political representation at all should be allowed in a commission such as the JSC.

In response to the Knaul’s findings, Gasim accused her of lying and joking about the state of the Maldivian judiciary.

“[Gabriela Knaul] claimed that the judges were not appointed transparently, I am sure that is an outright lie. She is lying, she did not even check any document at all nor did she listen to anybody.

“She is repeating something that was spoon-fed to her by someone else. I am someone who sits in JSC. She claimed there were no regulations or mechanism there. That is a big joke,” Gasim claimed.

Knaul is an independent expert appointed to deliver recommendations on potential areas of reform to the Maldives’ legal system at the 23rd session of the UN Human Rights Council in May, 2013.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

ACC probing alleged ‘jewelry deal’ between Zakat fund donor and Islamic Minister’s wife

The Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) has said it has begun probing into an alleged business deal struck between Firoz Ghulam Khan – who promised to donate a sum of US$ 10,000 to the Zakat fund last year – and the wife of Minister of Islamic Affairs Sheikh Shaheem Ali Saeed, Fathimath Afiyaa.

In September 2012, during a press conference held at the ministry, Khan, a Dubai-based Indian Muslim businessman, announced that he would donate a sum of US$10,000 to the Zakat fund every month in a bid to support the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, headed by Sheikh Shaheem.

“Zakat (Alms) is not something given as charity. This is something I am obliged to do. Zakat money is something that should be given to the needy. I have told Minister Shaheem that I will deposit the money to the fund in the first week of every month,” he was quoted saying in the media.

Speaking to Minivan News on Wednesday (March 13), President of the Anti Corruption Commission Hassan Luthfee confirmed that the case was being probed.

“We first noticed it in the media and began our investigation, and later we also received a complaint from an individual. We are now investigating the matter,” he said.

According to local newspaper Haveeru, the business deal was struck on December 25, just three months after announcement of Zakat fund donation, and involved the formation a company under the name ‘Pure Gold Jewelry Maldives Private Limited’, which intended to sell jewelry to resorts.

Citing a paper it claims to have received from the Ministry of Economic Development, Haveeru claimed that the company had 1500 shares in the name of Shaheem’s wife, while Firoz Ghulam Khan’s net share was 103,500. Kareem Firoz had shares totaling up to 45,000.

Speaking to Minivan News, an official from Company Registration Department of Ministry of Economic Development confirmed that a company under the name Pure Gold Jewelry Maldives Private Limited was set up involving foreign parties. However, he did not reveal any details of the parties.

According to article 15(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act passed in 2000, it is an offence for a Minister or his/her spouse to indulge in business with foreign parties.

Article 15(a) of the act states – “The Chief Justice, or the Speaker of Parliament, or a member of cabinet, or a cabinet minister, or anyone having a position equivalent to that, or the Auditor General, or the Commissioner of Elections, or a Judge of High Court, or an Atoll Chief, or the wife or the husband of any such person, or any state employee which the President decides so and their spouses having private business relations is an offence.”

According to the Article 15(c) of the act, punishment for such an offence includes imprisonment, house arrest or banishment for a period not more than 3 years.

Minister Shaheem – who was placed among the top 500 most influential Muslims in 2010 by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre (RISC) Jordan – was earlier also accused of sexual misconduct in a video broadcast by local media Raajje TV, in which he was seen speaking with a figure in a hijab before leading her through a doorway.

However the Minister denied the allegations claiming that the video was fabricated.

Minister Shaheem’s phone was switched off at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Political Parties Act was fabricated to destroy GIP: GIP

Minister of State for Finance and Spokesperson for President Mohamed Waheed’s abolished Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP), Abbas Adil Riza, has said that he does not accept that the party has been dissolved despite the Elections Commission saying otherwise.

During a press conference held at Nalahiyaa Hotel on Wednesday, Riza said the elections commission had not informed them of the party’s dissolution.

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

Vice President of Elections Commission (EC) Ahmed Fayaz told Minivan News on Tuesday that a total of 11 political parties had now been removed from its political party registry in accordance to the new Act.

President Waheed’s own party, GIP was among the 11 parties dissolved following the bill’s ratification, despite the president’s claims that it had reached 10,000 members.

EC Vice President Fayaz said that whilst GIP and the Maldives Development Alliance (MDA) had both submitted enough forms to meet the 10,000 minimum, many of those forms were still pending and so could not be counted.

“There are two parties who have submitted close to, or over the 10,000 membership minimum, but just because the parties have 10,000 membership forms submitted, it does not mean they have 10,000 party members,” he said at the time.

It had been previously reported that upon ratification of the bill, political parties with fewer than 10,000 members would have three months to reach the required amount or face dissolution.

When asked about the clause, Fayaz stated it only applied to registered parties in accordance to the bill, and that therefore if a party does not meet the 10,000 limit it cannot be classed as such and is therefore exempt from the three-month clause.

Meanwhile Abbas Adil Riza contended that a high priority was given by parliament members in drafting the Political Parties Bill which became law on Tuesday, claiming that the bill was fabricated to destroy the party.  Riza also accused Parliament Speaker Abdulla Shahid of playing a pivotal role in making sure the bill got passed into law.

Last week, both parliament’s minority leader and majority leader unanimously supported to overrule the vetoed Political Parties bill without any amendments, forcing it through. Out of the 67 members present during the vote, 60 voted in favour of the passage of the bill while six voted against the bill and one MP abstained.

During the press conference, Riza also contended that Maldives’ political party system was “significantly in need of smaller political parties” and that all major political parties had “betrayed the nation” because it had the support base needed to do so.

He also contended that the party would file a petition in Supreme Court challenging the Political Parties Act and the Elections Commission in its decision to abolish the party.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad – who is also a member of GIP – echoed similar remarks earlier, claiming the government had decided to take measures to “rectify” the decision to dissolve all but five of the country’s political parties.

He argued that the dissolution of the parties is seen by the state as an infringement of people’s right to form political bodies which he maintained was a constitutional right.

Masood contended that Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor had on Tuesday afternoon sought to file motions with the country’s Supreme Court raising concerns with the decision to dissolve the parties following the ratification of the Act.

However, it remains unclear as to whether the Supreme Court has accepted the case or not.

Addressing the impact of President Waheed’s own party being dissolved, Masood said the decision would not be a problem for the functioning of the present government.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Transcript: President Waheed’s testimony to the Commission of National Inquiry

This article was first published on Dhivehi Sitee. Republished with permission.

Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, who took oath of office as President of the Maldives on February 7 2012, gave an interview to the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) on May 8 2012. Dhivehi Sitee has seen a copy of the English translation of the interview. Shared here is Dhivehi Sitee’s reading of the document. Some of the questions and responses have been summarised for brevity. Where I have been unable to decipher a coherent meaning from the translation, I have left the text and words as is, marked [sic].

Could you tell us details of how your meeting with the Coalition on 30 January 2012?

Leaders of the Civil Alliance first asked me to meet them on 20 January. By then they had been protesting for several days and nights. It was Adhaalath Party President Imran who called and requested the meeting. I think it was a Friday. I said I could meet him at 4:00 p.m. I informed President Nasheed via an SMS. If you wish, you can send someone from the President’s Office to participate, I told him. There was no response. Circumstances prevented them from coming, so the meeting did not happen.

A few days passed, and he called me again. I think it was the night of 30 January. They would come to meet me after the protests ended for the night.

Usually, the protests ended late. Some nights they went on until 2:00. Some people stayed up watching the protests on television till about 1:00. Me too. I usually stayed up until the end. They did not come at 12:00 as agreed. I received information they were coming to see me after a meeting elsewhere. When they came, there were about fifteen or twelve of them.

There were some leaders, leaders of protests too. This included Imran, Umar Naseer…I can’t recall their names right now…they came. As it was, before this meeting, I happened to have said something about Abdulla Ghaazee’s arrest. First I wrote a blog post saying I did not agree with the decision, and that I wasn’t happy about it.

Later, at a press conference I gave at the President’s Office, I said,

“I still believe he [Abdulla Ghaazee] should be released. But he mustn’t return to the bench until all issues surrounding him were addressed.”

From then on, everyone was ‘indignant’ [sic] with me. At the same time, I was becoming more popular among the protesters. Others, however, were not happy with me for saying that Abdulla Ghaazee should be released though not allowed on the bench.

I thought this was the reason they wanted to meet me. To ask me about what I had said. Considering how they do things, I assumed they were putting it on. It had been a long time since the protests started and, at the time, they were losing momentum. I thought it was just a PR stunt.

I believed, and still do, that Abdulla Ghaazee should have been released.

When they did turn up, I told them why I thought Abdulla Ghaazee should be released.

“He was arrested extra-legally. But, with the problems surrounding him, a judge of a court, he shouldn’t be on the bench,” these were my thoughts.

Even if requested by the judiciary, or acting on his own volition, Abdulla Ghaaze must not return to the bench until all investigations pending against him were completed. That would have been the best for peace and harmony.

“If there is a change in leadership, given how the protests are going, are you ready to take on the responsibilities of the government?” they responded.

“There is no need for a question like that. If, for any reason, the President steps aside, I should take his place. That’s my legal responsibility”, I told them.

“Say you had to carry out the responsibility. What would you do then?” one of them, I don’t know who, asked me.

“I am a member of a small party. This government came to power in a coalition,” I responded. If I were to take on the responsibility, I said, “I will work with everyone.”

“If that’s how you stand, we are with you,” they responded.

“We have a pact now,” one of them said to me as they left.

That was how the meeting went.

**********

There was a cabinet meeting the next morning. The moment I walked in, before I was able to say a word, Sheikh Hussein Rasheed jumped up.

“That was some meeting last night! I will not sit at the same table with someone who’s been in such a meeting!” Sheikh Hussein Rasheed walked out.

Other Ministers wanted to know what I had discussed at the meeting. I got a little upset.

“None of your business. I don’t have to answer to Ministers,” I said. I was really very displeased with them.

“I don’t have to tell you anything,” I said. “It’s not that I am going to keep it from you, it’s just that there’s no need for such questioning.”

The questions came mostly from people like Shifa, Zulfa, Hassan Latheef. The rest had none to ask.

I told them what I have just told you, what happened [at the meeting], what we talked about.

They began asking more questions. The President interrupted.

“The Vice President has explained what happened. That’s the end of it,” he said.

There were no more questions; it was the last time we talked about it. That was during a working meeting. Later that day, in the afternoon, there was an official meeting. No questions were asked.

*********

Did anyone in the Civil Alliance ask you not to resign under any circumstances?

Yes, that’s possible. I am not someone who has ever thought of resigning. I had been given a post…it is possible that if someone had asked me if I planned on resigning, I would have said ‘No, I have no such plan.’

Why should anyone even ask me such a question? I don’t know why I should resign at all.

**********

Why did you make a statement at around 2:30-3:00 on the morning of 7 February asking everyone to act within the law. You also warned the military and police. Why?

Yes. As usual, we were watching the protest. What we saw that night was unusual. We saw the police leaving the place [Artificial Beach] and a fight breaking out. As far as I remember, I do make such statements on occasion. So I gave a statement that night, too, asking everyone to act according to the law.

“If things carry on like this, it may get out of control,” I thought.

No one was asking me anything, no one sought my counsel. As Vice President, I was very concerned with what was happening. That’s why I gave the statement, so everyone could hear.

**********

How much truth is in the statement that President Nasheed called you on the 7th and received no response?

The last time President Nasheed spoke to me was at tea, after the cabinet meeting. I haven’t spoken to him since. If he had called me, there would be a call log, right? His number is still in my phone as HEP. If he had called me, my phone would register a missed call, right? He did not call me. Had he wanted to, there were plenty of options. We are both under the protection of the SPG [security detail]. If he had asked one of the officers to call me, or fetch me, they would have done so. I don’t believe he called me at all.

**********

Did you contact any political leaders of the Civil Alliance during the events of 7 February?

Not even slightly do I recall talking to any political leaders that night.

Is there any truth to President Nasheed’s various, and changing, statements that you were a leader in this mutiny, that deals had been made and other such stories?

I have no such information.

President Maumoon made a statement that night. Did you have any role in that?

I did not talk to President Maumoon. I first talked to Maumoon only after this change was brought.

**********

Why did you not attend the cabinet working session on the morning of 7 February?

As you know, so much was happening in Male’ that day. Huge events. On TV I saw President Nasheed go out to the Republic Square. I saw fighting. I forgot it was a working day, that a cabinet meeting was scheduled for the day. The whole day was so chaotic, I completely forgot about the cabinet meeting. I didn’t think anyone would be going to work that day so I stayed home. We hadn’t slept that night.

In the afternoon, Abdulla Shahid called to say the President was about to resign. This, too, made me sure there wouldn’t be a cabinet meeting that day. Isn’t this to be expected in a situation like this?

The way things were going, it just didn’t occur to me there would be a cabinet meeting that day. I would have been really anxious when I heard the President was to resign. I didn’t hear it from the President, he did not talk to me or call me. Abdulla Shahid did.

“It will only be official when I receive the letter. I haven’t got it yet. I’ll call you when I have it,” Shahid said.

One and a half hours later he rang me again. He had received the letter. Would I come to the People’s Majlis and take the oath?

So, actually, I didn’t know there was a cabinet meeting that day. No one from the President’s Office called to say a Cabinet meeting was on, no one called to invite me.

I forgot. But, surely someone from the President’s Office could have phoned and asked if I were coming? Nobody did. There were cabinet ministers around him when he resigned, I saw it on TV. I only learned later that his resignation had been preceded by a cabinet meeting.

**********

It has been alleged that, during a time of such crisis, you failed to perform your responsibilities as Vice President. How do you respond?

To fulfil my responsibilities, I made a statement. I believed I had to say something, so I made a statement urging obedience to the law. I said I was willing to help in anyway I can with everything. I made the statement because no one in the government was in touch with me.

President Nasheed didn’t call me. He made no attempt to discuss things with me. And, given our relationship at the time, I didn’t want to take the initiative and get involved in things he hadn’t invited me to. He hadn’t called me, so I didn’t know how things were going. But I did call [retired Major General] Moosa Jaleel sometime in the morning, when the police-military confrontation began. He did not answer.

Did President Nasheed ask you then, or at any time, to finish up and go? To ‘retreat’ [sic] or resign?

No. Never. But, back when the whole cabinet resigned, he discussed the possibility of mid-term elections with a lot of people. Mid-term elections could only be held if both of us resigned together. But, even then, he did not ask me to resign. I learned indirectly that he, or others, wanted me to resign.

The British High Commissioner, in a meeting about a year and a half ago, asked me what my plan was.

“How will I know what to do? It’s not been discussed with me. When the time comes, I will do the best for my country,” I replied.

**Dhivehi Sitee Note: What the transcript says next is below in quotation marks. I am not sure of the meaning of the paragraph, so I have left it as it is. **End of Note

Then he asked me what was Plan B, I told him that Plan B was to go according to this within this unrests, then the High Commissioner asked me if so what was Plan C. Nobody replied to that, then the Commissioner told that it is talking to each other. Plan C was not followed later.

**********

How much truth is in the statement that you sent some people to take over TVM before President Nasheed resigned?

My younger brother called me to tell me he was there. But it was after I took my oath. He worked in TVM for a long time, and would go there on other people’s request. I don’t know the details. I told him to remain there until we knew what was going on. He did. I began working on handing over TVM to MBC the next day. Within two days of me becoming President—in less than 48 hours—the board of MBC came to meet me.

“I’ll see what I can do,” I said. I handed over the responsibility of handing over TVM and Radio Maldives to MBC to the Attorney General. It took several days—around two weeks, I think, to make the required changes to the board, transferring assets and such like. As soon as the changes were completed he [brother] left TVM.

Do you believe that the situation got to a level where President Nasheed had to resign?

No, I don’t believe that. Not at all. I was surprised. President Nasheed is not someone who does things that easily. From what I have seen, he never did anything he did not want to do. I believe that things could have been resolved through talking. Why that didn’t happen, I don’t know.

How come people who led things that day have been given such high posts?

‘We all expected it to turn like this’ [sic]. When things changed, and I came to be in charge, my first priority was to maintain law and order. The Attorney General advised me, too, that I should first secure the Police, Home Affairs, and Defence.

So I gathered members of all political parties and continued to do things according to their advice. They suggested those names. They are not people I know.

But then again, I don’t know a lot of people.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

Eleven political parties dissolved after controversial bill ratified by President

Additional reporting by Neil Merrett.

Five political parties remain registered in the Maldives following the ratification of the controversial Political Parties Bill by President Mohamed Waheed.

Vice President of Elections Commission (EC) Ahmed Fayaz told Minivan News today (March 12) that a total of 11 political parties had now been removed from its political party registry in accordance to the new bill.

Out of the 16 parties that had previously existed prior to the ratification of the bill, only the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Jumhoree Party (JP) and Adhaalath Party (AP) remain registered in the Maldives.

The Political Parties Bill, ratified today (March 12), states that parties who do not meet the required 10,000 members will no longer be recognised as such in the Maldives.

President Waheed’s own party, Gaumee Ihthihad Party (GIP) was one of the 11 parties dissolved following the bill’s ratification, despite the president’s claims that it had reached 10,000 members.

EC Vice President Fayaz said that whilst GIP and the Maldives Development Alliance (MDA) had both submitted enough forms to meet the 10,000 minimum, many of those forms were still pending and so could not be counted.

“There are two parties who have submitted close to, or over the 10,000 membership minimum, but just because the parties have 10,000 membership forms submitted, it does not mean they have 10,000 party members.

“We followed procedure in accordance to the [Political Parties] bill. Within that bill there is a clause that clearly states, that when a party that has less than 10,000 members it is to become null and void. The EC acted in accordance to the law,” Fayaz told Minivan News.

It had been previously reported that upon ratification of the bill, political parties with fewer than 10,000 members would have three months to reach the required amount or face dissolution.

When asked about the clause, Fayaz stated it only applied to registered parties in accordance to the bill, and that therefore if a party does not meet the 10,000 limit it cannot be classed as such and is therefore exempt from the three-month clause.

Government takes measures to “rectify” Political Parties Bill

Speaking to Minivan News, President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad said the government had decided to take measures to “rectify” the decision to dissolve all but five of the country’s political parties.

The dissolution of the parties is seen by the state as an infringement of people’s right to form political bodies, according to Masood.

“The constitution does give the right for every citizen to do this,” he added.

Masood contended that Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor had this afternoon sought to file motions with the country’s Supreme Court raising concerns with the decision to dissolve the parties following the ratification of the controversial Political Parties Bill by President Waheed earlier today.

However, at the time of press, he said he was not aware exactly of the nature of documentation submitted to the courts by the attorney general.

Addressing the impact of President Waheed’s own party being dissolved, Masood said the decision would not be a problem for the functioning of the present government.

However, he declined to comment on what implications a lack of party could have on President Waheed’s prospects for re-election.

“There maybe some issues there going forward, but you would need to speak with a spokesperson for the president’s party,” he said. “I would rather not comment on the matter.”

Local media reported that the AG’s Office had submitted both the Political Parties Act and the Privileges and Powers of Parliament Members Act to the Supreme Court today, stating that the bills contain a number of legal discrepancies.

At time of press, Attorney General Azima Shukoor and GIP party spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza were not responding to calls from Minivan News.

President Waheed’s Special Advisor and Leader of the government-aligned Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), Dr Hassan Saeed, and MP Ahmed ‘Sun Travel’ Shiyam, Interim Leader of the recently formed Maldives Development Alliance (MDA), were also not returning calls today.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

IFJ warns that Privileges Act will undermine journalist source protection

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has warned that the Parliamentary Privileges Act pressed into law today (March 12) will undermine the ability of Maldivian journalists to protect their sources.

Journalists in many developed countries, including the UK and Australia, are routinely sentenced to contempt of court extending to imprisonment for declining to reveal sources when asked.

The Maldives is one of the few countries to have so-called ‘shield laws’ protecting journalists from this, with the constitution containing specific provisions concerning freedom of expression in a bid to inspire confidence in potential whistleblowers.

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

However Section 17(a) of the new Parliamentary Privileges Act states: “[Parliament or a Parliamentary Committee has the power to] summon anyone to parliament or one of its committees to give witness or to hand over any information which the parliament wish to seek.”

The Act was passed after a presidential veto was overridden by parliament, in a vote that obtained rare cross-party support. The Act follows the refusal of senior government and police officials to attend committee hearings when summoned, including Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz, and would theoretically criminalise such refusal in future.

The IFJ endorse the the Maldivian Journalist Association (MJA)’s opinion that the new power “is too broad in its provisions and could undermine the constitutional protection that journalists currently enjoy.”

“The IFJ believes that [Article 28 of the Constitution] is a salutary provision of law which makes the Maldives one of the few countries to provide constitutional protection to sources of journalists’ information,” the IFJ said in a statement.

“The IFJ joins the MJA in asking for a reconsideration of provisions in the Parliamentary Privileges Act which may undermine this valuable protection afforded to journalists and all citizens,” it added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed ratifies controversial bills as AG vows to challenge in court

President Mohamed Waheed has ratified the two controversial bills – the Parliament’s Privileges Bill and Political Parties Bill – despite previous claims that the two bills had several lapses and “unconstitutional” elements.

Following the President’s initial vetoing of the two bills, parliament last Tuesday by a house majority overruled the presidential veto and forced the bill into law, giving the president no option but to ratify the bills – one of which would see the dissolution of his own political party.

The bill took a week before it was ratified, with parliamentary group leaders of all major political parties condemning the government for “delaying the ratification of the bill”.

The leaders claimed that Waheed – whose party Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP) is among the first few parties that would be dissolved under the Political Parties Act if it became law – had a personal interest in delaying the bills.

During a ceremony held in President’s office, President Mohamed Waheed after ratifying the bill stated that he did not believe the bill was delayed in ratifying.

According to the President, the bill had been delayed due to certain punctuation errors that needed to be rectified by the parliament before it was ratified.

He stated that the government received the bill on last Thursday but had sent it back as it contained “major punctuation errors”. This, Waheed said, was the cause of delay as the government had only received a ‘punctuation-error free’ version of the bill on Monday.

“I got the corrected bill yesterday after I had sent it to the parliament on Monday. I have to go through the changes before I sign it. Therefore, I do not believe that [the bills] have been delayed to the extent where some parties should go on strike,” he said.

“It is not that we are facing a huge crisis or a world ending. Neither are we facing a medical pandemic here. So I don’t see a reason for me to rush things,” he added.

Waheed contended that the passage of the bill did not concern a financial crisis or the destruction of a person, and argued that he was not purposely delaying the passage of the bills.

Responding to the concerns raised by political party leaders regarding the bill, President Waheed said he respected the parliament, unlike other political leaders, and claimed that on March 4 (Parliament Opening Day) people would know “who did not respect who”.

“I have been working to uphold the law and the constitution from day one. To uphold the rule of law. So what PPM MP Abdulla Yameen said was said very irresponsible,” he said referring specifically to the PPM’s presidential hopeful and half brother of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Waheed added that he was advised by Attorney General Azima Shukoor to ratify the bills despite the legal and constitutional inconsistencies.

In the meantime, Shukoor said that the government had withdrawn its previous case challenging the political parties’ bill, but stated that she would file the case again as soon as the bills are signed into law.

“We will seek a temporary stay order against the Elections Commission to withhold the immediate dissolution of political parties that failed to attain the required numbers in terms of membership,” she said.

Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham earlier told local media that ratification of the Political Parties Bill meant political parties that do not have the required number of members would be dissolved without any transitional period.

According to Usham, the state has requested the Supreme Court issue a writ that would prevent dissolution of the parties prior to a court decision or until a transitional mechanism is set up.

“Referring to the legal principles employed in other democratic societies, dissolution of a political party that is formed in accordance with the law is only given on very exceptional occasions,” he said at time.

Shukoor was on Tuesday quoted in the local media saying that the government had withdrawn a case it had filed challenging the Parliament’s Privileges Bill as well.

However, she did not give any detail as to what clauses in the bill did the government intend to challenge.

The Attorney General said that she had received concerns from Maldives Police Service regarding the privileges bill and would once again challenge the bill as soon as it is signed into law, and this time “include the concerns raised by police”.

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz in an interview given to local media earlier expressed concern over the Parliament’s Privileges bill, claiming the MPs are now “technically immune from the law”

Commissioner Riyaz claimed that the act gives enormous privileges to parliamentarians – privileges that are not even given to former presidents, which he said was “very concerning” and meant there would be no equality before the law.

“The [act] says that no person should indulge in an act that obstructs the work of the parliament. I really don’t comprehend what it is trying to say. I don’t think anybody would know beforehand what the parliament may decide to do. I don’t believe that is possible,” he said

Earlier a joint press statement issued by parliamentary group leaders of all major political parties called on the president to respect the constitution and ratify the two bills without any further delay.

Parliamentary group leaders including Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM)’s MP Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, Jumhoree Party (JP) Leader Gasim Ibrahim and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali had all expressed concern over the delaying of the ratification of the bill.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Cloudy side of life” protest pamphlet distributed at ITB trade show

Maldives anti-government campaigners have attempted to use this year’s ITB Berlin trade show to draw attention to allegations of police brutality and human rights abuses following the controversial transfer of power back in February 2012.

The Ministry of Tourism last year fell short of its stated aim of welcoming one million visitors to the country during 2012, citing difficulties resulting from media coverage of political turmoil following the change of government that brought President Dr Mohamed Waheed to office.

However, authorities in the country have since pledged to surpass the one million visitor goal in 2013, claiming late last year that the “hard days” were over for tourism in the country following 2012’s political turmoil.

Despite the government’s stance, as part of a so-called silent protest at this year’s ITB event, anti-government campaigners distributed leaflets entitled, ‘the cloudy side of life‘ – a play on the country’s official ‘Sunny Side of Life’ tourism slogan. The publication includes excerpts of reports from the Amnesty International NGO and select quotes from the UN high commissioner for human rights concerning alleged abuses.

“White sandy beaches, dancing palm trees and sparkling cocktails beckon the eager tourist to the Maldives: the emerald Isles in the warm blue Indian Ocean,” the leaflet reads.

“However, a few miles away from your secluded resort island, the same government, backed by the same resort-owners who wave over the honeymooners to the sunny side of life, with their other hand, imposes great injustices, brutality, and human rights abuses on us, the citizens.”

No identification of any organisation or political party in the Maldives affiliated with the leaflet is included on the publication, which accuses the current government of President Waheed of coming to power through a coup and being backed by resort owners advertising at the fair.

It concludes by requesting visitors “reconsider” a decision to visit the Maldives that will “directly fund” alleged human rights abuses and the present “illegal” government.

Last year, a Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) report welcomed by the US and the UN rejected accusations that the present government came to power illegally, despite claims from former President Nasheed that the report’s conclusions were flawed and failed to include key witness statements and evidence. These allegations were later backed by Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed, a one time SAARC Secretary General and Former Human Rights Minister under the current government who was dismissed from her post late last year.

ITB Berlin, which ran this year from March 6 until yesterday (March 10), is one of the world’s largest tourism shows and was attended by Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb, as well as a host of local tourism industry figures.

Adheeb was not responding to calls from Minivan News at the time of press,while Deputy Tourism Minister Mohamed Maleeh Jamal was not in the country when contacted.

Industry confidence

Speaking back in January this year, Tourism Minister Adheeb said he was confident the industry could meet it goals of bringing one million visitors to the Maldives in 2013,  despite falling short of this mark by 40,000 people in 2012.

“There were a lot of hiccups last year with the political turmoil that the country experienced. It is important that we do not compare ourselves to other destinations like Sri Lanka or Seychelles, as our tourism market is very different. We have a high-value tourism market,” he said at the time.  “We will formulate a strategy to go forward this year.”

Following last year’s transfer of power, the incoming government of President Waheed sought to utilise public relations groups and advertising to try and offset the perceived impact of negative news headlines following the transfer of power.

This focus included agreeing a US$250,000 (MVR 3.8million) advertising deal to promote the country’s tourism industry on the BBC through sponsorship of its weather services, as well as signing a £93,000 per month (US$150,000) contract with public relations group Ruder Finn to try and improve the country’s image internationally.

Boycott calls

Former President Mohamed Nasheed last year called for a tourism boycott of the Maldives, as he continued to question the legitimacy of the government of President Waheeed – his former vice president.

However, these calls were soon dropped by Nasheed and supporters of the now opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), which is still pressing for early elections.

Despite wider fears about the impact of political uncertainty on holidaymakers, Deputy Tourism Minister Mohamed Maleeh Jamal claimed back in September 2012 that “the hard days” were over for the Maldives tourism industry following the release of the CNI’s findings.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)