Category: Society & Culture

Cultural tradition and religious values at heart of “fresh, expanded nationhood”: President Mohamed Nasheed

In honor of the Maldives’ 69th National Day President Mohamed Nasheed has advised that Maldivian nationhood be rooted in universal values as taught by Islam and centuries-old tradition.

National Day remembers the heroic efforts of 16th century Maldivian leader Mohammed Thakurufaanu.

Speaking today, the President identified “conviction, beauty, humility, kindness, equality, justice, and caring” as the main bases of Maldivian nationhood. He advocated for “a fresh, expanded nationhood” in alignment with Islam and national tradition.

The question of the Maldive’s status as a 100 percent Muslim country was recently debated during protests in late December, when opposition parties and religious NGOs called for stronger Islamic policies.

The government’s all-or-nothing response included a shut-down of all spas and a proposed nation-wide ban on pork and alcohol–moves which drew anxious attention from international media and tourism officials.

Although asked to rule on the Islamic value of allowing the sale of pork and alcohol in resorts, the Supreme Court dismissed the case but said it found no reason why those items should be prohibited according to constitutional regulations on tourism goods and services.

Advocating democracy and human rights as elements critical to the Maldives, President Nasheed said a refreshed sense of nationhood should provide for “a just judiciary, freedom of expression, and other human rights; and an economic system that provides for a prosperous, clean livelihood for all citizens.”

Recently, the government instituted universal health insurance program Aasandhaa, providing free medical coverage for all Maldivian citizens for the first time in the nation’s history.

“For the sake of development and the prosperity of all citizens… the Maldives has already seen tremendous changes to the system of governance,” said the President.

However, the government has wrestled with freedom of expression. In late 2011, controversial blogger Ismail ‘Khilath’ Rasheed’s blog was swiftly shut down on the exclusive order of the Islamic Minister. He was also arrested and held for extended periods of detention after participating in a peaceful protest for religious tolerance on International Human Rights Day, during which he was beaten.

Rasheed’s arrest and detention were scrunitised and condemned by Amnesty International and Reporters without Borders (RSF).

Recognising the ongoing political unrest in Male’ since Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested on January 16 by military forces, President Nasheed said separation of powers and “a judiciary free from all undue influence,” are essential for future progress and growth.

In recent days the government has requested international legal assistance in bringing judicial reform to the Maldives, while lawyers contending that the judge was unlawfully arrested and detained have forwarded the case to the International Criminal Court (ICC), of which the Maldives became a member late last year.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Comment: One captain, one course

These past weeks’ demonstrations, protests, and proclamations continually evoke the principle that constitutional powers must be separated, but conveniently ignore the checks and balances which are meant to be inherent to any functional democracy.

We have had one constitutional crisis after another precisely because our system is broken. The checks don’t work and our system is anything but balanced. The opposition claims the executive is all powerful, while the ruling party claims that both the legislature and the judiciary are trying to hijack the government. The only way forward is through leveling the playing field. I propose we do this in two ways; implementing a real power of veto and meeting our constitutional obligations regarding the judiciary.

At Democracy’s Doorstep

It is self-evident that the democracy we fought for against 30 years of tyranny has not come to pass. In November of 2008, we merely started the next leg of a voyage that pioneers like the President and Vice President started two decades earlier.

In that moment, it was fitting that they embarked on this next leg together. And though much hailed as the fruition of hopes and dreams for democracy, what we failed to grasp is that the journey was not yet complete. The legislature, when controlled by a hostile opposition can bring the state to a standstill, while the judiciary remains with strong political bias and an ethos that should have ended when the middle ages did.

Democracy is meant to function with representation from the people. The people choose a president and a plan for five years, and while the implementation of that plan should be vetted through the legislature and the rule of law safeguarded by the judicature, neither of the two subsidiary bodies are supposed to take the helm of the country. A ship is supposed to have one captain, who is advised and guided, but whose direction and vision guides the course that the ship takes.

The reason why we have a presidential system is because we have the right to choose the vision to guide our nation. We choose our President and Vice President as they are directly elected by us. We choose our path for five years.

But say they both, God forbid, die tomorrow. Our Speaker becomes interim President till elections are held. In parliamentary systems, those who control parliament head government as well, and they do fine – right?

Wrong. If the Speaker led government, we would have a man who represents only 0.2 percent of the voting population (having won his seat with a total of 305 votes). A delightfully clearheaded and capable man though he is, he would not represent the people. We would not have a say in how our country should progress.

In 2008, when we voted, we had our say. Fine, a bunch of people voted against the former President, rather than for this one – but that is one of the growing pains of overcoming dictatorship. We chose this path, so it is time we stopped institutional mechanisms from hindering it.

We stand here at democracy’s doorstep, afraid to cross the threshold because of our authoritarian past. But the point of government is not to constantly bicker and make governing impossible, but rather to provide for those who elected you to power – not through handouts but rather through policy that changes things rather than causes stagnation.

The Point of Majlis

All the Majlis has done for the last three years is to find ways to cause stagnation rather than governance. The opposition believes that every government policy is wrong and that instead of dialogue, the only avenue available is to block policy. It is not about helping the people – it is about making sure the government fails.

That is not the way a government is supposed to function. Apart from the fact that our newly elected Majlis members have no resources, guidance, or staff to assist them – we are also encumbered by a significant institutional failing: the President has no veto.

When the President sends a bill back to Parliament because it is either inconsistent with his vision, or because it may be damaging to the people, it is but a symbolic gesture in our country. In other nations, such an action can only be overturned by a stronger majority (such as two-thirds).

Yet in the Maldives, a simple majority can force a bill through. A simple majority can hijack government and change the course of our ship. This is not the way it was meant to be. Because of the electoral system by which our parliamentarians are chosen, and because of the other factors that influence parliamentary functions, that simple majority can never equal the weight of the office of the President. To change our course and to change the direction which our country follows, we must empower our president with the authority to stand against the tyranny of a minority, and only ever let the will of the majority override the vision we chose.

An Independent Judiciary

Yet a nation cannot function, unless the rule of law is safeguarded. We worked long and hard to ensure that the judiciary would be one that was independent and free from political and social bias. There is but one mechanism to keep the judiciary accountable; the Judicial Services Commission. Alas, this mechanism has failed. It was tasked with thinning the herd, with vetting our judges, and with maintaining some level of dignity on the Maldivian bench. As described by Dr Azra Naseem, we had our moment to hold the judiciary to some standard, and we collectively dropped the ball.

The constitution clearly empowers this commission to take disciplinary action, including dismissal proceedings, against judges for incompetence or gross misconduct. And yet, when they finally get around to finding that Abdulla Mohamed failed to comply with the required standard of conduct, on the 26th of November 2011, the same judge managed to have a court order issued preventing further proceedings. The one body charged with keeping our courts in check has proven itself powerless to fulfill its constitutional mandate.

Here, we have a judge whom most agree is corrupt – or at the very least unfit to sit in so high an office; we have a judge who is blatantly politically biased and admits as much on national television; we have a judge who has released criminals including rapists and drug dealers and who has been seen cavorting with defendants after his rulings; and yet we as a nation and a people are powerless to remove him from the office which he so flagrantly disgraces. Can there be a constitutional failing that is more evident than the one embodied in this man?

A Constitutional Amendment

Our path and our national progression are being hindered by mechanisms that do not function. We have a President determined to follow through on the promises he made when elected; to provide housing, healthcare, transportation, less drug abuse and a better standard of living. Yet even basic policies are refuted, not by the merit of the program, but rather by the party which proposed it. And now there are few avenues that are open to move forward. We need to move beyond stagnation as a policy for politics. We need to change the game. There is but one captain of this ship. For five years, we choose one captain, one direction and one path. In 2013 the path might change, but before that happens – let fix these mechanisms. Let’s become the democracy we were always meant to be.

www.jswaheed.com

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Citizen sheep

A Maldivian chronicler once recounted an anecdote of the late Prince Hassan Farid Didi who remarked back in the 1930’s that granting democracy to Maldivians is like giving a handkerchief to a monkey. “The monkey doesn’t know what a handkerchief is used for and soon it will wipe its bottom with it,” the Prince reportedly said.

A lot of Maldivians take offense at being compared to primates, but the past few weeks of political volatility has definitely called into question the country’s ability to shoulder the responsibilities of being a democracy.

The current crisis was sparked after the armed forces were commanded to forcibly detain Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed of the Criminal Court, after he ordered the release of two opposition leaders who were being prosecuted for “hate speech”.

The DQP leaders, Dr Jameel and “Sandhaanu” Ahmed Didi, had publicly accused the government of coming under the influence of Jews and Christian missionaries “to destroy Islam”. Religious hyperbole is frequently used for political slander in the Maldives – an unfortunate outcome of the country’s failure to adopt a secular constitution in 2008.

The military detention of the judge has led to a series of increasingly violent, opposition-led street protests in Male’ for the past 10 days. Protesters have allegedly attacked journalists, uprooted trees, damaged public property and vandalised a Minister’s house.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court, High Court, the Opposition parties, the SAARC Secretary General and the Vice President have all spoken out against the detention calling it unconstitutional. Even the Prosecutor General has declared the detention unlawful.

This wouldn’t be the first time President Nasheed has exercised his uncanny willingness to shake things up.

In August 2010, he commanded the armed forces to lock down the Supreme Court after the Interim Supreme Court bench boldly decided to declare itself permanent. Following the siege, the major political parties managed to do some quick backroom negotiations to appoint a new panel of judges.

While the President’s latest salvo has successfully brought into the mainstream public conscious, for the first time, the long ignored issue of the runaway judiciary, it does raise concerns about the Executive setting unwelcome precedents for the future.

Runaway Judiciary

Aishath Velezinee, the former Judicial Services Commission whistle-blower, has publicly alleged that there is a collusion between senior opposition parliamentarians and the judiciary, which exercises undue influence over the JSC.

The JSC, which is supposed to be the independent watchdog of the judiciary, is itself dominated by judges and opposition allied politicians – and its record thus far is less befitting a watchdog, and more indicative of a lap dog.

Velezinee alleges that this is tantamount to a ‘silent coup’, where the judiciary is hijacked by a nexus of corrupt judges and opposition leaders, and the courts are used as an instrument to protect members of the old establishment that was overthrown during the democratic uprising.

The Criminal Court

The charges against Judge Abdulla Mohamed are extremely serious – ranging from corruption, to obstruction of police duties, to questionable judgments and poor professional conduct.

In February 2010, the judge ordered the release of a murder suspect – who would then stab another man to death within the next month.

The judge has in the past demanded that an underage sexual abuse victim re-enact her abuse in the public courtroom. These allegations were first reported in 2005 by then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed, whose political party is now among those leading the charge to release him.

The police have in the past accused the judge of delaying search warrants by several days, allowing major drug traffickers to get away. The Home Minister accuses him ordering the release of suspected criminals “without a single hearing”. He also stands accused of arbitrarily dismissing court officials.

It does not help allegations that the courts are in bed with tainted politicians when the same Criminal Court Judge also bars the media from covering corruption proceedings against opposition-allied Deputy Speaker Nazim.

A February 2011 report released by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) also highlighted the failure of the politicised courts to be impartial in providing justice.

The Rule of Law

While there are obviously dark clouds looming over Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s record, and the state of the judiciary is less than acceptable, does this automatically excuse the executive’s decision to forcibly detain the judge on a whim?

The unilateral actions of the very first democratically elected executive sets a rather poor precedent.

Will it be the case in the future that any elected President can arbitrarily command the armed forces to detain errant officials or citizens without the any court approval, or warrant or legal backing?

Will all future presidents be similarly entrusted to be the ultimate judge of when the Rule of Law can be subverted – if they feel it is in the larger interests of society? Will their judgements always be enforced through the brute force of the military?

The ruling party and the President’s apologists offer the explanation that given the nature of the allegations against Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, and the cartel-like behaviour of the judiciary, drastic action needed to be taken to ensure justice.

Yes, drastic action was indeed required – but did it necessarily need to be initiated from the President’s Office? Does not ultimate power rest with the voting public anymore?

Citizen Sheep

It has proven surprisingly difficult to get the public involved in a debate over the many, many allegations against the judiciary – that less glamorous wing of state power where the primary actors work behind closed doors, hidden from the media limelight.

When former MP and Chairman of the Special Majlis Drafting Committee Ibrahim “Ibra” Ismail expressed alarm in September 2011 over the growing excesses of the judiciary, the Supreme Court fantastically reprimanded him in a press release, asserting that criticising the Courts went “against the principles of civilisation” and that the constitution forbade such criticism.

In a democracy, the power rests with the people. However, Maldivians so far have shown little inclination to hold their state office bearers accountable.

In the neighbouring country of India, tens of thousands of outraged members of the public poured out onto the streets in recent months to protest against corruption in high offices.

The impact of overwhelming public sentiment and the willingness of the Indian public to hold their elected officials accountable worked. Several cabinet ministers and powerful provincial leaders previously thought to be untouchable by law suddenly found themselves behind bars.

Despite their every natural instinct, both opposition and ruling party leaders in India were forced to bend to public will and draft legislation that would create a new constitutional authority – an ombudsman that would be empowered to investigate corruption at the highest levels, including the Prime Minister’s office.

In contrast, the Maldivian public seems to be lethargic, and content with mindlessly echoing whatever slogan is aired by whichever party they happened to plead allegiance to.

Thus, we had ten thousand protesters mindlessly follow their sloganeering political leaders last month to complain about monuments and a host of other trivial non-issues, but there wasn’t a murmur to be heard about the serious charges of corruption and undermining of the judiciary by the same politicians who were on stage blathering about some imagined grief caused by invading Jews.

Pray where were the hordes of MDP loyalists that today defend the President and speak in angry tones against the Criminal Court judge, when the judiciary made a mockery of the constitution throughout the whole fiasco involving the appointment of judges?

Does anyone know the views of the opposition protesters on the state of affairs of the judiciary?

Are they not concerned about the under-qualified, under-educated, and sometimes convicted criminals of poor moral calibre that now occupy the benches of their courts?

If they are worried about the abuse of executive power, why are they not concerned about the abuse of judicial and legislative power?

Perhaps the Maldivian public is simply uneducated on the gravity of these issues due to the lack of any avenue for factual, impartial information – and having access only to a bunch of partisan propaganda outlets masquerading as ‘the media’, with the choice to pick one that most panders to their views.

The slant of the State media coverage of the recent protests is eerily similar to the language employed by Gayoom-era news propaganda. Similarly, the bias and sensationalism spewed by opposition-allied TV networks would make Fox News and The Daily Mail blush.

A second revolution

An argument can be made that the task of democratic transition still lies incomplete, and that democratic reforms only changed things in the executive, leaving the judiciary and parliament to remain bastions of the old guard.

The President and the ruling party have the right to educate the public and complete the task of democratic reform in all areas of governance.

However, if they feel that more drastic, revolutionary actions are necessary, then perhaps they ought to relinquish the position of the executive, return to the streets as ordinary citizens, and organize a grassroots campaign to cleanse the country’s courts and Parliament.

It simply does not bode well for the country’s democracy when the powers bestowed to one arm of the State is unilaterally employed to twist the other arm.

The country has already had one failed attempt at democracy before. If the actions of the democratic leaders causes the general public loses faith in democratic institutions and the rule of law, then there’s no reason to believe it won’t fail again.

The Maldivian public needs to realize that the ultimate Constitutional power is not vested in the President’s residence of Muleeage, but in the hands of voting citizens, and that if they are serious about completing the task of Judicial reform, then it is up to the citizens themselves to rise up and sort out the Judges.

Echoing the sentiments of the Prince Hassan Farid Didi, Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom once said in an interview that Dhivehin are not ‘ready’ for democracy.

Recent events suggest that both the Pharaoh and the Prince appear to be correct.

Four years after we voted in our first democratic government, the Maldivian public continues to be as clueless as the monkey with the handkerchief – and it is under our watch that politicians and judges wipe their bottoms with the constitution.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

High-risk behaviour leaves Maldives at risk of HIV/AIDS “explosion”

A new report has revealed that the health authorities detected 18 HIV positive cases and over 400 cases of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) in last year – a “significant” finding which has highlighted the need for additional research to understand the prevalence of STI’s and HIV in the Maldives.

The report, “Annual Communicable Disease 2011” from the Centre for Community Health and Disease Control (CCHDC), revealed that among the 31,016 people tested under the Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT) program last year, a total of 438 cases of STIs were reported, out of which 97 percent affected females.

The report says among the 426 females with STIs, 395 involved vaginal discharge cases and 31 ulcers. Meanwhile, males with STIs were reported significantly low at 12 – eight cases of urethral discharge and four cases of ulcers. The report does not specify the age group, however all participants in the study were volunteers.

CCHCDC director Director Moomina Aboobakuru told local media that the authorities are deeply concerned about the increased detection of STIs such as chlamydia and gonorrhea – both conditions that can cause infertility if left untreated.

As the surveillance is limited to the number of people volunteering to take the tests, and with no nationwide survey, Aboobakuru believes that more people are likely to be living in with STIs “undetected”.

Meanwhile, Dr Ahmed Jamsheed, public health expert and former Director General of the CCHDC, argued that it could not necessarily be deduced from the report that the sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise in the Maldives.

He explained that as this was the first published general finding on STIs in the Maldives, there was no reference to determine whether cases were on the rise nationwide without previous data to compare it with.

“But certainly there is an urgent need for additional research for STI’s , including HIV to understand the prevalence of these diseases in the country,” Dr Jamsheed asserted.

Risk of HIV/AIDS ‘explosion’

Jamsheed and CCHDC officials fear that increasing rates of “high risk behaviour” risk the historically low rate of HIV prevalence in the Maldives, putting selective groups such as drug users, resort workers and people travelling abroad at greater risk.

Meanwhile, a total of 18 HIV positive cases were reported last year alone – including 17 expatriates and one local.

Between 1991 and 2011, 15 HIV cases were reported among Maldivians, compared to 168 among expatriate workers. Of the Maldivian cases 13 were males, and two females, and all patients cited heterosexual transmission as the cause.

Despite the country’s conservative exterior, Dr Jamsheed wrote on his blog in June 2011 that Maldivians have always been sexually very active: “High divorce and re-marriage rate, which increases the number of sexual partners any individual have over the lifetime. It is also a known fact that despite being a Muslim community, a lot of Maldivians have multiple extramarital relationships.”

Human trafficking for purposes including sexual entertainment has put more locals at risk, while in 2010 police arrested an HIV-positive prostitute.

Further risk factors include falling rates of contraceptive use, Dr Jamsheed wrote, particularly among high risk groups.

“The condom prevalence rate in the Maldives is very low and on a negative curve, though this data comes from married couples. Studies also show that condom use by the high-risk groups (commercial sex workers, men having sex with men, clients of sex workers) is also very low. Condom is the most effective preventative tool we have to protect from HIV transmission through sexual intercourse,” Dr Jamsheed wrote.

Furthermore, “However much we deny, there is a significant number of gay men in the Maldives, a lot of who are married and having bisexual relationships. There is also reason to believe that the gay community in the Maldives is increasing and becoming more organized and open about their sexual orientation,” he wrote.

Without any formal sexual education in schools and a general stigma around purchasing condoms, the basic defenses against HIV transmission are low.

“With all these extremely high risk factors, it could be said that we are sitting on a ticking bomb for an explosive HIV epidemic,” Dr Jamsheed warns.

“It’s [only] a matter of time for the virus to be introduced to the high-risk circle, especially the IV drug users. Unless we escalate our preventive efforts and introduce new and more effective measures, the low HIV prevalence in the Maldives might change to a very high prevalence in no time.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Lawyers forward Chief Judge’s case to International Criminal Court

A group  of lawyers have forward a case concerning the government’s arrest and detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s by military forces has been forwarded to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Maldives became a member of the ICC after acceding to the Rome Statute late last year.

According to the Rome Statute, “the jurisdiction of the [ICC] shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”, notably genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. The ICC does not deal with small cases, even if the victims may be in the hundreds.”

The case was forwarded by a group of lawyers contesting the conditions of the judge’s arrest and detention at a Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) training facility on Girifushi.

Maumoon Hameed, a member of the legal team, said the case was submitted “as the continued detention of Judge Mohamed is in clear violation of the International Convention on the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearance.”

Hameed told local media that ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Occampo, would investigate the matter. Minivan News is currently waiting for a response from the ICC.

The judge was arrested by MNDF forces upon police request after he attempted to block his own police summons in the High Court. Allegations against him include corruption, political bias and poor professional conduct, such as requiring underage victims of sexual abuse to re-enact their experiences during court hearings.

MNDF did not release details of the judge’s whereabouts for 48 hours following his arrest, prompting the opposition to define the act as “enforced disappearance”.

The military has not complied with High and Supreme court orders to release the judge. Officials from the military and police forces were today questioned on the matter by Parliament’s 241 Committee for safety and security, and further hearings are pending.

Opposition parties have claimed the judge’s detention as a ‘crime against humanity’, leading to a string of increasingly violence protests since last week. Over 40 people have been arrested in the past four days, and several individuals have been sent to the hospital.

Opposition Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) President Ibrahim Shareef termed the arrest an inhumane “kidnapping”, while Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed surprised the govenrment by expressing shame over the action calling it “the first possible violation since the dawn of democracy in our country”.

The European Union (EU) also expressed concern over the judge’s arrest in a statement in which it encouraged all parties to “act in accordance with these [democratic] principles and to refrain from inflammatory language or other action which could incite hatred.”

Acting on these and other concerns, Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) last weekend visited the judge on Girifushi and reported that he was in good health and conditions, drawing criticism from the opposition for allegedly “backing down” from its duties.

Meanwhile, the government has maintained that the judge’s arrest was lawful and that invoking the term ‘crime against humanity’ is only a political strategy.

“The government of Maldives is taking appropriate action in extraordinary circumstances involving allegations of serious corruption and gross misconduct by a senior judge. Public statements seeking to define his detention as a human rights issue are part of the web of protection which surrounds Judge Abdulla Mohamed,” said a government legal source.

Citing the ICC’s Rome Statute, the legal source has noted that “detention of a person can only be construed as a ‘crime against humanity’ if that detention is committed by a State as part of a widespread systematic attack on a civilian population, and if that detention is followed by the refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom, and or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of that person with the intention of removing the person from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.

“The detention of Judge Abdulla Mohamed is not part of a systematic attack on a civilian population and the government has acknowledged his detention to both his family and the public at large,” the source stated.

The source described the allegations against the Chief Judge as “of serious concern to the Maldivian government and community” and claimed to hold evidence of “gross misconduct” against the Judge.

In particular, the government claims that the judge exercised “undue influence” over at least one member of the Civil Court to prompt a ruling against the Judicial Services Commission’s (JSC) investigation of the Judge last year.

Observing that the High and Supreme courts remained silent during the affair, the government accused the judge of “tacit acceptance of a ploy to prevent the JSC from exercising is powers under the constitution.”

Furthermore, by accepting the Civil Court’s ruling the JSC indicated its own subscription to biased input, the source claimed.

Speaking today to Minivan News, in his own capacity, opposition Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) member Abdul Rasheed Nafiz endorsed the gesture of sending the case to the ICC.

“Right now, this is a legal argument. The opposition says the military cannot arrest judges, and the President says he has the authority as commander-in-chief. The Supreme Court tried to resolve the matter but it has had some problems. We need a mediator, and now it’s time for the international community to get involved”, he said.

Among the criteria for the ICC to take on a case in the Maldives is doubtful willingness and capacity of the country’s own judiciary to handle the case in question.

Speaking to Minivan News in September, President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said it was important for the Maldives to have access to an international judiciary

“This is a big step for a country whose previous leaders have been accused of human rights violations. I believe their cases would be fairly addressed in the ICC,” he said, while an ICC official hoped membership would help the Maldives proceed with judicial reform.

Towards that end, the Foreign Ministry has requested an international legal delegation from the United Nations’ Human Rights Commission to help resolve the current impasse in the nation’s judicial system.

Meanwhile, former President’s Member on the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), Aishath Velezinee, today told Minivan News “I would like it if the ICC were to accept this. Not because of Abdulla Mohamed, but because it will mean they will have to look into why he was taken.”

Velezinee has accused the opposition of subverting the judiciary for political purposes, with the aim of protecting their supporters from prosecution and retaining control over the judges as previously held by the former Ministry of Justice.

“It was a coup,” she told Minivan News today. “Now they are asking the Supreme Court to investigate – the same Supreme Court which has asked the authorities to investigate people who criticise the judiciary. No single person has criticised the judiciary more than me – and I say this because I have all the evidence, and all the papers.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

PPM still asking for Chief Judge’s release as violent protests continue

Police and Maldives National Defence Forces (MNDF) last night arrested 19 people during a violent protest outside the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) building near Republic Square, in which four police officers received minor injuries.

“The protest became violent when people started throwing bricks and other things,” said police Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef. “We tried to disperse them, and the protest spread throughout Male’ city.” Haneef said the protests continued until 1:25 am on Monday morning.

‘Sandhaanu’ Ahmed Ibrahim Didi, a council member of minority opposition Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP), has been released. The other 18 individuals remain in custody.

However, Mulaku MP Abdulla Yameen was summoned to police headquarters this morning for questioning in regards in to an ongoing investigation. Local media reports that Yameen was due to leave for Sri Lanka this evening to meet foreign diplomats.

Police officials estimated that between 300 and 400 individuals associated with political opposition parties participated in last night’s protest, part of a trend which began when several opposition figures were detained for “hate speech” against the government nine days ago. Opposition-led protests demanding freedom of expression escalated when Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested by military forces seven days ago, shortly after he declared the arrest of the politicians unlawful.

Sub-Inspector Haneef said the protests were “of a high concern to the Male’ police service”, observing that last night’s protest was part of a developing trend of increasingly violent demonstrations.

Stating that military forces are prepared to assist police upon request, MNDF spokesperson Major Abdul Raheem added that “anytime there is violence it is a big concern of ours. We are always on alert and want to make sure Male’ is safe for residents.”

Meanwhile, the Security Services Committee (241 Committee) questioned MNDF Chief Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel and Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh  regarding the detention of the chief judge and the string of protests.

Local media reported that further hearings will be held. However, Minivan was unable to confirm the report with members of the 241 Committee at time of press.

Concerns about the protests were raised at Parliament’s National Security Committee last week by PPM MP Ahmed Mahlouf.

According to Committee Chair and MDP MP Ali Waheed, Mahlouf subsequently withdrew the case “because he didn’t want (MDP MP) ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik to be involved, and he didn’t like the way the investigation was going.”

“We offered dialogue, because we don’t want to stop work, we want to be democratic. In a committee we should be able to have dialogue and make a solution. But the opposition is trying to disrupt the process and make trouble everywhere in the country so the government can’t focus,” Waheed claimed.

Stating that the protests “are an issue of national security”, Waheed warned that disrupting committee procedures were “a means to an end.”

“Right now there are many ways to terrorise a country. Some use guns and bombs, some use language, and even now the way [former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives] is acting is a type of terrorism – they are trying to stop the whole system”, he said, observing that as the protests carry on with blocked roads and vandalised homes, “Male’s roads should not be used only by PPM.”

PPM MP Mahlouf had not responded to phone calls at time of press. However, party member Abdul Rasheed Nafiz said he understood that Mahlouf’s case was voted down during a committee session when MP Yameen was absent, and did not believe that the National Security Committee had the mandate to address the protests.

Nafiz said the protests were important for public expression however he believed the response was overblown.

“Police and military forces are both involved, which is a concern. Force is not required, when these people are gathering they keep silent until the police decide to disperse the crowd,” he claimed.

Acknowledging that a regulation prohibits demonstrations after midnight and at certain locations – such as Republic Square, located next to the MMA building – Nafiz pointed out that “neither side has obeyed that regulation, and even a small regulation can’t limit the freedoms granted in the Constitution.”

During his time as a Parliament member, Nafiz said, he suggested regulations on public protests “because Male’ is a small place and people are saying things that are hard for families and small children to hear. We have a culture and a religion to respect as well. But at the time the proposal was attacked and now people can hold protests when and where they like.”

Nafiz said he believed restoring peace “depends on the chief judge’s release.”

“Opposition parties are willing to bring an end to the protests through negotiation, but the government should release the judge first,” he said, noting that a group of lawyers had today forwarded the case to the International Criminal Court (ICC), of which the Maldives recently became a member.

“This is really a legal issue, and a mediator is needed. The question is ‘who’. Now is the time for the international community to get involved”, he said.

Yesterday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that it had requested an international legal delegation from the United Nations’ Human Rights Commission to assist the Maldives.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Chamber of Commerce VP stabbed by two men on motorcycle

A pair of men have stabbed the Vice President of the Maldives National Chamber of Commerce and Industries (MNCCI),  Ismail Asif, near private Radio Station SunFM.

Speaking to Minivan News from ADK Hospital, Asif said the two men came up on a motorbike and stabbed him twice in the back.

‘’They were two very young persons, they just stopped and stabbed me. I was shocked to see there was no fear on their face, they were not covering their faces or anything, I mean it was broad daylight,’’ Asif said. ‘’They did not say anything to me and I have not received any threats or warnings, so I do not what it is about.’’

Asif said the two men must have been following him for a long time, because he said he was not stabbed at a place he goes to regularly.

‘’I came out from a meeting at the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) and went to drop this friend and right before I turned to leave they came up and stabbed me,’’ he said, adding that it was a “complete shock”.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News that the incident was reported to police at about 3:25pm.

‘’We have information that Asif was attacked with a sharp object and that he is currently at the hospital,’’ he said, adding that investigation was ongoing and declining to provide further information.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldivians among 161 Muslim clerics evicted from Sri Lanka for illegal preaching

Sri Lanka has ordered a group of 161 foreign Islamic clerics – including a number of Maldivian citizens – to leave the country after they were found preaching Islam illegally.

AFP reported the Controller of Immigration and Emigration of Sri Lanka Chulananda Perera as saying that the clerics belonging to the Tabligh Jamat group, and were ordered to leave following complaints from the Muslim community that the “clerics were not preaching the moderate Islam” practiced normally in the Buddhist dominant country.

Perera also told that the clerics arrived in Sri Lanka on the tourist visas and they had violated Sri Lanka’s immigration laws by preaching Islam.

“We have ordered them to leave the country by January 31. They have violated immigration laws. A tourist visa is to have a holiday or visit friends and family and not to preach Islam,” Perera told AFP.

Foreign clerics are required to submit an application to the Sri Lankan religious affairs authorities to get permission before preaching Islam.

According to Perera, the clerics arrived in Sri Lanka last month in small batches.

The preachers included Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, Maldivian and Arab nationals, although authorities did not specify the number of people belonging to each country.

The Maldives Foreign Ministry did not specify the number of Maldivians ordered to leave, although it confirmed the report.

“The ministry is deeply upset that some Maldivians were among the group of people ordered to leave the country for breaching Sri Lankan law,” the official added, advising Maldivians visiting abroad to respect the rules and regulations of countries they were visiting.

Tablighi community scrutinised

The group to which the clerics belonged to remains “controversial” among the Muslim community and has been criticised even by the some local religious NGOs in the Maldives.

When the Islamic Ministry permitted a group of five Tablighi Jamaat members to preach in the Maldives in 2009, several religious scholars advised the public not to join their gatherings and walked out from the mosques during the Tablighi scholars’ sermons.

Speaking to Minivan News at the time, Sheikh Abdulla Bin Mohamed Ibrahim, the president of religious NGO Jamiyyathu Salaf, said the Tablighi Jamaat “have beliefs and principles which conflict with the true Islamic creed.”

He added that no prominent scholar had accepted their principles and all had warned against them for their “misconceptions”.

Further, Sheikh Aboobakuru said a number of Islamic clerics, including the former Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia Sheikh Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz, had urged Muslims to stay away from the group.

But, Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, State Minister for Islamic Affairs at the time, defended the ministry’s decision to issue preaching permits to the group saying “they are not extremists and they are preaching according to guidelines given by the ministry”.

Speaking to Minivannews on Sunday, Ibrahim Fauzee, President of the Islamic Foundation of the Maldives (IFM) also said that it is “concerning to hear” that Maldivians are participating in the Tablighi group.

“I do not know about the Maldivians being deported from Sri Lanka. But we have  heard that some Maldivians are involved in Tablighi group. This is very concerning and needs to be investigated,” Fauzee said.

He also added that the Tabligh group widely promotes Sufi beliefs, as opposed to the Sunni Islam practices in Maldives.

The Tablighi Jamaat, (‘society for spreading faith’) is described on Wikipedia as a religious movement founded by a Muslim named Maulana Muhammed Ilyas India in 1926, in response to degradation in practice of Islamic principles and values among the common Muslim folk and efforts by organisations to convert poorer sections of Muslims to Hinduism.

The movement primarily aims at Tablighi spiritual reformation by working at the grass roots level, reaching out to Muslims across all social and economic spectra to bring them closer to Islam, according to the site.

The movement gradually expanded from local to national, and turned to a translational movement and now has followers in over 150 countries.

Due to the orthodox nature of Tablighi Jamaat, they have been criticised for being retrogressive, according to the entry: “The women in the movement observe full hijab for which the Tablighi Jamaat is accused of keeping women strictly subservient”.

The group is also widely criticised for their “neutral political stance” and accused of being a “recruiting ground by al-Qaeda” – allegations which the movement has denied repeatedly.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

SAARC Secretary General’s resignation first in regional body’s history

The SAARC Secretariat has said it has yet to formally receive the resignation of Secretary General Dhiyana Saeed, both the youngest individual and first woman to be appointed to the position.

The Secretariat is headquartered in Nepal. In the country’s Himalayan newspaper, Secretariat Spokesperson Niranjan Man Singh Basnyat noted Saeed’s resignation was the first untimely resignation by a Secretary General in SAARC’s 26-year history.

“It will be clear only after the office opens on Monday,” Basnyat told the Nepalese newspaper.

Saeed has confirmed her resignation following her appearance on private broadcaster VTV, owned by opposition-aligned Jumhoree Party (JP) MP Gasim Ibrahim, during which she accused the government of ignoring the law in its detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed.

If the government contended that Abdulla Mohamed had violated the constitution, “he has to be dealt with within the confines of the law,” Saeed insisted. “The government should not take the law into its own hands.”

Press Secretary for the President Mohamed Zuhair told Minivan News last week that Saeed’s public statements “clearly contravened the SAARC Charter” which “forbids interference in the matters of any state, including the state she represents”.

Resigning before making her public statement against the government would have been the “honourable” approach, Zuhair said. “Now, even should she resign, [her behavior] is still dishonourable and indecent.”

Secretary Generals of the regional body are appointed for three year terms. The Maldives is required to appoint a replacement for Saeed to serve out the rest of her term, which expires on February 28, 2014. The nomination must be endorsed the SAARC Council of Ministers, currently headed by Foreign Minister of the Maldives, Ahmed Naseem.

The ongoing detention of Abdulla Mohamed has caused divisions even among senior members of the government. Vice President Mohamed Waheed Hassan said over the weekend that he was “ ashamed and totally devastated by the fact that this is happening in a government in which I am the elected the Vice President.”

For its part, the government contends that its detention of the Judge is justifiable under the President’s obligation to protect the letter and spirit of the constitution, given the failure of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) to pursue the many allegations of corruption and political favouritism pending against the judge.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)