Category: Politics

Judiciary has failed to keep up with parliament and the executive, says Attorney General

The Judicial Services Commission (JSC), the body entrusted to vet and regulate the conduct of judges in the Maldives, has failed to match the government and parliament over the last two years in operating within a constitutionally defined role, Attorney General Dr Ahmed Ali Sawad has claimed.

The claims follow the publication this week of a report by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) that was critical of both political interference in the judiciary by government and opposition groups, and critical of the JSC’s ability to “carry out its functions” in ensuring judges were both impartial and capable of performing their duties.

Along with outlining recommendations for the executive, the Majlis and legal bodies like the JSC to follow in order to better ensure a judiciary independent from government and opposition influence, the ICJ’s Director of Asia Pacific Operations, Roger Normand, suggested a lot of work lay ahead.

Accepting that positive developments had been made within its courts since the Maldives became a democracy, concerns remained over a number of issues, Normand said. Having spoken to stakeholders across the country’s legal system, “ordinary” Maldivians did not look to their courts for justice or to solve problems, he suggested.

The report criticised the conduct of the government during a period of crisis last year; where the government locked shut the Supreme Court questioning its legitimacy on conclusion of the interim period. The report was also critical of the JSC’s decision-making, which was perceived as being inappropriately politically influenced.

Sawad said that he welcomed the observations by the ICJ in regards to recommendations for improving efficiency in the JSC and judicial administration, but added that ultimately, all stakeholders working within the Maldivian court system were under pressure to step up accountability.

“I think there is a lot to be done by the JSC in terms of enhancing the standard of the judiciary,” the attorney general told Minivan News.  “I think there is a need to inwardly look into the judiciary and all agencies related to it. That is the judicial administration, the judicial council, the JSC, the Attorney General’s Office, the Supreme Court and the High Court – it’s time they work together in bringing about perceived standards required of the judiciary in the constitution.”

Sawad said that he believed that as a judicial watchdog, the JSC had at times tended to act defensively instead of self-critically, particularly when reviewing the constitutional role it was assigned within the constitution to appoint judges and protect independence in the judiciary.

In order to try and ensure it was able to meet these roles efficiently, the attorney general suggested that it may be appropriate to have the Majlis consider reviewing the role of the JSC during the last year and a half to determine if it was functional.

However, Sawad claimed that no single entity alone should shoulder the blame in terms of perceived issues with independence in the judiciary.  He added that during a seven year period allotted for education and improvement under the Judges Act, education was a key to ensuring effective changes and developments in ensuring confidence within the legal system.

“When I look at the crucial actors in this, I feel the JSC has a crucial role to play.  I feel the judicial administration have a crucial role to play and I feel there is a missing link in the form of a judicial training academy,” he said.  “We cannot burden the Supreme Court or the High Court of with continuously setting the standards of measure for the rest of the judiciary day-on-day.”

Ultimately, Sawad said that as one of three distinct branches of the state along with the government and the Majlis, the judiciary was required to meet the same levels of accountability as part of its independence – making the role of the JSC essential.

“What we have [under the constitution] is an accountable government and an independent judiciary,” he said. “But independence is a perception made by the people who are the beneficiaries – in this case the public.  If the people do not perceive that level of independence then there is a problem.”

Sawad stressed that the perception of independent courts within the country were especially important in defining the difference between the judiciary before and after 2008, when the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) came to power on the promise of trying to bring more political accountability.

“Pre-2008, people knew that the judiciary was part of the executive,” he said.  “Post-2008, the people need to know the judiciary is independent.”

Government criticism

Along with concerns over the impartiality of the judicial system in the Maldives, the ICJ was also critical of the handling by the government of what it called a “constitutional crisis” last year over the legitimacy of the courts and the arrest of some prominent opposition figures.

In addressing these concerns and whether the actions of the government were a setback to the democratic mandate it promised, Dr Sawad said it was unacceptable under the constitution for any branch of the state to have jurisdiction over another, whether in the case of the executive over the judiciary, or the Majlis over the executive.

The attorney general claimed that ultimately, a “culture of respect” needed to be created by different branches of the state and government that would allow these different groups to work under the mandates they were assigned.

“That is a constitutional convention that needs to be dealt with. We haven’t had that in the past,” he said.  “It’s just over two years since 2008.  Now a convention takes a little more than two years, but it must nevertheless be started.  The commencement of that respect agenda, that’s what needs to happen.”

Sawad said that he was generally encouraged by findings in the report, which he suggested were “timely” in light of political tensions across the nation, though may have been better served if it had been released a year earlier to grant more room for maneuver (prior to the end of the interim period).

However, the attorney general claimed to be cautiously optimistic that the report would provide guidance to “tweak” the problems that had been experienced in trying to establish courts independent of political and commercial manipulation.

“When you look back at what has happened, it has been a tumultuous two years where the three branches of the state have been morphing into their own jurisdiction perimeters – there have been teething issues, but I think two years is long enough to learn respect,” he said.  “I am more optimistic about the future, I think we have a permanent judiciary now and the role of the judiciary is very clear.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

UN Security Council meets as Gaddafi vows “to die a martyr”

Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi has vowed on national television that he will not step down from the country’s leadership, and was ready “to die a martyr.”

Speaking in the third person, Gaddafi said “I am not going to leave this land. I shall remain, defiant. Muammar is leader of the revolution until the end of time.”

The leader of the 42 year-old autocracy has reportedly used African mercenaries, snipers and even anti-aircraft missiles to target increasingly fractious demonstrators, with reports of 200-300 killed.

Referring to his green copy of the Libyan penal code, Gaddafi stated that anyone Libyan who “uses weapons against Libya will be sentenced to death.”

The public speech, he said, was intended to refute earlier reports in the international media that he had escaped to Venezuela.

A New York Times journalist in the country reported that much of the east appeared to now be under opposition control. Many of the protesters were armed, she observed.

The UN Security Council has meanwhile called for Gaddafi to cease his campaign of violence against his own people, deploring “the repression of peaceful demonstrators.”

Libya’s Deputy Ambassador to the UN, Ibrahim al-Dabashi, defected from Gaddafi’s regime and confirmed that the east of the country was no longer under government control. He said he had received reports of “genocide” occurring in the country’s west.

The UN Security Council’s message to Gaddafi was “not strong enough. But any message to the Libyan government at this stage is good,” he said.

As well as losing the UN delegation, Gaddafi has lost at least one military battalion and two air force colonels, who flew to Malta in their jets and requested asylum after refusing to bomb protesters.

The Maldives has meanwhile joined Jordan and Qatar among Muslim nations called for an emergency session of the UN Human Rights Council, on which Libya also sits.

Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed called on the international community to “strengthen measures to realise the aspirations of the Libyan people to fundamental rights and freedoms.”

“The right not to be tortured, the freedom to speak your mind, the ability to choose your own government… these liberties are not the preserve of Western nations but universal values to which everyone aspires,” Nasheed said. “These are the forces that are being played out on the streets of Libya and other countries of the Middle East.”

Established democracies had a responsibility to assist those who aspired to democracy and basic freedoms, he said.

Retired British MP Robert Key, who is currently visiting the Maldives for the first time since taking its case for democracy to the British parliament, said earlier this week that the Maldives had led “blazed a trail in promoting democracy and empowerment of the citizen, with all the difficulties that presents”, and could “hold its head high”.

“There will be leaders in North Africa who will be wishing they had listened to the Maldives, had done what the Maldives chose to do in 2008,” he said.

Oil prices spiked to US$106 a barrel on the back of ongoing unrest in the region.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: Former UK MP for Salisbury Robert Key talks democracy in the Maldives

Robert Key was the UK’s MP for Salisbury between 1983 and 2010, and member of cabinet during Margaret Thatcher and John Major’s administration. He was responsible for bringing the Maldives to the attention of both the British parliament and the Westminster Foundation for Democracy. He has supported the country’s path to democracy ever since current President Mohamed Nasheed walked into his constituency office and made his case.

Minivan News spoke to Key during his first visit to the Maldives.

JJ Robinson: Was it difficult to visit the Maldives while a serving MP, given its image as a holiday destination?

Robert Key: No it’s not difficult, because there are organisations that do it such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association – they all do organised visits, with a political purpose.

But to be completely free of politics and party and able to take a more academic interest in it – I was a teacher for 16 years before I was a politician – has been a great privilege.

In five days I have had a political reeducation. Because a lot of the aspirations I have taken for granted as a British politician do not necessarily apply in the culture of the Maldives.

JJ: What sort of aspirations?

RK: Aspirations towards human rights, for example. In my political life in the UK, human rights have always been an important issue on the political agenda, have has always been seen as virtuous and necessary, and have always been pressed for by the electorate.

I have to realise this is not the case for all people in the Maldives, who have come across human rights only in the last year or two. It’s a new and challenging idea for them, and they are not quite sure what it means. I’ve had to understand that. Even though I’ve been a British politician for 27 years, I certainly don’t have all the answers.

JJ: How did you originally become aware of the Maldives?

RK: Of course I have been aware of the Maldives for many years as a desirable holiday destination – islands in the sun. But it was really the arrival of President Mohamed Nasheed in my constituency office in Salisbury with an agenda of issues for which he needed the assistance of the local member of parliament.

He walked in through the door with his school-friend David Hardingham (Nasheed attended Dauntsey’s school with the founder of the Salisbury-based Friends of Maldives NGO), and said “I have problems. I have problems with visas, I have problems with police, I need some advice from police about how to protect my little office in Salisbury” – all these sorts of issues.

There were bigger problems: such as how to engage the British government ministers and the Commonwealth with what was happening in the Maldives. He quite rightly, as a good democrat, used the democratic system in the UK to pursue answers to his problems.

JJ: This was before the founding of [Nasheed’s] Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)?

RK: Absolutely. It was when he was setting up the party in a room above a shop in Millford street in Salisbury. That is where he was writing for Minivan News, that is where he was broadcasting on the Internet to Germany, and uplifting the shortwave to the Maldives.

JJ: Can you describe that first meeting?

RK: It was quite an extraordinary meeting. Over my many years I’ve realised you never knew what was going to hit you next as an issue. You never knew who was going to walk through your office door with what sort of problem. It might be a regular sort of problem – housing or taxation – but just sometimes there was an issue that really gripped me as really important. This was one of those.

I saw a young man with great vision and enormous energy and determination, who wanted to change his country. I’d had only one or two similar experiences in Salisbury, with other people who had equally great ambitions, interests and determination, but I recognised this particular young man as someone who I could not ignore, indeed who I wished to promote, because I believed he had all the right instincts as a democrat.

It was an extraordinary impression he made at first. He was very nervous, and very apprehensive. He didn’t know if he could trust me. Trust is the big issue in democratic politics, and I think he had one or two rebuffs from other politicians.

I took it at face value, and we took it from there. I met him a number of times in Salisbury, and I never ceased to believe in his own vision and his motives, and his motives appeared to me to be all correct.

I know nothing about all the party politics of the Maldives, but I do understand a good democrat when I see one.

JJ: What motivated you turn that meeting into a push for democracy in the Maldives? Wasn’t it a far-reaching project for the member for Salisbury?

RK: Not really, because I’d always believed in the Commonwealth and international development issues. I had worked for Chris Patten when he was Secretary of State for International Development, both as his parliamentary secretary and later as a minister, and I understood his view of the world. He left politics to become governor of Hong Kong where he oversaw the hand-over of Hong Kong back to the Chinese government, and I was close to that process.

So I always believed that British politicians had a duty to other Commonwealth countries. And that was why I believed it was more than worthwhile – it was my duty – to assist in this process.

At that stage I knew nothing about the politics of the Maldives – I had no reason to. But if what [Mohamed Nasheed] said was true, he had a strong case.

That was why I needed to take the case to Ministers in the British government, to seek their involvement.

JJ: What was the reaction from British ministers when you presented this story to them?

RK: I think it was always positive, always open-minded, waiting for the evidence to emerge. I think the British government never sought to interfere with political processes, but it did wish to ensure democratic processes were possible in the Maldives.

That was why the Westminster Foundation for Democracy – which is an all-party Foundation – was willing to supply funds and people to advise.

JJ: When did the Westminster Foundation become involved and what support did they provide?

RK: In the year or so before the 2008 presidential election a number of people came out to the Maldives to give advice based on their experience from other parts of the world – the Commonwealth in particular – on what was going on and what was possible. It was completely even-handed and fair-minded, and it was not taking up a party political stance.

JJ: A version of the story told here is that Westminster Foundation funded and trained the MDP.

RK: No no, the Westminster Foundation is completely non party-political. That is why the leaders of all parties are trustees of the Westminster Foundation. It is absolutely not party political. It operates in a whole range of countries, for example Macedonia and other countries of the former Yugoslavia. It acts exactly the same way in any given circumstance anywhere in the world.

JJ: It often stated here that the MDP was strongly supported by the UK Conservative Party. What was the extent of that relationship beyond yourself?

RK: It simply started with me because I was the local MP and happened to be a Conservative. It may equally be true that if it was a Labour Party constituency it might have been the Labour Party that took up the cause. But that wasn’t the issue.

At no stage did I ever discuss party politics with President Mohamed Nasheed. He never asked me anything party-political and I didn’t offer it, any more than I have [during this visit]. I’ve seen both political parties, both party headquarters.

JJ: One of the accusations the former administration threw at both yourself and David Hardingham was that you were Christian missionaries out to subvert Islam in the Maldives. How did you deal with that?

RK: Well I recognised it as a political ploy. But we had to take it seriously as a threat because that was how it was presented – that Salisbury Cathedral might become a target for some kind of activity. It was very specific.

The actual threat was that Salisbury and Salisbury Cathedral were trying to convert the Maldives to Christianity. Which was absolute nonsense but had to be taken seriously, because quite obviously in the Maldives that would be seen as a significant threat in a country that is 100 percent Islamic. I understood that straight away.

It was not true, and therefore we had to say “It is not true.” The Dean of Salisbury Cathedral understood the issue, she took it at face value, and we sought security advice as necessary. But it was never a serious threat. It was a juvenile political ploy.

JJ: Were there any difficulties you faced with the cultural differences of the Maldives? What has your experience been like?

RK: This is my first visit. I was always very keen that people would see my concern for the Maldives as completely impartial and in the interest of good government in the Maldives. That is why I am here, and that is the message I have given to the civil servants I met [on Monday].

The turnout included 14 permanent secretaries – not bad for a retired backbencher. If they are prepared to take me seriously as an impartial supporter of the Maldives, I hope everyone else will.

JJ: What was your reaction when you heard that Mohamed Nasheed had won the 2008 Presidential election?

RK: Astonishment. And delight – in that order. But then I should have recognised that the people are right. As a good democrat I shouldn’t have been surprised. I should have been delighted that he has become President, for the right reasons, doing it the right way, playing it by the rulebook, to make sure his view of good government in the Maldives has prevailed.

He’s now finding out how difficult democracy really is. But that should not deflect him from his vision – of course its difficult, of course the issues are intractable. But, as long as his motives remain completely clear, then I think he will stand again as president, with honour. He clearly has the backing of his party and I wish him well. It’s up to the people of the Maldives.

JJ: Are you aware that when the cabinet resigned Nasheed came under a lot of international pressure for detaining one of the MPs, People’s Alliance (PA) leader Abdulla Yameen, allegedly outside what the constitution permitted?

RK: I’m not aware of that at all. I had just retired [in July 2010], I was away on holiday.

JJ: Have you followed the Maldives since Nasheed’s election? What is your assessment now you’ve seen it first-hand?

RK: I haven’t seen everything, I’ve seen a sample. It’s extremely interesting. I have an agenda of things to go back and do in the UK and contacts to make. I compared notes with the new High commissioner to the Maldives (John Rankin).

I had a fascinating meeting about the importance of statistics to good government. I pointed out that even the British government has only for one year had an independent office of national statistics that everyone can trust – journalists, taxpayers and politicians. And no-one can say “You’re massaging the figures minister” because they are independent.

JJ: Why did this meeting jump out at you?

RK: Because of their anxiety to maintain independence, and their sense of the collective wisdom of the government of the Maldives. In other words, the mark of any good civil service. That was hugely encouraging – their desire not to be party political, or be seen to be party political. All of these are virtuous aspirations on behalf of a civil service determined to serve the people well.

They were asking questions like ‘How do you educate ministers?’ A very important question.

I explained how it worked for me, and how influential civil servants ulitimately are in shaping a government and having limits beyond which they will not go – at which point the cabinet secretary has to see the prime minister to talk about it.

JJ: One of the major economic issues here is that the Maldivian civil service employs a substantial percentage of the population. How do you pare down a civil service while maintaining its integrity and keeping it clear of party politics?

RK: I was asked directly what happens when a government comes in committed to cutting the size of the civil service, and what difference did that make.

I pointed out that is exactly what I had to do during Margaret Thatcher’s government, when as Local Government Minister I was charged with introducing policy that took delivery of public service out of the hands of political and civil servants, and put it in the hands of agencies and contractors, while maintaining services to the public.

It was a painful process – and by and large it worked – but sometimes you had to admit you were wrong. To be able to say, “No, this has failed, stop it and don’t waste any more money. Change the policy.” And that was the advice I gave.

JJ: What reaction did you get whenever you did that?

RK: Huge relief, not least from the Treasury. Because if a policy is not working, it’s wasting money. For example the [UK] poll tax – it was generally recognised politically, but it didn’t work. It was massively expensive, and every time there was another protest, the government had to spend more money to get themselves out of a hole. The only sensible thing to do was put your hands up and say “It hasn’t worked”, and change it. We abolished the poll tax and introduced the council tax in the UK, which is still going strong. Now I can say, “Hey, I got it right.”

JJ: There’s a sense in the Maldives that while everyone agrees on the constitution, not everyone is working in the spirit of it. If you have a situation where the international community is piling on pressure to respect the constitution, how, as a leader and a President, can you work within the boundaries of the constitution when you are dealing with people who may not have its best interests at heart?

RK: I don’t know, because Britain doesn’t have a written constitution. Which is why Britain works!

I have read the Maldivian constitution online, and I recognise some very, very very difficult issues in the constitution which are at loggerheads with the expressed policy of the government over, for example, human rights. Which is very difficult to handle. I don’t know the answer and I’m certainly not going to tell the government how to do it.

But I recognise, and I’m sure they do, that if you have a written constitution, you ought to either abide by it, or change it. But you shouldn’t try to do either too quickly. As I said today, don’t do too much too quickly. Some things you have to do quickly – you have to tell the truth – you have to tell the electorate what your intentions are. But you can’t do it all at once.

It took Margaret Thatcher 11 years to get anywhere near where she wanted to be, before she resigned – or was forced to resign, to be honest.

JJ: In your reading of the Maldivian constitution, what were some of the things that jumped out at you as contradictory to government policy?

RK: I think the clash between human rights and 100 percent Islam is a really difficult issue. I’m a religious person – I therefore respect the Islamic tradition very much, and I’m certainly not trying to convert anyone in the Maldives to Christianity.

But that would be difficult for any government when they are signing up to the UN declarations, which are all about religious freedom and liberty, while at the same time trying to respect a constitution which says “Absolutely not. 100 percent Islam.”

There is a difference in my mind, in my understanding as a Western democrat, that there’s a difference between saying that as a citizen of a country you must belong to a particular faith and, as in Britain, saying: “This is a broadly Christian country, but any other religion is tolerated.”

How you square that circle politically is going to be really difficult to carry out by any government of any complexion, and it’s more likely to take 50 years than five.

JJ: A recurrent observation from the liberal side of debate here is there is a conflict between human rights and Islam. Do you think this then is more a conflict between human rights and the constitution?

RK: No – I think the Maldives will find that it goes through an age of Enlightenment, just as Europe did in the 18th century, when the certainty of a particular interpretation of a particular faith is questioned.

It is not denigrated, it is not abandoned – it is simply talked about. People ask questions. That was the great break in European civilisation – the age of Enlightenment. When science became respectable, when creationism was abandoned, by all but a few.

It didn’t shake the faith, it didn’t abandon the faith, it learned how to question it, and live with the consequences of being a mature democracy. I think the Maldives will go through a similar process.

It will take a long time – if you have a culture which has not been questioning, for hundreds of years, hasn’t seen the need to, and then suddenly the world moves on, that is a big challenge for any government.

JJ: If many of the issues in an emerging democracy will take time to resolve, is there a risk of losing perspective when you are dealing with five year political terms?

RK: Some of the consequential policy changes are going to be difficult if they are done too quickly. But one of the most interesting features of my visit to the Maldives this week has been what is going on in the Middle East and North Africa – and the sense that if the Maldives hadn’t come as far and as fast as it has since the last presidential elections, they may well have found themselves in the situation of one of the North African or Middle Eastern states. Where younger people in particular decided that enough is enough of a particular regime.

The Maldives can hold its head high, and say “We have led the way. We have blazed a trail here in promoting democracy and empowerment of the citizen, with all the difficulties that presents.”

There will be leaders in North Africa who will be wishing they had listened to the Maldives, had done what the Maldives chose to do in 2008.

JJ: What role do think international community can continue to play to ensure the Maldives does see the benefits of democracy?

RK: There is an enormous international role and responsbility. For example in strategic defense planning. The head of military told me about the reorganisation of the military into different heads and commands, and that was an important strategic review that needed to be carried out. It does need to be said that the Maldives’ neighbours, not only India – which is currently providing a helicopter, but the wider international community – should take some responsibility. For example: over this issue of the 37 Somali pirates currently in the Maldives, presenting a huge legal problem for such a small country.

The UN should take the lead in this, and I think there’s a way through this to resolve it internationally. There are other issues of security in the Indian Ocean in terms of everyone’s safety – surveillance of the seas, but also in terms of environmental conservation. I would also like to see the Maldives one day able to lead other emerging democracies down the path of democracy.

JJ: One of the problems civil society organisations have faced here is that because the MDP campaigned strongly on a platform of democracy, freedom of speech, independent media and so forth, suddenly these values and organsiations promoting them have been politicised by association. How does a country separate these values from politics?

RK: It’s not easy, and it takes time, and it’s not the first time this issue has arisen. 10 years ago the Labour Defence Minister asked me to go with him and stand with him in Slovenia in the aftermath of the break-up of Yugoslavia, to convince them that democracy needs an opposition as well as a government – because they were inclined to shoot the opposition.

The Minister took me with him to Slovenia and I sat beside him in a meeting with the group that had obtained the greatest number of votes, and said “Don’t shoot the opposition. You need them to work with you in a democracy.”

Here it is not as extreme. There is not a war in the Malidves. But having talked to both parties I have noticed that there is a very young shoot of democracy here, and it’s going to need time to mature. The political parties are going to both have to see the best in each other and their leaders as well as the worst.

There is no love lost between the political parties here, and in my judgement things that should not be politicised are being politicised. That is the mark of the new democracy. It is a strange idea, it is difficult to handle. But as political thought matures, as the electors get used to democracy, they will encourage their leaders to be more constructive over policy differences. I am not dispirited by this – I think it is competely normal and natural, and part of growing up in a democracy.

We have been at it for a thousand years in England – we take too much for granted. We have politicians slagging each other off, and we yawn. I’m quite sure that is a position people will reach in the Maldives when they want their politicians to get serious about policy issues, and not keep blaming each other for what has happened in the past – and above all, not to seek revenge.

JJ: There is an almost post-apartheid dichotomy between revenge and reconciliation in the Maldives, and a ‘head in the sand’ approach in the hope it will go away. Do you think that is a reasonable position to take, or do old wounds fester and contaminate this discourse you are encouraging?

RK: I think the Maldives should probably seek the advice of Nelson Mandela, who post-apartheid set up the truth commission as a way of learning and forgiving, rather than seeking political revenge. But that is a decision for the Maldivian people – not for me.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC condemns remarks made by Dr Munawar after formation of new party fails

The Elections Commission (EC) of the Maldives has strongly condemned remarks made by Former Attorney General Dr Mohamed Munawar, after the commission said not enough people had attended the formation of his ‘Reform Movement’ party for it to be registered.

The dispute between the Elections Commission and Dr Munawar occurred after commission members appeared at a meeting held at Villa College by Dr Munawar to establish his new political party.

The formative meeting of the party required the attendance of a minimum of 300 members in order to meet the regulatory requirements for the establishment of a political party. Dr Munavar said canceled the meeting and the new party was not formed.

The Elections Commission said in a statement that ”although Dr Munavar claimed that the meeting to form his party had to be canceled when the commission members attended the meeting, the meeting must be attended by a minimum of 300 person according to Political Party Regulations 2005, 8[c]. The number of people who attended the meeting was less than 140.”

The Commission said that the meeting began the with the Quran recitation after it was announced that the legally-mandated number of people were present. But while the meeting was ongoing it was called off by Dr Munavar himself, saying that the legal number of members were not present.

”It is a responsibility of the Elections Commission to ensure that at least 300 members attend a meeting before a political party is recognised,” the Elections Commission said.

Dr Munavar later criticised the Commission’s conduct of the recent local council elections, telling VTV that the elections were held against the constitution.

The Commission said that Dr Munavar’s remarks were intended disregard the commission and smear its respect and dignity.

Dr Munavar was a former president of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) prior to his resignation. He has been absent from politics until recently.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldivian courts failing to serve the public impartially: ICJ report

The Maldives legal system is failing to serve its citizens despite many “positive developments” that have been made in an effort to depoliticise the courts; with many of judges found lacking in qualifications and independent attitude, according to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ).

“How often do ordinary Maldivians look to the courts for justice? Is there a sense that ‘We [Maldivians] have an independent judiciary that is capable of resolving problems?’ I think the answer is no,” surmised Roger Normand, Director of the ICJ’s Asia Pacific operations.

“Historically, [independent resolution] has not been the role of judges. Judges were an outcome or a product of the executive power. This is not a controversial statement, this is an outline of what their legal role was in the previous [government],” Normand stated.

Normand’s claims were made as the ICJ published a report on the Maldives legal system that outlining a huge number of challenges to ensure the country’s courts are in the long-term transparent in their decision making. It is hoped that the developments can remove the opportunities for abuse from government and opposition politicians alike, the ICJ stated.

The report itself is highly critical of both the role of some members of government in calling for protests and gatherings outside judges’ homes, as well as the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) that it said was “unable to carry out its functions” to impartially vet and reappoint judges on the basis of qualification and background.

“To date, JSC decision-making has been perceived as being inappropriately influenced by a polarised political environment,” the report stated. “Also troubling is that members of the judiciary have been subject to threats and intimidation as well as improper inducements by both governing and opposition party members.”

The ICJ said the report, entitled ‘Securing an Independent Judiciary in a Time of Transition’, had raised particular concerns over the “constitutional crisis” that occurred last year concerning the legitimacy of the courts and judges and the conduct of the government of President Mohamed Nasheed in addressing this.

Despite these concerns, Normand claimed that while there were “significant” problems with judiciary in the Maldives, and that the structure of a watchdog body such as the JSC needed much work needed to resolve, he was encouraged that there appeared to be a political mandate to bring changes to the legal system. However, the ICJ Asia Pacific director stressed that a non-independent judiciary could not simply change directly to an independent body.

“To have a sudden change, where suddenly judges are independent – this can’t just be signed on a piece of paper or constitution, it’s an attitude and a practice,” he said. “I think it’s safe to say we don’t have those attitudes and practices in the Maldives, but I also think the size of the developments are very positive.”

According to Normand and the ICJ, part of the challenge in trying to provide an independent judiciary is to ensure public support and acceptance of the country’s legal institutions and their verdicts, which in itself was linked to transparency within the decisions of bodies like the JSC.

“Judicial accountability is key to cultivating such public confidence and is an integral aspect of judicial independence,” the report stated. “Accountability must be manifest both at institutional level, in terms of court administration and access to justice, and at the individual level. This enables judges to decide cases without fear or favour and that they strictly apply the law to the facts before them.”

Recommendations

The report recommends a number of areas, such as education and training programmes for court appointees, bringing foreign experts to assist long-term, and advise on developments that it believes the Supreme Court could adopt to boost its own accountability.

In areas such as education, the ICJ said that seven-year periods outlined under the national Judges Act was used more effectively to enhance the qualifications of judges as well as ensure that a code of ethics was introduced in line with international agreements such as the Bangalore Principles on Judicial Conduct.

In addition, the ICJ claimed that steps could also be taken to ensure the Department of Judicial Administration was used to try to provide smoother administration of justice,such as requiring all levels of court to issue written reasons for its actions and establishing a judicial database so the court and public could refer to similar case law and precedents.

Normand stressed that the Maldives was relatively unique in that its courts would turn to Sharia law where Maldivian legislation didn’t apply, but that it was not alone in such experiences.

“We would recommend [collaboration with] countries that have experience of working both with common law – using previous legal cases to set precedent – and Sharia law, Pakistan is one example, Malaysia is another,” said Normand. “There are other countries where the issues the Maldives faces have been looked at before. It’s not the first time so you need to take advantage of this.”

The ICJ also recommended steps it hoped the JSC would take to act with greater transparency after coming under criticism and allegations of possible corruption.

Beyond adopting regulations and procedures to create greater accountability into the JSC’s decision making by recording detailed minutes of its meetings, a technical secretariat could also be established by a neutral party that could limit the workload to allow the organisation to work to its constitutional requirements.

The ICJ added that these developments needed to be backed by using international experts to help oversee work, and also ensure the high “moral integrity” of judges in relation to their criminal records that is also outlined under various international treaties and agreements.

The report also outlined recommendations for the country’s parliament and government to adhere to in their conduct in relation to the courts such as launching public awareness campaigns in relations to the requirements under the constitution of various legal institutions. The government was also called on to provide funding and strengthen the faculty of law and Sharia in the country, and the Majlis were called upon to pass vital laws such as the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code to allow swifter and more impartial delivery of justice.

The organisation also called for reform of the JSC in relation to concerns the report and others have raised over issues of transparency.

“As a principle, the JSC must become more transparent and effective in processing the complaints by the public about judges,” added Normand.  “In fact, it is important for the judges themselves that the institution of the judiciary has the confidence of the public – that you’re qualified, that you’re not a criminal – it’s important for everyone.”

Taking the example of other nations such as Indonesia that are claimed to witnessed huge problems with trying to establish an independent and efficient judicial service, Normand claimed there were positive examples of countries like the Maldives that had seen vast improvements in the impartiality of its courts.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

One in seven Maldivian secondary students have been sexually abused, finds 2009 report

Almost one in seven children of secondary school age in the Maldives have been sexually abused at some time in their lives, according to an unpublished 2009 study on violence against children.

Rates of sexual abuse for girls are almost twice as high than for boys at 20 percent – one in five girls have been sexually abused – while the figure for boys was 11 percent. Girls are particularly at risk in the capital Male’, the report found.

The National Study of Violence Against Children, produced by UNICEF and the Ministry of Gender and Family and conducted by global research firm TNS, was heavily cited at last week’s Conference on Child Protection held at Bandos.

The stud – currently unofficial – is the first large-scale national study on the issue of physical and emotional punishment against children in the Maldives, interviewing almost 17,035 people in 2500 households as well as 2000 children in schools.

The study found that 47 percent of Maldivian children under the age of 18 have undergone physical or emotional punishment at home, school or in the community.

“The use of emotional punishment is considerably wide-spread and is also supported by the
parents’ beliefs that this is an effective way of teaching children the proper behaviour,” the report found.

Boys were more susceptible to physical punishment while large numbers of girls at secondary school level reported emotional punishment. Eight percent of school students, mostly boys, reported physical punishment from their school teachers.

Physical violence was more common among students attending secondary school in the atolls, with one in four reporting they had been hit by adults or other children during the past year. The figure for Male’ was 14 percent.

30 percent of children at secondary school reported being hit by at least one of their caregivers, while 21 percent said at object had had been used to do this.

A quarter of all carefivers said they believed that physical punishment had a positive effect on the rearing of children..

Furthermore, “children who suffer from a handicap – however light – have experienced
significantly more emotional punishment than children without such handicaps,” the report said.

The study also revealed a lingering distrust of authorities and their ability to deal with issues relating to physical or sexual abuse of children.

“When aware of a case of abuse in the community, the majority [of respondents] chose to not
inform the authorities, not [to] cause any trouble and/or due to limited belief in the efficiency of
the system.”

The report identified that despite high awareness of the issue, the cultural background of the Maldivia society “does not particularly prohibit emotional or physical punishment of children.” Efforts to increase the level of discussion were “hampered by the notion that such events should be solved in the home and not discussed publicly.”

Resolution of cases within the legal system was a particular change for the Maldives, especially cases involving child sexual abuse.

“The victim itself might turn out to be made liable for such an event and might be subjected itself to penal proceedings if the perpetrator does not plead guilty or four witnesses for the prosecution cannot be found,” the report noted.

It urged the education of caregivers as to the negative impact of violence against children, and highlighted particular discrepencies in the education system.

“Over 30 percent of teachers in the Maldives are untrained because 80 percent of staff training costs are transport related. In a country where 70 percent of the population lives on islands far from the capital, and where transport among islands can be prohibitively expensive, many children are at the risk of being invisible,” the report warned.

The report also produced some interesting demographic findings about the structure of the Maldivian families. In 24 percent of cases, a child’s male caregiver is not their biological father – in seven percent of cases, this role is performed by an older brother, and only rarely (two percent) by a stepfather or uncle. 87 percent of children have their biological mother as a caregiver.

A quarter of all children reported health difficulties. The majority of these concerned problems seeing, and to a lesser extent, “walking or climbing stairs”.

Domestically, arguments between children and their caregivers in the home revolve around fairly universal themes: watching TV (10 percent), household chores (10 percent), homework (12 percent), and staying up late (seven percent).

The main source of domestic arguments for girls were household chores (15 percent) – the second highest source of friction for boys was hairstyle (12 percent).

The 24 hour toll-free Maldives Child Helpline is available on 1412.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

New councilors to take oath of office on Saturday

Councilors who have won seats on newly formed island and atoll councils are scheduled to take their oath of office on the morning of Saturday February 26, the Home Ministry has announced.

The ministry said that the oath-taking ceremonies will be held in all areas where the Elections Commission have announced the official results.

”The Island Councils will hold the ceremony in their respective islands and atolls, and councilors will take the oath in the capital island of each respective atoll,” said the Home Ministry.

Councilors of Male’ City will take the oath in Male’ and Addu City councilors will take the oath in Hithadhu, the Home Ministry added.

The Ceremony will commence at 9:00am in the morning and the Home Ministry has invited citizens to attend Saturday’s ceremonies “in the spirit of national unity.”

Meanwhile, the elections commission has announced the official results of almost all divisions except for the Council of Kela in Haa Alifu Atoll and other division where candidates got equal votes.

Following the election on February 5, the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) won a clear seat majority while the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) won control of the major population centres. The MDP calculated that the popular vote was 44 percent – 40 percent in its favour, but the EC has not confirmed this figure. Full breakdowns of the available results are available on the Elections Commission website.

Kela results were delayed according a High Court order after complaints were filed regarding the elections procedures.

Candidates uneducated

Islanders in at least one division have expressed concern that most of the elected councilors were not capable of handling such positions of responsibility.

One islander from the central region of the Maldives told Minivan News that on his island, only two of the five elected councilors have finished their GCE O’Levels.

”Because they ran as candidates for the seats under different parties, supporters of those parties have voted for them for the sake of promoting their party,” he said. ”Votes were not made with consideration for how educated the candidate is, or how capable the person, just by what political party he belongs to.”

He noted that the councilors will therefore follow the orders of their parties regardless of whether they were beneficial or harmful to their own island.

”For instance, if a foreign party were interested in developing our island, there is no way some councils could deal with it because they don’t even understand English very well,” he said. ”It would be the islanders who will have to suffer, I don’t think people really considered [candidates’] educational background or their capability.”

Recently Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali told Minivan News many successful candidates in the local council election remained unaware of their new responsibilities, or even of the mandate of a local council.

“It is a fact that candidates from many parties including ours may not be clear on their responsibilities and mandates,” he told Minivan News.

All the councilors will take over the the administration of their respective island and atoll offices following the oath Saturday.

The new structure of island and atoll councils is meanwhile expected to cost the Maldivian state an extra Rf 173 million (US$13.5 million) a year, a figure that has raised concerns among international financial donors such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

The President of every island council will receive a salary and allowance of Rf 15,000 (US$1160), council members Rf 11,000 (US$850). The mayor of Male’ will receive Rf 45,000 (US$3500).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Letter in response to Lale teacher story

Dear Sir,

With reference to the news article published on Minivan News with headline ‘Lale English Teacher Resorted to Begging, Sleeping in Fish Market’ I would like to issue the following clarifications to the case on behalf of the school.

1. An Australian citizen named Mr John S Campbell has served Lale as an English teacher on a contract basis.

2. Mr John S Campbell was NOT an employee of the School when he allegedly begged or slept in the fish market. His contract with the school ended on November 16, 2010. The school issued him a return ticket to Australia on October 20, 2010 and he left the Maldives on December 2, 2010. The Labour Ministry cancelled his employment approval for the School as he left the Maldives on December 2, 2010. The school paid him salary for every single month during his contract period, which was shared to Authorities upon request. Although his contract ended on 16th November 2010, the school paid him a full salary for November.

3. Mr. John S Campbell was claiming for December 2010 salary, which the school refused to give because his contract was over by November 16, 2010 and there was no new contract with him. No institution will pay as per the demands of people based on ‘Nothing’. Furthermore the school has noticed his habit of making baseless claims for money, like demanding 1 million USD from school for an injury; like demanding 50,000 USD from Bank of Maldives for not opening his bank account on time.

4. Mr John S Campbell took the matter to the Labour Ministry before he left the Maldives on December 2, 2010 and the Labour Ministry explained to him what his rights were and what the school should be giving him.

5. The school was in contact with the Labour Ministry, Australian Embassy, Immigration and Maldives Police Service regarding the case.

6. Authorities did not find any failings on the part of the school.

7. Mr John S Campbell did NOT inform the school at all about his return to the Maldives and was in the country for his own reasons and nothing to do with the school. When he returned to the Maldives he was no longer an employee of the school.

Furthermore we are very disappointed with the irresponsible journalism practiced by the author. This news article lacks any investigation, any comment from relevant government authorities which worked on the case and any comment from the school. In the past this author has accused the school and its management with various allegations without any proof, and has targeted the school regularly for reasons which Maldivian general public does not realize. We urge the editor to take concrete steps to make sure that information is verified before it is published.

Thank you.

Yours Sincerely,

Mr Mehmet Akif
Principal

All letters are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write a letter, please submit it to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Immigration Controller to exchange roles with National Disaster Management chief

Immigration Controller Ilyas Hussein Ibrahim is to trade roles with head of the National Disaster Management Centre Abdulla Shahid, also Minister of State for Housing and Environment.
Minivan News understands that the official letters of appointment have not yet been delivered but are awaiting the President’s signature, after news of the decision was leaked.

Ilyas told Minivan News that the Haveeru report was the first he had heard of the proposal: “No one’s shared it with me yet,” he said.

The move may have a political dimension, as Ilyas is one of the few remaining members of the Vice President’s Gaumee Itthihaad Party (GIP) in government, which was dropped as a coalition partner by the ruling Maldivian Democractic Party (MDP) last year after Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan publicly criticised the government for sidelining him.
The supposed reshuffle also comes a month after President Mohamed Nasheed called on the Immigration Department to postpone the roll-out of the Nexbis electronic border control system for the Maldives in accordance with concerns by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) over the project’s selection process.

The President’s Office previously confirmed to Minivan News that Nasheed has requested that the Department of Immigration and Emigration adhere to the ACC’s guidance until it rules over the next step for the project, with no appeal expected to be heard on the current decision.

Nexbis has meanwhile said it will be taking legal action against parties in the Maldives, claiming that speculation over corruption was “politically motivated” in nature and had “wrought irreparable damage to Nexbis’ reputation and brand name.”

The project is intended to curb illegal immigration by tying biometric data to an individual at point of entry, thus reducing the reliance on potentially forged paper documentation. Labour trafficking in the Maldives is thought to be worth at least US$42 million a year and up to US$200 million, according to the former Bangladeshi High Commissioner.

Both positions – Immigration Controller and head of the National Disaster Management Centre – share the same rank.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)