Category: Politics

Canadian government’s statement “misleading”, “one-sided”: Maldives Foreign Ministry

The Maldivian government has expressed “disappointment” over a “misleading” statement by the Canadian Foreign Ministry, which accused it of threatening to arrest its political opponents with a view to eliminating former President Mohamed Nasheed’s candidacy in an upcoming election.

Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird, a member of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), issued a statement on July 27, in which he stated “It is clear that the arrests of senior officials of the Nasheed government are politically motivated. Such actions are completely unacceptable and must be reversed.”

“The threats of the present government to arrest its opponents, including former President Nasheed – the only democratically elected president in the last four decades – so as to prevent his candidacy, undermine that government’s credibility and violate its undertakings to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group,” Baird said.

“The Maldives has been given the benefit of the doubt by the Commonwealth so far. Continued intimidation, illegal arrests and other authoritarian tactics by the present government may require the Commonwealth to consider a different approach, in our view.”

Canada’s statement preceded a rally by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s government-aligned Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), at which senior party figures blasted the government for not being able to “put down” Nasheed “and his 200 hounds”, and called for the ousted President to be “put in solitary confinement”.

On July 24, former Justice Minister under Gayoom and current Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel, described Nasheed, his party and the Raajje TV station as “enemies of the state.”

“We will take action against whoever incites violence against the police, no matter who it is or what kind of position they hold or have held in the past,” Jameel vowed.

Following Nasheed’s resignation under controversial circumstances on February 7, the Criminal Court issued a warrant for Nasheed’s arrest.

Nasheed’s government had detained Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed, accusing him of “taking the entire judicial system in his fist” in order to protect the remnants of Gayoom’s administration from prosecution for corruption and human rights abuses.

The warrant was never acted on by the police, amid tense confrontations outside Nasheed’s residence.

However police this week ordered Nasheed to attend police headquarters on August 2, to answer allegations in a tapped phone conversation that he had request supporters “fight back” against police.

“The Waheed administration is currently demonstrating a clear pattern of abuse of power and tactics aimed at removing President Nasheed from the upcoming Presidential race,” claimed MDP Spokesperson, MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, who was himself recently arrested.

“The letter to summon President Nasheed is baseless and fails to state any specific charges. The letter refers indirectly to attacks on police, vandalising of police property and claims that their observations have led them to believe President Nasheed is responsible for such events.

“This summons is an attempt by the Government to thwart the progress of the Commission of National Inquiry and former President Nasheed’s participation in upcoming elections. Furthermore, members of the security forces have openly issued death threats to President Nasheed.

“In the absence of any specific criminal charges, “we are of the opinion that the only safe course of action will be for President Nasheed to provide a written statement without physically entering the police station,” Ghafoor said.

However in its response to the Canadian government, the Maldives’ Foreign Ministry said it “would like to make it very clear to the members of the international community that the government has not arrested, nor has it made any threat of arresting, its political opponents.” the Maldives Foreign Ministry responded.

Instead, the Ministry stated, “it is the prerogative of the Prosecutor General to decide on whom and when to charge an individual of criminal offence.”

“As part of a reform programme launched in 2004, the Maldives adopted a new Constitution with clear separation of powers between the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of government.

“The Constitution also established several new State-bodies, such as the Prosecutor General, and the Human Rights Commission of Maldives. These institutions are fully independent from the Executive branch of the government, and indeed assert their independence.

“Now that these institutions are independent, everyone, including our valuable friends in the international community, should be prepared to accept the decisions of these institutions,” the Ministry said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Raajje TV sue police over decision to “not cooperate” with station

Local TV station Raajje TV has announced that it will file a lawsuit against the Maldives Police Service (MPS) following their decision to not to cooperate with the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)-aligned TV station.

In a statement the station claimed that the actions of the police narrowed the constitutional right to freedom of expression and the station’s freedom to practice journalism, and said that the actions of the police were depriving its reporters of their constitutional rights.

The case was filed in the Civil Court, with a request for the court to issue an order to the police to resume their support and cooperation with the TV station, and to hold that its withdrawal was illegitimate.

Civil Court has also confirmed that they have received the case.

Speaking to local media, Deputy CEO of Raajje TV Abdulla Yaamin said that police were discriminating against the station in collusion with other media outlets by inviting them to police press conferences and providing information.

“Due to these reasons we filed a lawsuit to invalidate the police decision. Because of it, our journalists do not get protection from them anymore,” he said.

Raajje TV has also accused police of targeting, assaulting and harrasing its reporters during MDP’s protests.

A statement from Raajje TV on July 10 read: “Raajje TV journalists have been forced to live in fear as they have increasingly become targets of attacks by the national security forces, particularly the police service. The station also believes that these attacks and harassment has been the source of emotional distress and psychological damage to all Raajje TV employees.”

Last week police announced that they had stopped cooperating with Raajje TV, claiming that the opposition-aligned TV station was broadcasting false and slanderous content about police which had undermined their credibility and public confidence.

In a press statement released today, MPS stated that the decision was reached after the station had “deliberately and continuously broadcast false and baseless content with the intention to incite hatred” towards the institution.

“Also, Raajje TV’s broadcasting of false and baseless content about the police institution is seen to be carried out for the political benefit of certain parties and such actions neither fit in with the norms of professional journalism or the principles followed by media outlets of other democratic countries,” read the statement.

Controversial video

The decision from the police comes just a day after Raajje TV broadcasted CCTV video footage of some police officers, who the station alleged were “caught on video” while they were stealing petrol from a motorbike parked in a small road in Male’.

However police denied the allegations and condemned Raajje TV for spreading “false and untrue” information about them.

Superintendent of Police Abdulla Navaz in a press briefing dismissed the claims and said that the video footage was showing the police carrying out their legal duty.

Raajje TV had twisted the details and information in their news report, which Navaz said showed police confiscating a five litre container of petrol from the road.

He also stated that the container was confiscated after police on patrol duty noticed that someone had connected a pipe to steal petrol from a parked motorbike in the road.

“It was decided that we would find the owner of the motor bike and hand over the things that were confiscated. The petrol container is also kept under police observation as evidence,” he said.

Navaz showed the media documents filed during the confiscation.

In the press briefing he expressed concerns over Raajje TV’s “irresponsible” actions and said that the police would file complaints with concerned authorities.

Demand for apology

Following the broadcast of the video, the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) sent a letter to the TV station stating that it had broadcast the content without checking its authenticity and was therefore ordered to apologise for their actions.

The MBC in the letter stated that following the broadcast of the video, police had denied the allegation and released details of the incident, but said the station had failed to inform the public of their error.

Raajje TV’s Deputy CEO Yaamin responded to the letter stating that the station had no intention of undermining the reputation of the police.

He also stated that the station had broadcast the entire recording of the police press briefing held to deny the allegations, giving them the opportunity to defend themselves from the allegations.

He also stated that police were very unresponsive to the queries of reporters from the station.

“They don’t give a proper response when we call to get a comment for a news piece. Even today, when our reporters went to cover the events where the murdered police officer was brought in Male, they sent us away saying that they cannot give us protection,” he said.

“Enemy of the state”

Following the murder of Lance Corporal Ahmed Haleem two days before, the government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan alleged that that the TV station was responsible along with opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) for attacks on police.

In a joint press conference held on the same day, Home Minister Mohamed Jameel and Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz said that Raajje TV had spread “baseless allegations” about police brutality and the police role in the controversial change of government on February 7, thereby inciting and encouraging violence against the police and their families.

Jameel described MDP and Raajje TV as “enemies of the state,” while Riyaz said former President Mohamed Nasheed and senior MDP officials were behind the planning of psychological and physical attacks on the police.

“I note that former President Mohamed Nasheed is behind the planning of the attacks and damage caused to police property and repeated physical attacks on police officers,” Riyaz said.

Claiming Raajje TV’s reporting was “not responsible journalism,” Riyaz said that the station had spread baseless allegations regarding police brutality towards protesters and police role in the controversial change of government.

“Raajje TV has repeatedly attempted to defame and raise questions over police professionalism by broadcasting baseless allegations to create distrust towards the police,” he added.

He went on to refute the TV station’s CCTV video footage that suggested police had stolen fuel from parked motor cycles, claiming Raajje TV was attempting to falsely cast the entire police force as “brutal” and as “thieves.”

Raajje TV is one of the five private broadcasters of the country and is the only opposition-aligned TV station the country. The TV station has come under pressure and criticism from the government and political parties aligned to government for its opposition coverage.

The TV station first went on air as “Future TV” in 2008, but started broadcasting as “Raajje TV” in 2011. Its audience increased dramatically following the takeover of the state broadcaster by the police and military on February 7.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP would consider halting protests for “substantial” high-level talks

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has said it will not rule out halting ongoing protests to facilitate fresh “high-level talks” with its political rivals, but would only do so should it see  “substantial” commitments from government-aligned parties.

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s government meanwhile stated it will not consider reconvening talks between senior politicians and former President Mohamed Nasheed until he ceases the alleged “harassment” and “threats of violence” against its ministers.

Proposed “Roadmap” talks were launched in February with the stated aim of overcoming the political deadlock resulting from the controversial transfer of power that brought President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan into office. Former President Nasheed and his party  continue to allege that Waheed came to power in  a “coup d’etat” – and that the government is illegitimate.

Convenor of the roadmap talks, Ahmed Mujuthaba, on July 12 announced that a series of “high-level” discussions will be held between President Waheed and the leaders of the country’s man political parties after 16 previous attempts had resulted in “no breakthrough.”

The last round of the UN-mediated talks, held at Vice President Waheed Deen’s Bandos Island Resort and Spa in early June, collapsed after parties aligned with the government presented the ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) with a list of 30 demands.

The list included calls that the MDP “stop practising black magic and sorcery”, “stop the use of sexual and erotic tools”, and “not walk in groups of more than 10”.

MDP MP and Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor told Minivan News today that while the party’s protests that it maintains are “largely peaceful” were “totally within” the law, it would not be a “big deal” to stop the street demonstrations if it would help secure meaningful talks.

However, Ghafoor claimed that the party was ultimately sceptical over the commitment of government-aligned parties to ensure “substantial” and “worthwhile” dialogue.

“We have always maintained dialogue is the best way to proceed in the current situation,” he claimed. “What we have seen in the last party talks has just been ridiculous demands such as the issues about keeping crows and using black magic. We found out as a party that we are not dealing with serious people.”

According to documents said to have been provided to the international community by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, former President Nasheed has over the last week offered to stop ongoing street demonstrations to facilitate high level talks – but only if certain conditions are met by his political rivals.

The conditions stated in the document include addressing possible outcomes of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) presently investigating the events during and leading up to February’s transfer of power.  The CNI has been given a deadline of the end of August to concludes its report.

The MDP is also said to have requested allowing only the participation of parties with an elected parliamentary representative to attend the talks.  Such a condition would effectively rule out the participation of President Waheed.

Speaking to Minivan News today, President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza claimed that the government had been attempting since February 16 this year to hold high-level talks with the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to facilitate talks on resolving the current political situation.

However, he denied that the government had called for an end to the MDP’s ongoing protests, claiming instead that it was more concerned by the alleged “unlawful” behaviour of opposition supporters such as in the “harassment” of government officials during demonstrations in recent weeks.

“There has been harassment on several occasions of late by the MDP,” he claimed. “The government will not yield to threats of violence.”

Abbas claimed that in negotiating over continuing potential talks, the government had also refused to negotiate regarding addressing any potential outcomes of the CNI.

“Nasheed has continued to insist on doing this,” he claimed. “But we have said that we refuse to interfere with the country’s judiciary.   We have been clear that we will not negotiate on the CNI or do anything that may compromise its work.”

In a statement released last week, the government called for Nasheed and his supporters to stop “violent activities” in order to ensure any high-level  talks could conclude “fruitfully”.

“Former President Nasheed’s supporters have been agitating and protesting on the streets at times with violent incidences for the past two weeks,” the statement read. “He and his supporters have been harassing government officials for the past five months indulging in violent attacks including the burning of the gender minister’s car, a police motorcycle and a newly constructed police building.”

Foreign Ministry view

According to a Ministry of Foreign Affairs briefing, discussions took place last Thursday, (July 26) between Ahmed Mujuthaba, President Waheed and UN Resident Coordinator Andrew Cox to convey a message that Nasheed would conditionally agree to end the MDP protests.

According to the document, the conditions set by the MDP required high level talks to resume at the “highest Level”, with the discussions taking into account the outcomes of the CNI’s findings on top of the existing six-point agenda set for the all-party talks.

The government was said to have responded the following day with five conditions that included:

  • All talks are held in the Maldives
  • The nine parties previously involved in the talks should continue to take part
  • Participants must be at the level of party deputy leaders or higher
  • The previous six-point agenda remained in place without adding the CNI to the discussion or anything that might “influence” its conclusions
  • The MDP agree in writing not to continue street protests for a “period of time” before talks resume

The briefing document claimed the MDP responded by calling on the government to only allow political parties with a parliamentary representation in the discussions. The opposition party said it would then put a stop to ongoing protests that have taken place over the last few weeks once talks continued.

The opposition party also said to have called for any agreed agenda to include the outcomes of the CNI.

By Sunday (July 29), the government was claimed to have responded that talks between the MDP and coalition parties be conducted on the basis of a “two-track” system based around political discussions and parliament.  The government also called for all parties including the MDP to refrain from holding protests.

The proposal was also said to have called for the agenda on the previous all party talks to remain unchanged, with the MDP addressing any issues regarding the CNI through parliament.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Court fines Shafeeg for defaming Gayoom by publishing book on torture during his rule

Local historian Ahmed Shafeeg has been ordered to pay up to MVR 5000 (US$324) in compensation after the Civil Court on Tuesday found him guilty of defaming former President Mamoon Abdul Gayoom.

Gayoom sued Shafeeg for politically-motivated slander over a book he released in 2010,  in which he claimed that 111 Maldivian citizens were held in custody and tortured under Gayoom’s administration.

The judge ruled in favor of Gayoom in the absence of Shafeeg, noting that the defendant had failed to present himself or a representative to the hearings despite the multiple court summons and attempts by the police to bring him to he court.

Shafeeg has to pay up to MVR 5000 withing one month from the date of the ruling, as a compensation for the damages caused to Gayoom’s character, according to the court.

Chronicles of torture

Shafeeg, now 83, was held in solitary confinement for 83 days in 1995 together with three other writers, including Hassan Ahmed Maniku, Ali Moosa Didi and Mohamed Latheef.

Shafeeg contends that 50 of his diaries containing evidence relating to the deaths of the 111 Maldivians were confiscated during a raid by 15 armed men. He was ultimately released by Gayoom with without charge, and was told by the investigating officer to write a letter of appreciation to the then-President for the pardon.

During the launch of Shafeeg’s book, titled “A Day in the Life of Ahmed Shafeeg”, then-President Mohamed Nasheed observed that he knew the events chronicled by Shafeeg very well.

“Back then, from 1989 and 1990 onward, I spent a very long time – three years in total – in jail. Of that I spent 18 months in solitary confinement, and nine of those months in the tin cell,” he said.

All Maldivian rulers had employed fear to govern, Nasheed said, and he had always believed that Gayoom had him arrested and tortured to serve as a cautionary tale as the former president and his senior officials were already aware of the intent of “a whole generation” to topple his government since the early 80s.

“So the decision to put me through every imaginable torture in the world from the very beginning as an example to all those people was made, in my view, not because of any animosity President Maumoon had towards me personally,” Nasheed said.

He added that Gayoom alone could not be blamed for all the human rights abuses that occurred under his watch.

Nasheed meanwhile also described Gayoom’s decision to take legal action against the historian Shafeeg, who has lasting physical and mental damage from his ordeal, as “going beyond the limits.”

Nasheed said: “I ask President Maumoon very sincerely and respectfully, don’t do this,” Nasheed said. “Go to Shafeeg. Go and ask for his forgiveness. This is not the time to come out and say ‘I’m going to sue Shafeeg.’ If you want to sue Shafeeg now, you will have to sue me. That is because I will repeat what Shafeeg is saying fourfold.”

Together with allegations of corruption in Gayoom’s administration, such as those flagged in audit reports, allegations of torture remain one of the most politically divisive topics in the Maldives.

Since Nasheed took office after beating Gayoom’s 30 year-old autocratic rule in 2008, public opinions – very strongly held – oscillated between a desire for prosecuting Gayoom and his close allies for the torture and corruption and a desire to move on and reconciliation. Nasheed openly supported the latter option to be magnanimous.

However, after his controversial resignation on February 7, which he insisted was forced by an opposition backed military-police coup, Nasheed told Time Magazine that allowing former dictator Maumoon Abdul Gayoom to live in peace following the 2008 election was a wrong decision.

“The lesson is we didn’t deal with Gayoom. That’s the obvious lesson. And my romantic ideas of how to deal with a dictator were wrong. I will agree with that,” Nasheed told Time, in a striking reversal of his magnanimity in 2008.

The court decision in favor of Gayoom also comes less than a week after the UNHRC called for the government to establish an independent commission of inquiry to investigate “all human rights violations, including torture that took place in the State party prior to 2008 and provide compensation to the victims.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament sittings canceled indefinitely by Speaker

Speaker Abdulla Shahid has announced that parliament sittings will be cancelled indefinitely as “a peaceful atmosphere could not be assured” for sittings to proceed amidst rising political tension.

In a press statement today, Speaker Shahid said that MPs of the formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) confronted the Speaker in his private chambers after MDP MP Mohamed Rasheed ‘Kubey’ was forcibly removed at the beginning of today’s sitting.

“Moreover, confrontations occurred between MPs in the chamber to the point of becoming dangerous,” the statement read, adding that “an atmosphere of calm necessary to conduct sittings could not be assured” as all recent sittings had to be cancelled due to disorder.

Shahid explained that he decided to invoke the Speaker’s authority under section 213(e) of the rules of procedure to cancel sittings indefinitely as he believed a political solution had to be sought through dialogue among parliamentary group leaders.

Section 213(e) states that the Speaker has the discretion to not conduct sittings for a period “as a precautionary measure if there is fear of a certain type of danger facing the Majlis.”

Both today and yesterday’s sitting were cancelled after MDP MPs vociferously raised points of order to protest the arrest of MPs during the party’s ongoing street demonstrations and the government’s decision to alter the ‘Aasandha’ health insurance scheme to charge patients from private hospitals and clinics.

MDP MPs led by MP Ali Waheed also disrupted today’s meeting of the Finance Committee alleging that the committee had failed to investigate the government “illegally borrowing” MVR 300 million from the Bank of Maldives.

“Paralysed”

Speaking at a press conference yesterday, MDP MP Ali Waheed argued that parliament has been “paralysed” since the transfer of power on February 7 and that “nothing productive” had been done in the past six months.

MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih ‘Ibu’, parliamentary group leader of the MDP, contended that the government was violating the Public Finance Act by borrowing large sums of money without parliamentary approval.

Ibu claimed that the Finance Minister had written to parliament’s Finance Committee seeking MVR9 billion (US$583 million) for the budget as well as MVR 3 billion (US$194 million) in additional expenditure.

MP Ali Waheed meanwhile noted that MPs last month overwhelmingly rejected a Finance Committee recommendation to make changes to the Aasandha health insurance scheme.

Speaking to press after today’s sitting, MDP Chairperson and Hulhu-Henveiru MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik said the party would not allow parliament to resume while the current government was altering the MDP’s flagship free universal health insurance scheme.

MDP MP Eva Abdulla claimed that the government was facing a shortfall in budgeted funds for the health insurance scheme due to increasing expenditure on the police and army.

“What we’re seeing is the result of a group of people assuming power without making any pledges to the public,” she said. “That is, they do not have to be accountable to the people. They do not have to let the people know what is going on.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Gayoom expresses “frustration” over “foreign influence” in inquiry commission

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom has said that he will not accept that the toppling of former President Nasheed’s government on February 7 was a coup d’état, even if the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI)’s report  came to such a conclusion.

After giving a statement to the CNI, Gayoom in a press conference held at the office of his Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), stated that he had seen the recording of the video in which ousted President Nasheed publicly resigned, and said that it was not made “under duress” and that therefore it was very clear that it “was not a coup”

“Even though I was in Malaysia, I saw the video recording of how he resigned and what he said – such as that he is now resigning, and that if he continued to remain as the president the country may face further grief and pain,” Gayoom said.

“Also, it was he himself who wrote the letter of resignation and it is he who sent the letter to the parliament,” Gayoom claimed added.

Gayoom said that there was no point in Nasheed claiming that it is “a coup” after he had resigned in accordance with the constitution.

“I told this to the members of the CNI, and I think they seem to believe it too. I also said that Mohamed Nasheed after [his resignation] went home to sleep, he slept that afternoon, that night, the following morning and then he changed his mind [after waking up], then in the evening said he did not resign, or that his resignation was not permanent but a coup d’état. Then who is going to believe that?” Gayoom questioned.

“Something must have happened after 24 hours, some people must have talked to him and ‘got into his head’ to make him change his statement. Before that he was under the belief that he resigned,” the former president contended.

“Frustrations”

In the press conference, Gayoom stated that during the session with the CNI, he also highlighted two things that “frustrated” him about the commission.

One reason for the frustrations was, he explained, the inclusion o a representative of ousted President Nasheed in the commission, following “foreign” influence.

“The reason that frustrates me is that if this commission has a representative of Nasheed there should be a representative of mine too. That is because on many previous occasions Nasheed has repeatedly made false accusations towards me, both in the Maldives and outside, that the change [of power] was a revolution that I brought in,” Gayoom said.

“Where is justice when there is someone in this commission who supports Nasheed’s claims?” the ex-president questioned.

Gayoom claimed that it would only be fair that he have his “own representative if Nasheed gets to have one”.

His second cause of frustration, Gayoom said, was that the CNI was mandated to look into the events that took place from January 14 to February 8.

He stated that the “change” that took place on February 7 was the result of Nasheed’s “unlawful” and “un-Islamic” actions carried out, that had “angered a lot of citizens”, and contended that this would be clear if the CNI looked into what Nasheed had done after assuming presidency in 2008.

Gayoom during the press conference also shared some of the questions that the CNI posed to him during the session, and the responses he offered.

He said that the CNI questioned as to whether he had provided any financial benefit to the key actors of the change in February 7, to which he replied saying that he “did not spend a single cent on them”.

“Nasheed told the commission that when he entered the Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) headquarters, I had told someone that now the ‘fish has gone into the net’ and to better to hold it there,” he explained. “I said that was an outright lie.”’

Gayoom maintained his earlier stand that he had no part to play in the transfer of power, and that “now even Nasheed should believe it because he said that he would believe it if I went to the CNI and told them that I did not play a part in the ‘coup’.”

Ending political instablity

When the CNI had asked him what he thought would bring an end to the ongoing political instability in the country, Gayoom said told the commission the solution was for Nasheed and his Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to stop their “extremist” actions and pave the way for negotiations.

Despite Gayoom expressing his openness to negotiate, last month in a rally held by the PPM in Addu City he vigorously condemned his successor, claiming that Nasheed had a habit of defaming him to both the local and international community.

Gayoom at the time said that he “humbly refused” a request from United States Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives, Patricia Butenis, to take part in the All Party Talks along with Nasheed.

He dismissed Nasheed’s claims that the controversial transfer of power was a coup d’état, and commended the acts of the mutinying police and military officials.

Following the remarks, the opposition MDP expressed its disappointment to see Gayyoom refusing to take part in the All Party Talks.

“With the country fallen into this grave state, it is saddening to see Gayoom refusing to take part in the All Party Talks, a negotiation that is highly related to the public interest of the country,” MDP Spokesperson MP Imthiyaz Fahmy said, and called on the former President to prioritise the country before his own personal interest.

Fahmy said the MDP was ready to come to the negotiation table, a sentiment matched by former MP and MDP Legal affairs committee member Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail.

“I was once the President of the MDP. Nasheed was the Chairperson then. We both were harassed and tortured during Gayoom’s regime because we were opposed to his rule,” Ibra said. “But even then we were both prepared to talk to Gayoom and his government on issues that concerned the national interest,” he recalled.

Gayoom showing “symptoms of dementia”

Speaking to Minivan News, Ibra described Gayoom’s comments as “desperate” and in “self-denial”, knowing that CNI report would unveil the “dirty truth” behind the toppling of the country’s first democratically elected government.

He further suggested that the recent remarks that Gayoom had been making in the local media exhibited symptoms of dementia, a loss of cognitive ability in a previously unimpaired person beyond what might be expected from normal aging.

“Perhaps a person may make contrasting statements rarely. But we are speaking of several and repeated statements, which may suggest that [Gayoom] maybe exhibiting symptoms of dementia. People of that age face dementia, due to old age,” he alleged.

In response to Gayoom’s frustrations on the CNI, Ibra questioned why Gayoom should have his own representation when allegations were levied against several others, and stated that it was impossible to include the representatives to CNI.

“Allegations were levied against the current Commissioner of Police, Defence Minister, the President and several politicians. Can we include each of their representatives in the commission?” he questioned.

Ibra stated that the focus and the mandate of the CNI was to find out whether Nasheed resigned under duress or not, and added that it was not the CNI’s mandate to see how Nasheed ran the country, or reflect on frustrations expressed by Gayoom.

Ibra further alleged that Gayoom was trying to discredit the members of CNI, knowing that the CNI report would not come out in his favor.

“I think he clearly knows from what the CNI knows and the evidences they collected, and from the facts surrounding the event, that it is highly unlikely the report will not come out in his favour. So he has already begun his work to discredit the CNI stating that it is not impartial and lacks credibility,” Ibra claimed.

Concern and condemnation

Following Gayoom’s remarks, in a media statement the opposition MDP expressed concerns and condemned the remarks, citing that it reflected Gayoom’s lack of concern on the interests of the country.

“When a lot of people are alleging that the transfer of power that took place on February 7 was a coup d’etat, and while many question the events that unfolded on that day as well as the legitimacy of the current government, it is very concerning to see former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom publicly stating that he would not believe that former government of the Maldives was toppled by a coup, even if the CNI established to look into the issue decides so,” read the statement.

The MDP in the statement said that the democratic achievements the people of the country had achieved in the last three years were diminishing, and claimed that police brutality and human rights abuses had become abundant following the coup.

“The grave situation that the Maldives lies today is that the economic growth of the country has severely slowed down, efforts of social protection of the people are at a halt, unemployment rates are rapidly rising and people’s income has come down significantly,” read the statement.

The MDP in the statement alleged that despite the country being in such a grave situation, Gayoom’s remarks reflect his insincerity and lack of concern towards the general well being of the country and its people.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Pro-government MPs hit out at UN’s “biased” and “political” calls for religious freedom

MPs of several government-aligned parties have expressed concern over a UN Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) report calling for freedom of religion, sexual orientation and several other commitments in the Maldives, claiming the document is “biased” and “against the will of the people”.

Jumhoree Party (JP) MP Abdulla Jabir told Minivan News today that he had “reservations” about the UN’s conclusions, claiming they appeared to single out former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s government for alleged human rights abuses, while also contravening the constitution and laws of the Maldives.

Progressive Party of Maldives MP Ahmed Mahlouf  also hit out at the report’s conclusions, which he claimed were both “political” and “biased” as a result of the influence of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), according to local media.

UNHRC calls

The UNHRC findings urged Maldivian authorities to guarantee citizens’ right to democracy, permit freedom of religion, reform the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), abolish flogging and the death penalty, and deal with human trafficking, among other recommendations.

A core concern of the committee involved the Maldives’ reservation to Article 18, concerning freedom of religion, the validity of which was questioned by the committee on the basis that it was “not specific, and does not make clear what obligations of human rights compliance the State party has or has not undertaken.”

However, Jabir today contended that the stipulation within the Maldives constitution that the nation was 100 percent Islamic reflected the views of the Maldivian people, with not a single political party in the country having called for religious freedom.

“It is the Maldivian people who have decided that if you are not a Muslim, you are not a Maldivian. There is not one party here calling for this to change,” he said. “Maybe this is not what is practiced in many other countries around the world, but it is what he have decided here by law. It is our sovereign right.”

Aside from calls for freedom of religion, Jabir also said he was concerned about the issue of establishing an independent inquiry into “all human rights violations, including torture” that were allegedly conducted prior to the 2008 election.

He claimed this appeared to single out the 30 year autocratic rule of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom,  who was voted from office during the 2008 presidential elections.

“We have had other presidents in this country before Mr Gayoom and I do not understand why they are not also being focused on. Why only Gayoom’s time? This shows there is bias in this report,” he said. “Before President Gayoom, we had President [Ibrahim] Nasir. It should look at all abuses from the country’s first president onwards.”

Constitutional matter

Jabir added that he had personally been one of the 12 member body who had drawn up the present constitution, that had in turn been approved by the Maldivian people.  He claimed that despite the UN calling for freedom of religion and sexual orientation – as well as other commitments designed to address concerns about human trafficking and judicial reform – the organisation was unable to overrule the laws and regulations of a sovereign nation.

“When the UN asks for freedom of religion, this is what former President Nasheed has been trying to promote in the country,” he claimed.

Jabir’s concerns about alleged political bias serving to influence the UNHRC’s conclusion were also raised by the PPM, a party formed last year by former President Gayoom.

PPM MP Mahlouf reportedly told the Sun Online news service yesterday that items raised in the UN report seen to contradict Islam would not be implemented in the Maldives.

He claimed that the findings had been influenced by the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and “foreign associates” linked to the party.

“MDP encourages the destruction of our sovereignty and our religious values,” Mahlouf was quoted as telling Sun Online.

Mahlouf reportedly pledged that the PPM would work to stand against allowing any changes relating to the national religion under Maldivian law as a report on how the Maldives will implement the Committee’s recommendations is due to be delivered to the UN during the next twelve months.

Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, leader of the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayythithunge Party (DRP) was not responding to calls today about the report.  Both DRP Deputy Leader Ibrahim Shareef and MP Dr Abdullah Mausoom could also not be reached at the time of press.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed, who has alleged that he was forced to resign from office on February 7 this year in a “coup detat”, had denied advocating for freedom of religion during his time in office. The former president has faced strong criticism from political opponents over his commitments to protecting the nation’s Islamic faith.

However, during a gathering of former opposition political figures, NGOs and other civil society organisations on December 23 last year to “defend Islam”, Nasheed held a counter-rally for those he claimed practised a “tolerant form” of the faith that he contended been traditionally followed in the Maldives.

“We can’t achieve development by going backwards to the Stone Age or being ignorant,” he said back in December, 2011.

The President also called on leaders of political parties to explain their stance on religious issues to the public ahead of a scheduled 2013 presidential election.

“Should we ban music? Should we circumcise girls? Should we allow 9 year-olds to be married; is art and drawing forbidden? Should we be allowed to have concubines? We have to ask is this nation building? Because we won’t allow these things, we are being accused of moving away from religion,” he said at the time.

Nasheed also urged MPs at the time to discuss the inclusion of Sharia punishments in a revised penal code “without calling each other unbelievers.”

The December 23 coalition also raised concerns over calls by United Nations Human Rights Chief Navi Pillay during a visit to the Maldives last year that flogging be abolished as a punishment for extra-marital sex in the country.

Pillay’s comments further fuelled tensions across the nation late last year over concerns about the erection of monuments in Addu Atoll to commemorate the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit that were deemed as “idolatrous” by some.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Patients to be charged at private clinics under Aasandha from August 1

Treatment from private hospitals and clinics will be covered under the “Aasandha” universal health insurance schemes  from August 1, with an agreed amount to be charged from people going to those clinics.

According to a statement released by the Aasandha Company on Sunday, private clinics are being included in the scheme after they agreed to a revised price list for health services with the National Social Protection Agency (NSPA).

The scheme will cover the treatments from those private clinics based on the revised price list, while the clinics are allowed to charge their patients to cover any additional costs.

“Therefore, patients will likely have to share the costs of outpatient care and other services,” the company adds.

The authorities have not revealed the amount to be charged, but State Health Minister and National Social Protection Agency (NSPA) Board Chairman Thorig Ali Luthfee told local media that the “charge will not be a burden to the patients.”

“In addition to what is being (covered) from Aasandha, they might charge a small amount from the patient. Once they agree to the price with us, they cannot alter that price,” Thorig told Haveeru.

According to Thorig, four clinics have so far agreed to the prices, and Aasandha services will be offered at the clinics as soon as the agreements are signed.

Price negotiations with several other clinics are still reportedly pending as over 60 private healthcare providers have applied for Aasandha coverage.

According to the Aasandha website, the scheme currently covers treatment from IGMH, ADK Hospital, IMDC Hospital in Addu and other hospitals and health centres currently operated by state-owned health corporations.

Thoriq observed that privately-owned ADK, the second largest healthcare provider in the country, will also have to confirm the revised prices agreed with NSPA to keep providing Aasandha services from next month on wards.

Under the parliament-approved scheme which commenced in January, all Maldivian citizens will receive government-sponsored coverage up to Rf100,000 (US$6,500) per year, including further provisions to citizens who require further financial assistance. Expatriate workers are also eligible for coverage providing their employers pay an upfront fee of Rf1,000 (US$65).

MDP’s critical response

Following the decision to charge patients at private health premises, the former ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) which initiated the universal insurance scheme, under its affordable healthcare pledge, contended that the government’s decision reflects attempts to “restore the tradition of begging to afford health care services”.

According to the statement released by the MDP, the agreement signed between Aasandha company and the government explicitly states that no amount can be charged from the patients.

“The agreement signed by the Finance Ministry, Health Ministry and Aasandha Company explicitly states that no amount should be taken in fees or as any other charge from the people,” the statement reads. “Therefore, we condemn the coup government’s attempts to charge people a fee for healthcare services.”

The party also accused the government aligned Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and coalition alliance of deliberately attempting to sabotage the health insurance scheme.

The MDP noted that while the party was in power it had regularly made the payments to Aasandha company as per the agreement, however, the incoming government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik had not made the payments, pushing the scheme to the brink of collapse.

Aasandha is a public-private partnership with Allied Insurance. Under the agreement, Allied splits the scheme 60-40 with the government. The actual insurance premium is paid by the government, while claims, billing and public awareness is handled by the private partner.

Aasandha Managing Director Mohamed Shafaz told Minivan News last week that the government had failed to cover weekly premium payments as agreed under the Aasandha contract since March 2012.

He alleged that while the scheme was continuing to run, the shortfall in state funding was creating some difficulties for service providers such as hospitals and pharmacies both in the Maldives and outside the country in the wider South Asia region.

Without detailing specifics, State Health Minister Luthfee said that the government was presently involved in consultations to clear outstanding bills. He added that a target of 30 days had been set to try and settle outstanding debts to creditors.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police summon ousted President Nasheed over tapped phone call

The Maldives Police Service (MPS) has sent a letter to ousted President Mohamed Nasheed requesting he present himself at police headquarters on August 2 at 10:00am, regarding an investigation into a phone conversation police last week released to the media.

Police have claimed that in the phone conversation, tapped and recorded the day police dismantled the MDP protest camp ‘Usfasgandu’, Nasheed and  former MDP Chairperson Mariya Didi discussed attacking police officers.

Police publicised the telephone conversation which they claimed was retrieved with a court order following information from intelligence.

Nasheed and Mariya’s leaked audio conversation appears to have been held during the police’s attempt to dismantle the MDP’s protest camp at Usfasgandu on May 29. Police had obtained a search warrant claiming MDP was performing black magic, conducting criminal activity and damaging public property in the area.

In the audio clip, Mariya says: “[Police] are forcing people back! They are using pepper spray! That is why we are unable to hold a national council meeting. And we have also received a second letter, ordering us to vacate the area by ten o’clock tonight. We cannot file an appeal at court or do anything. We cannot even hold the National Council meeting. We won’t have [enough members for] quorum. Shihab is here. But they are using pepper spray and forcing people back. Can only vacate the place if we could only get in there. This is all very unjust. What shall I do?”

Nasheed then replies, “There’s not much we can do. I don’t know. What is there to do? I think [we] need to get people out to fight if we can get them. If we can get people to fight, get them out. It’s very clear to me, I think we need to fight back. If we can get people to fight. Find kids from Male to fight the police,” Mariya laughs at this point, but Nasheed continues, “That is what I think. I don’t know if we can get people to fight. I want to fight against them.”

Superintendent of Police Abdulla Riyaz at the time said the police had decided to publicise the audio conversation “because we have no other choice.”

Riyaz said Mariya had been summoned for questioning over the audio clip on June 20, but claimed the MDP had spread “baseless allegations” that  police were arresting and harassing opposition politicians for no apparent reason. “The time has come to reveal the truth,” Riyaz said.

The audio clip was obtained legally through a court warrant, he added.

Speaking to Minivan News, police media official Haneef confirmed that the letter was sent.

“The retrieved of the phone call was within the law. We can assure that,” he said.

Calls for arrest of Nasheed

Following the controversial transfer of power, several politicians and political parties supporting the current government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan have openly called on the government to arrest Nasheed.

The latest call came on Saturday night during a rally held by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), where party council members openly vowed to arrest Nasheed and put him in “solitary confinement”.

During the rally Deputy Minister of Transport Ahmed Nazim highlighted the party’s efforts to topple Nasheed’s government, and praised the patience of those who took to streets to bring an end to Nasheed’s government.

“When we come out to do something, we won’t back down. We proved that when we came out to bring Nasheed down, and we only stopped after bringing an end to Nasheed’s dictatorship,” he said.

“Now we have come out to put an end to all this. I assure you all, we will only stop after putting Nasheed in solitary confinement,” Nazim said.

Speaking at the rally PPM MP Ahmed Nihan Hassan Manik also assured the party supporters that Nasheed would face trial and would be “imprisoned for a very long time”.

“I am saying this as the deputy chair of the parliament’s temporary committee set up to look into crimes that Nasheed has committed. I assure you we will thoroughly investigate what he has done in the last three years,” he said.

Last month, Interim vice Preisdent of PPM Umar Naseer expressed his confidence that the Prosecutor General’s (PG) investigation into charges against former President Mohamed Nasheed will see his imprisonment before the scheduled elections in July 2013.

“We will make sure that the Maldivian state does this. We will not let him go; the leader who unlawfully ordered the police and military to kidnap a judge and detain him for 22 days will be brought to justice,” he said at the time.

He further added that the PG had told him that Nasheed would be prosecuted.

“He is an independent person. I hope he will prosecute this case. He has said that he will. I have no doubt that he will,” Naseer said.

Pepper sprayed

On June 16, local TV station aired a video showing the police pepper-spraying Nasheed while he was participating in the MDP led protests calling for an end to police brutality and the holding of early elections.

The video shows a riot police officer reaching over a crowd of people surrounding Nasheed and spraying him in the face. Nasheed turns away as the spray hits him, and is taken away by his supporters, but later returned to the protest.

Police initially denied use of any excessive force or pepper spray on the protesters.

“Maldives Police did not use any excessive force nor was pepper spray directed to anyone’s face,” police said in a statement at the time.

“The Maldives Police strongly denies MDP allegations of directly pepper spraying on individuals eyes at close range, especially ex-president Mohamed Nasheed, and urge the Maldivian Democratic Party to publish statements responsibly,” police said.

Police admitted using the spray to control the crowd during their recovery of barricades removed by the demonstrators, but denied intentionally targeting the former President.

“Pepper spray was used to halt the charging demonstrators on July 14th night against police barricades set for security reasons. This spraying was never in any case directed to human eyes in close range but into the air to avert possible regulation violations by demonstrators,” the statement read.

“The allegations made by the Maldivian Democratic Party against Maldives Police pepper spraying directly on Ex-president Nasheed’s face are not true. The Maldives Police Service have no intentions on directly pepper spraying on Ex-President Mohamed Nasheed nor any other individuals; however, the incident is currently being looked into and necessary actions will be taken against any officer who uses excessive force.”

However to the surprise of many, police later told the media that Nasheed’s body guards did not see him being pepper sprayed to an inquiry.

Police questioned the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) Special Protection Group (SPG) bodyguards assigned to Nasheed, after the media publicised video footage of a police officer pepper spraying Nasheed’s face while he was with a group of MDP supporters at a protest.

In a statement issued on following the allegations, police said that Nasheed’s bodyguards said that while they were aware pepper spray was being used in the area, they could not identify the officer using it.

Police said officers that working that night to control the protest were also questioned, and said they had used pepper spray after protesters moved inside the cordoned area and refused to move back after police advised the protesters to do so.

Police said they did not spray at any individual, and that the pepper spray was targeted at the crowed, the police statement said.

Charges

On July 15, PG Ahmed Muizz has filed charges against Nasheed and the former defense minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu for their alleged role in detaining Criminal Court Chief Justice Abdulla Mohamed in January.

Nasheed and Tholhath were charged with violating Article 81 of the Penal Code, which states that the detention of a government employee who has not been found guilty of a crime is illegal. If found guilty, Nasheed and Tholhath will face a jail sentence or banishment for three years or a Rf 3000 fine (US$193.5).

The case, if lost may bar Nasheed from any upcoming presidential elections was filed in Hulhumale Magistrate Court instead of Criminal Court, where PG stated that the decision was because there was a conflict of interest.

However, Hulhumale Court rejected the case on July 18 stating that it did not have the jurisdiction to preside on the case.

Hulhumale’ Court Magistrate Moosa Naseem told Minivan News at the time that the case was sent back to the Prosecutor General’s Office after the court stated it did not have the jurisdiction to deal with such cases under the Judicature Act.

‘’We studied the case and we found that we do not have the jurisdiction to deal with the case according to article 66 of the Judicature Act,’’ Naseem said.

Naseem told local media that the Hulhumale’-based court can only accept the case after the Chief Justice issues a decree in agreement with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and the Judicial Council as stated in the article 66[b] of the Judicature Act.

Following the decision, PG asked the court to review its decision.

Deputy PG Hussein Shameem following the decision said that Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court does have the jurisdiction to hear the case of former President Mohamed Nasheed over his role in the detention of a Criminal Court Chief Judge.

Shameem contended that should the court maintain its decision against hearing the case, there were few other judicial alternatives in trying to ensure a “fair trial”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)