Category: Society & Culture

MDP ‘Hoara’ Ibbe’s sexual assault trial scheduled next month

The trial against senior Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) activist and former Undersecretary of the President’s Office, Ibrahim Rasheed ‘Hoara Ibbe’, has been scheduled for next month.

Rasheed stands accused of sexually abusing a 17 year-old girl in December 2012.

The Criminal Court stated that the Prosecutor General had filed the case in the court on February 19.

The Criminal Court told the media that Rasheed was charged under article [c] of the Special Measure for Perpetrators of Child Sex Abuse Act of 2009, which states that perpetrators of child sex abuse can be sentenced up to 14 years.

Ibrahim Rasheed is a well-known politician and a senior figure within the opposition MDP who  also served in the President’s Office under the former government of Mohamed Nasheed.

Rasheed was arrested on December 6, 2012, after being discovered in a house in Galolhu Ward of Male’ with a seventeen year-old girl.

The local media at the time quoted police as saying that when officers entered the room containing Rasheed, he was naked with the girl.

However, police later declined to confirm these reports.

In January 6, 2013, the Criminal Court placed Rasheed under house arrest, after keeping him in pretrial detention for a month.

According to Maldivian law, any person under 18 years of age is considered a minor.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Criminal Court extends detention of suspect arrested for attack on Raajje TV journalist

The Criminal Court has extended the detention period of the suspect arrested in connection with the attack on Raajje TV senior journalist Ibrahim Waheed ‘Aswad’.

Police have not officially identified the suspect, however local media reported that the suspect was 21 year-old Ahmed Vishan.

The suspect was arrested on Tuesday while he was at his house and was summoned before the court, which extended his detention by 15 days.

The arrest was initially reported by Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz, who informed the public in a tweet that a person had been arrested in what he described as a “murder attempt”.

Waheed, a senior reporter for the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)-aligned television station, was attacked with an iron bar while riding on a motorcycle near the artificial beach area early on Saturday morning.

The attack left him unconscious, and he was transferred to a hospital in Sri Lanka for treatment. Doctors have since said his condition is stable, and that he is recovering.

Maldivian journalists took to the streets of Male’ to protests against the recent attacks, joining international organisations who have also condemned the violence.

In July 2012, July 2012, a group of alleged Islamic radicals slashed the throat of blogger Hilath Rasheed. Rasheed, who had been campaigning for religious tolerance, narrowly survived and has since fled the country.

However, no arrests were made in connection to the case.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Rape victims punished, failed by Maldives justice system

The Maldives court on Tuesday sentenced a 15 year-old girl to 100 lashes and eight months’ house arrest, for having pre-marital sex with a man.

At any given time in the Maldives, thousands of female tourists are on the country’s beaches in bikinis, with their male counterparts. Many of them are straight and gay couples, married or unmarried, enjoying sex on rose petal-covered beds in water bungalows. For them, this chain of islands with white beaches and blue shimmering waters is a short escape to heaven.

While they enjoy a piece of paradise on a luxury resort vacation, just a few miles away 300,000 locals face the grim reality of a struggling democracy and increasingly radicalised interpretation of Islam.

Women and girls are bearing the brunt of this. Calling it sheer hypocrisy would be a gross understatement.

The 15 year-old girl  is from Feydhoo island in Shaviyani Atoll, one of the 200 remote islands in the country with less than a thousand inhabitants. She was arrested last year on the island, when police discovered a dead newborn buried in an outdoor shower area in the yard of the house. The investigation uncovered a disturbing yet common reality in the capital and isolated islands of Maldives: sexual abuse.

The girl’s stepfather had been raping her for years. Her mother assisted this gruesome abuse by turning a blind eye and deaf ear to her pain and cries. When the girl became pregnant as a result of rape, they pulled her out of school afraid that the community would find out the family’s dark secret. They waited patiently for nine months, and killed and buried the newborn after delivery.

Soon after the baby’s body was dug up, the parents were arrested and charged with murder and abuse of a minor.

While any authority with professionalism and common sense would be expected to protect a child who has suffered such horrifying abuse and provide help of a psychologist, the Maldives police and prosecutors had a different plan.

On the contrary, the girl was arrested, interrogated and charged with fornication within a few months by the authorities. They claimed that she had confessed to having consensual sex with another man – not the stepfather. The identity of this man, who has not stood up, been found, arrested or charged to this date, remains a mystery.

And yesterday, despite the ongoing debates challenging the legitimacy in pursuing fornication charges against victims of child sexual abuse, the court issued its ruling to flog the girl 100 times. A conviction against her abusive step father, and neglectful mother is still pending.

This case is just the latest in a series of unashamed attempts by the Maldivian Sharia-Common Law based judicial system to punish sexual abuse victims, instead of providing protection and justice.

While, several in and outside the country are taking to the social media to condemn this ruling as morally wrong, cruel, degrading, and a violation of human rights and protection guaranteed to children and victims of sexual abuse under national and international laws, the police who arrested her, the PG office that charged her and the court which sentenced her have not even flinched.

In fact, shortly after reversing its decision to withdraw the fornication charges, the Prosecutor General stated that they have found “no substantial reason to withdraw the charges” and allowed the trial to continue. They repeatedly emphasised the case is “unrelated to the rape”. Furthermore, both the PG and courts repeatedly defended the decision in media, claiming that there is nothing illegal or wrong in this case.

Under Sharia Law, both men and women – adult and children alike – can be punished with 100 lashes and house arrest if they are found guilty of having pre marital sex or adultery. Of course, the tourists are exempted – they are free to have sex, eat pork or drink alcohol as much as they wish, on islands designated as “uninhabited”.

Flogging is the one remaining Islamic Sharia penalties that continues to be practiced in Maldives, despite the century old moratorium on other Shaira penalties such as stoning, capital punishment and cutting off hands. UN Human Right’s Commissioner Navi Pillay and other international organisation’s calls for the moratorium of flogging have been rejected by current and past governments, amid mass protests from conservative factions of society.

As with any other Sharia offence, fornication is only proved with a confession or four witnesses. Notably, ninety percent of those flogged are women, accordig to the 2011 Judicial statistics report. It revealed that out of the 129 sentenced to 100 lashes, 11 were minors – 10 girls and one boy.

However, in 2010, the parliament passed a legislation to prevent corporal punishment  of children in sexual related offences and provide stringent punishments for child abusers, as a response to curb the widespread cases of incest and child molestation in the Maldives: one in seven children is reported to be a victim of sexual abuse. The legislation for the first time paved an easy road for the prosecution of child sexual abuse cases by reducing the Sharia-based burden of proof, which otherwise makes it impossible to prove the sexual offences without a confession or four witnesses.

This legislation, as part of the common law practiced alongside Sharia, set the precedent that no child below 13 can consent to sex and that any sexual relations will be deemed as child abuse. The same law also adds in clause 25 that no child between 13 – 17 can consent to sex either ,”unless proven otherwise”.

It must be noted that hundreds of children have been protected under this law, and several child rapists and abusers have been put behind bars for decades since it came into effect. However, in this specific case, the authorities report that the girl confessed to having consensual sexual relations, and that therefore it cannot be treated as a case of abuse.

But what is highly questionable is the failure by the state to provide a motive that can justify pressing charges against an abused victim, especially a child, with utter disregard to the mental trauma she has suffered in an endless cycle of abuse.

In the past, the court had sentenced a man for abusing a 16 year-old girl. However, the same girl was sentenced to 100 lashes and house arrest after being found guilty of confessing to having consensual sex with the same man who was found to have abused her. This conflicting ruling, stands out as clear evidence that fornication charges against minors in sexual abuse cases are being pursued by authorities, simply because its legally possible to do so with a confession, regardless of whether the victim is abused or not.

In the face of growing international pressure over such incidents, the government claimed in media that it would review and “correct” laws that victimise young women and minors who have suffered sexual abuse. However, no information was made public of any such attempts apart from this public condemnation.

Another issue worth noting is also the significantly low rape convictions in cases where the rape victim is an adult. Annual judicial statistics report show that in past three years, zero cases of rape have reached a positive verdict. This year alone, three rape cases have been reported,while 1 in 3 women aged between 15 – 49 are found to be victim of physical or sexual abuse – a statistic that is a reminder of a justice system that is failing women in every way possible.

According to Human Rights Lawyer Mohamed Anil, rape is defined as ‘forced fornication’ in the currently practiced outdated laws. The aforementioned legislation provides special provisions in child abuse cases, however, he explained, rape and sexual assault victims aged 18 or above, are denied justice because of the Sharia’s burden of proof – confession of the rapist or four male witnesses – is required to prove fornication, whether forced or consensual.

A state prosecutor once commented that proving rape is “next to impossible” despite the most prudent investigations, because the only two kinds of admissible evidence is never available. Both lawyers have said that this cannot be changed unless the amended penal code – which includes rape as an offence-  is passed by the parliament, where it had been stuck for more than half a decade.

Alternatively, the parliament could pass the sexual offences bill submitted by MP Mohamed Nasheed. This bill defines actions to be taken against specific types of sexual offences, including rape, spousal rape, prostitution, sexual trafficking, bestiality and incest etc. While submitting the bill, Nasheed echoed the immense need for an updated legislation to deal with the modern day sexual offences to bridge the shortcomings, especially related to proof and evidence and leniency in the current legal structure.

Meanwhile, in recent years reports of infanticide and baby dumping have increased to alarming levels, as women and underage girls – including those who become pregnant as a consequence of rape – are forced to take desperate measures, such as self-induced abortions, infanticide or leaving babies abandoned. Such was the case with the 15 year old girl in question.

With an unforgiving system and laws stating that is a punishable offence to give birth outside of marriage, driven by a thirst to punish the victims rather than protect them, victims find themselves alone, helpless and forced to remain silent.

These are just a small fraction of the many deep-rooted gender issues in the justice system of Maldives, that ripple outward from the branches of justice system into the entire society.

In her recent visit to Maldives, UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers issued a statement in which she commented “all members of the justice system should be sensitised to gender equality and women’s rights to make access to justice a reality for women in the Maldives.”

She also also expressed concern over low representation of women in the judiciary. There are currently no women sitting on the Supreme Court and only eight women sitting in the High Court, the Superior Courts and the Magistrate Courts. It is arguable that the gender issues in the system are arising due to lack of a diverse representation in the court benches and decision-making bodies.

When women and girls are stripped off their dignity and rights for having sex or being raped, it is not an issue that can be simply ignored. Meaningful action is needed by the authorities to remove the gender issues through legal and structural reforms, and prevent the culture of impunity currently enjoyed by sadistic perpetrators such as rapists and child molesters.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Comment: What case, if there is no Judge Abdulla?

This article was first published in Ceylon Today on 27 February 2013, and is reproduced with the permission of the author.

President Mohamed Nasheed is being prosecuted, accused of using the military to remove ‘Chief Judge of the Maldives Criminal Court’. Found guilty, Nasheed will lose the chance to contest elections; and the public will lose the first consistent voice for democratic change for nearly a quarter of a century.

On 17 January 2011, Abdulla Mohamed, who sat as Chief Judge of Criminal Court, was forcibly “removed” by the military. Political opponents of Nasheed, all once linked to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, quickly screamed foul, praised “Top Judge Ablow”, wreaked havoc on Male’ streets, damaged public property in nightly riots, and by 7 February had co-opted the security forces in a drama that unfolded live on local media.

This Criminal Court, which in fact was the ‘subject’ of the political crisis, had kept the nightly ‘vigil’ for “Judge Ablow”, systematically releasing detainees and helping to sustain numbers out on the streets. Those released praised Allah on social media, their release a sign that victory was theirs and God was with them.

To the familiar eye, the crowd of no more than 300 to 400 people who came out nightly were easily identifiable. Leading opposition politicians, MPs, recognised gang activists, and petty criminals. Many had cases before the Criminal Court or had appeared before ”Judge Ablow” on some criminal allegation. They were joined by former security personnel ‘retired’ during the government transition and a few serving policemen adorned in pink t-shirts. With them was sitting member of the Judicial Service Commission – business tycoon, MP and presidential candidate Qasim Ibrahim – and Chair of the JSC’s Parliamentary Oversight Committee, MP Mohamed (Kutti) Nasheed. It certainly was not the ‘public’, as public would be defined in a democratic state.

I watched these unfolding scenes, stunned, as my fears were confirmed.

To all outward appearance, however, President Nasheed had faulted. He had, it seemed, interfered in the business of the independent judiciary, an area strictly forbidden to the executive.

The international community, wary of domestic politics and players, is cautious not to be seen as interfering in a matter of rule of law. Due process, while reiterating the importance of free and fair, inclusive elections, is the mantra of the democratic international community.

The sitting government echoes back the words: ‘rule of law’, ‘due process’. Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel, who served in President Gayoom’s cabinet as Justice Minister during the transitional years and was personally involved in selecting many of the sitting judges, is one of the loudest voices insisting on ‘rule of law’.

What is not obvious to the casual observer, or understood by distinguished members of the international community, is that while the government and the international community voice the same words, they may not have a shared understanding of the concepts so familiar to democracies that they do not even think to question how another may be using or abusing it. What is forgotten, it seems, is that the Maldives never was a democratic state, but is a state in transition.

The Maldives’ judiciary, unlike in Sri Lanka or even Egypt, has never been independent. The Constitution introduced the concept of an “Independent Judiciary” with requirements upon the state to appoint a new judiciary within two years, and 15 years transitional provision to develop it.

Hence, the suggestion that Nasheed interfered in the judiciary holds true only if built upon certain assumptions, such as the assumption that Abdulla Mohamed is a legitimate judge appointed through due process.

If this assumption – the premise for the case against President Nasheed – stands, if indeed he had disregarded due process, interfered in the judiciary, and physically removed Chief Judge of the Criminal Court from duty, President Nasheed must stand trial. Rule of law must not be disregarded for President Nasheed, Abdulla Mohamed, or myself, and must prevail in all instances for democracy to take root.

Having said that, what if that premise does not hold true?

What if Abdulla Mohamed, who had become a household name with frequent reports of his irregularities in the media and public speeches against President Nasheed and his government, was placed as Chief Judge of Criminal Criminal Court without due diligence or due process?

What if the Judicial Service Commission, backed by President Nasheed’s powerful opposition, had indeed breached the Constitution and corrupted the judiciary in an elaborate scam to deceive Maldivian citizens and the international community? What if Abdulla Mohamed is indeed unfit to sit as a judge?

What if, apart from the criminal conviction for hate speech and disrupting public order – on record before Abdulla Mohamed was first appointed a judge in 2005 – there is truth to the claims that Abdulla Mohamed systematically works with organised crime, “launders” criminals and is likely being blackmailed?

What if there is truth to reports that certain influential MPs are linked to organised crime, and Abdulla Mohamed is kept Chief of Criminal Court by the power and influence of these criminal elements in parliament?

Of course none of these questions will rise anew with the trial of President Nasheed, had they not existed or been raised before.

Questions on constitution breach by the Judicial Service Commission, and the constitutionality of Abdulla Mohamed’s reappointment, together with the reappointment of all other men and women sitting as judges prior to ratification of the Constitution, is a matter pending inquiry in parliament since 2010.

The Parliamentary Oversight Committee for Independent Commissions first summoned the JSC on 2 August 2010, following months of appeal, and after I went public with information pointing to high treason in the JSC.

The summons from parliament to the JSC clearly stated the inquiry was in relation to complaints filed by myself, leaving no doubt that the committee was finally ready to inquire into the matter.

However, the committee sitting, telecast live, turned out to be a farce, a clever cover-up, a signal for the JSC and ‘judges’ to go ahead. The scandalous three-hour sitting centered on allowing then JSC Chair Mujthaaz Fahmy to air his story, a story that he has no evidence to back, and a story I could easily disprove with the documents and audio evidence I had brought to the committee.

Not only did the parliament committee deem it unnecessary to hear my evidence, they decided I was not to speak at all after my initial response to Chair Fahmy’s statement, declaring “all members have equal opportunity to speak” – ie, once. Chair Fahmy and Vice Chair, the late MP Dr Afraashim Ali, responded on behalf of the Commission.

That the matter was a disagreement in the JSC, and the fact that I stood against the Commission, was irrelevant to the MPs. In fact, the DRP and current PPM MPs took the opportunity to ridicule, slander and attack me, and praise the JSC Chair and Vice Chairs’ perjury while I sat gagged. The only other member to join me in noting the Chair was committing perjury was member of the general public appointed by Parliament, Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman.

Attorney General Husnu Al-Suood, who also sat as a member of JSC, remained silent.

MDP MPs were of little help. Not having given time to review the evidence they were either not fluent enough with the subject to see the JSC was committing perjury, or not interested in entering a battle where a sure win was far from guaranteed given the balance of power in the Committee and in Parliament.

The JSC session with the committee ended not with a conclusion on the issue, but having run out of time. Committee rules did not permit a further extension. The Chair quickly closed the sitting as one MP noted the issue of Article 285 was a very serious matter and was to be investigated.

The JSC, for its part, fabricated a “legal reasoning on Article 285”, organised a press conference unknown to Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman and myself, and made a statement attacking and defaming me in what was supposedly their legal reasoning.

In 24 hours, the judges took a ceremonial ‘symbolic’ oath without check or scrutiny in a ceremony that shocked the entire nation as unexpected live footage of it appeared. It was a moment that replayed continuously on all local TV stations for the next 72 hours, and has been repeated often since. The video footage raised serious doubts in the public.

Questioned by the media immediately after the now infamous oath, parliament made a statement to the effect that the Article 285 inquiry was pending while Legal Counsel Dr Ahmed Abdulla Didi reviewed the matter.

However, all was forgotten within the week, as “political dialogue” encouraged by the international community diffused the situation.

The suspension of the interim Supreme Court ended with the appointment of a politically-agreed Supreme Court, and the constitution compromised. On the bench among others of dubious integrity sits the said Legal Counsel Dr.Ahmed Abdulla Didi, who, despite not qualifying even after an unusual amendment to the Judiciary Act hours after its ratification, was approved by Parliament in the same sitting that amended the Act.

The question of Article 285 was forgotten except for my continued ‘rants’. Repeated calls for an inquiry went unheeded despite an International Commission of Jurists report in February 2011, noting both substantive and procedural issues in the JSCs’ actions regarding Article 285.

Repeated concerns on the JSC acting against Constitution and State, the runaway judiciary, the  politicisation of judges, and specifically the JSCs’ cover-up of Abdulla Mohamed and his threat to national security reported in communications to parliament and shared with military intelligence, were ignored. Nor was there any action against me by parliament or the court, all keeping silent on the subject.

If, there is any substance in what I repeat, wherein is rule of law or justice in the trial of President Nasheed?

The real questions in the Maldives case are not about Judge Abdulla Mohamed or the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court. It is a battle centred around the Constitution; its meaningful execution and state building. It is a tug of war between President Nasheed, who attempted the judicial reform required by Constitution, and his opposition intent on preventing fulfillment of Article 285 and retaining their handpicked judges. Abdulla Mohamed is a shield.

Today, the future of the Maldives’ democracy is more than ever dependent on the goodwill, wisdom and diplomatic skills of the international community. The trial of President Nasheed is a standoff where a domestic resolution is out of the question.

Try President Nasheed, and myself too, but not without trust in the judiciary and the guarantee of a free and fair trial. Will the international community guarantee there is no aberration of justice in the name of democracy, rule of law and justice?

Velezinee served on the Maldives’ Judicial Service Commission (April 2009-May 2011) and is the author of ‘The failed silent coup: in defeat they reached for the gun‘ published in August 2012.

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(0)Dislikes(0)

Under-age rape victim convicted of fornication, sentenced to 100 lashes

A 15-year-old rape victim from the island of Feydhoo in Shaviyani Atoll was convicted of premarital sex at the Juvenile Court today and sentenced to 100 lashes and eight months of house arrest.

In June 2012, the girl gave birth to a baby that was discovered buried in the outdoor shower area of her home. Her stepfather was later charged with child sexual abuse, possession of pornographic materials and committing premeditated murder.

Her mother was meanwhile charged with concealing a crime and failing to report child sexual abuse to the authorities.

An official from the Prosecutor General (PG)’s office told Minivan News in January this year that the fornication charges against the minor were related to a separate offence of premarital sex that emerged during the police investigation. The charges were filed on November 25, 2012.

In its verdict delivered today, the Juvenile Court ordered the state to transfer the girl to the Children’s Home in Villigili to enforce the sentence of eight months house arrest, according to local media reports.

The girl reportedly confessed at the trial to having consensual premarital sex.

The Islamic Shariah punishment of flogging would be administered when the girl turns 18. However, the sentence could be implemented earlier should the minor request expedition, a court official explained to local media.

In late January, the PG’s Office told Minivan News that it was reviewing the decision to press charges against the minor. Two hearings at the Juvenile Court were subsequently cancelled upon request by the PG.

However, the trial resumed after the PG decided earlier this month not to withdraw the charges.

Officials from the PG were unavailable today to clarify whether the male offender faced the same charge of premarital sex.

The case of the 15 year-old had prompted concern from the executive following international media coverage. The government announced last month that it would review and “correct” laws that victimise young women and minors who have suffered sexual abuse.

President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad told Minivan News that from government’s perspective, the 15 year-old girl was a victim who needed to be protected, not punished by authorities.

“We will be talking with the Ministry of Islamic Affairs over this manner and will review and correct the problem,” he said.

Masood said that the Maldives had experienced a number of similar cases of late where young women had been victimised and punished by authorities – a situation he said the government was looking to prevent.

“We are reviewing this right now and if we have to go to the extent of changing existing laws then we would look to do this,” he said.

“Absolute outrage”

The criminal charges against the minor was slammed by Amnesty International last month, which called the prosecution “an absolute outrage.”

“This is an absolute outrage, regardless of the reason for her charges. Victims of rape or other forms of sexual abuse should be given counselling and support – not charged with a crime,” said Abbas Faiz, Amnesty International’s Maldives Researcher.

“We urge the Maldivian authorities to immediately drop all charges against the girl, ensure her safety and provide her with all necessary support.

“Flogging is a violation of the absolute prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. The Maldivian authorities should immediately end its use regardless of circumstances. The fact that this time a 15-year old girl who has suffered terribly is at risk makes it all the more reprehensible,” said Faiz.

“Flogging is not only wrong and humiliating, but can lead to long-term psychological as well as physical scars.”

In response to a Minivan News report in 2009 of an 18 year-old woman fainting after a 100 lashes, Amnesty International called for a moratorium on the “inhumane and degrading punishment.”

Of the 184 people sentenced to public flogging in 2006, 146 were female, making it nine times more likely for women to be punished.

In November 2011, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay urged the authorities to impose a moratorium on flogging and to foster national dialogue and debate “on this issue of major concern.”

“This practice constitutes one of the most inhumane and degrading forms of violence against women, and should have no place in the legal framework of a democratic country,” the UN human rights chief told MPs during a maiden visit to the Maldives.

Her remarks sparked protests by Islamic groups outside the UN building and drew condemnation from the Islamic Ministry, NGOs and political parties.

According to statistics from the Department of Judicial Administration, almost 90 percent of those convicted of fornication in 2011 was female.

Of 129 fornication cases in 2011, 104 people were sentenced, out of which 93 were female. This included 10 underage girls, 79 women aged 18-40 and and four women above 40 years.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Failure to recover misappropriated state funds to be investigated: Parliament Public Accounts Committee

Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee will investigate the failure of authorities to recover funds highlighted by the auditor general as misappropriated.

In a meeting held on Monday (February 25), Committee Chairperson MP Ahmed Nazim revealed that the committee intended to send a letter to Attorney General Aishath Azima Shakoor regarding the failure to recover the misappropriated funds.

Majlis Finance Committee member MP Ahmed Hamza told Minivan News today (February 26) that the Public Accounts Committee was still going through the reports and was unable to give an estimate as to how much money is still owed as a result of the misuse of state funds.

“We are having to look into past audit reports starting from when they first began under [former President Maumoon Abdul] Gayoom was president. We are not able to scrutinise the spending from any year before audit reports were introduced.

“We have agreed that in order to scrutinise Gayoom’s government accounts, the majority of those looking into them will be held by opposition parties. This will also be the same when [former President Mohamed] Nasheed’s accounts are looked into,” Hamza said.

The finance committee member said that there were two issues in regard to the failure of recovering misused funds.

“If the government incurs a loss due to the misappropriation of funds, rather than recover the money, the guilty party is faced with criminal punishment instead.

“Secondly, it is a case of certain members finding it not possible to recover the funds that had been misused,” Hamza added.

When asked whether there had been any effort to recover the money in the past, Hamza stressed that some had been returned, but he was unable to give a rough figure as to how much.

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Visam Ali was reported by local media as saying that government offices do not correct issues relating to how funds are managed, even after repeatedly being advised to do so in audit reports.

The Attorney General Aishath Azima Shakoor and Head of Majlis Finance Committee and MP Ahmed Nazim were not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Finance Committee member and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Abdul Ghafoor Moosa answered his phone when contacted by Minivan News stating that he was “in a meeting”.

Extravagant spending

Previous reports compiled by the auditor general have uncovered extravagant spending by former Presidents and ministerial officials.

Earlier this year, an audit report for 2010 highlighted 12 instances whereby the President’s Office – under Nasheed’s government – had acted in breach of laws and regulations.

The report noted that in 2010, the President’s Office spent MVR 7,415,960 (US$480,931) over the parliament approved budget for the office.

In addition, the report also highlighted Nasheed’s chartering of an Island Aviation flight from Colombo to Male’ on November 19, 2010. This had cost MVR 146,490 (US$9500).

The audit report states that while all these were paid from state funds, no records were available to prove that Nasheed booked this flight for official purposes.

The report further reveals that President Mohamed Waheed Hassan, then Vice President, had spent MVR 764,121 (US$49,554) on a trip to Malaysia and America with his own family.

Meanwhile, the expenses of Former President Gayoom were leaked last year revealing the excessive spending on Gayoom’s family from money allocated to helping the poor.

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Rozaina Adam leaked the invoices revealing Gayoom’s spending through Twitter in 2012.

In a statement, Rozaina noted that a total of MVR 905,636 (US$58,807) was spent on various items for Gayoom’s family, including MVR 193,209 (US$12,546) on trouser material in 2008.

Auditor General Niyaz Ibrahim told newspaper Haveeru back in October 2012 that the state should recover funds used by former presidents on their families and associates.

Lack of legislation explicitly prohibiting such expenses was not an obstacle to recovering the misappropriated funds, the Auditor General contended.

He noted that there was no law that authorised the use of public funds for personal expenses, adding that assistance from state funds should be provided on an equal and fair basis.

“Even if its Nasheed, Waheed or Maumoon, no one can spend state funds for their own personal use,” Niyaz was quoted as saying.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Religious NGO Jamiyyathul Salaf recommends beheading, firing squad over lethal injection

Religious NGO Jamiyyathul Salaf has called on Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor to amend the government’s draft bill on the implementation of death penalty, urging that convicts be beheaded or shot instead of given lethal injection.

In letter to the AG proposing its recommendations for the bill, Salaf explained that by beheading the convicted murderer, the pain he endured would be reduced while the heirs of the victim would still receive satisfaction.

Salaf argued that Islamic history had precedents for this form of execution, while the purpose of Qisas – an Islamic legal term for equal retaliation which follows the principle of Lex talionis (‘an eye for an eye’) – would be achieved if it acted as a deterrent to others from committing such crimes.

Salaf also expressed support for the execution of convicts through firing squad, noting that scholars of Islamic jurisprudence had spoken in favour of the method.

The Attorney General in 2012 announced that the government had drafted a bill on implementing the death penalty through lethal injection, and presented it to the public for comment.

Salaf disputed the reliability of this method, contending that such injections have been proved ineffective in executing a convict within a single needle.

The NGO argued that due to the West’s opposing stance towards death penalty, the Maldives could face difficulties and restrictions in receiving stocks of lethal injections, which would be a “perfect excuse for any president who does not wish to enforce the death penalty”.

“If that is the case, it is a huge injustice to society. It is very dangerous that the current draft paves way for one government to execute it while another can make excuses to not execute it. It is unacceptable. Even today, convicts in several countries are still un-executed because of the non-availability of such injections,” Salaf said.

Salaf also proposed several other recommendations including barring intoxication as a legal defence for the crime of murder, meaning that even involuntary intoxication would not commute a convict from facing the death penalty. Salaf argued that if intoxication could be considered a defense, the purpose of implementing death penalty would be undermined as an accused could always misuse the defense of intoxication to avoid execution.

The current draft bill stipulates that the death penalty should be given to a convict who has murdered someone while in possession of his senses and conscience. In theory, a murder committed while under the influence of a substance will therefore not attract the death penalty.

Salaf also recommended that the current position of the bill on minors should be abolished and that even minors should face execution as soon as the final verdict is made.

Currently the bill stipulates that should a convict who is a minor, pregnant or in a critical medical condition be found guilty of murder, the execution shall be delayed.

Among other recommendations, Salaf proposed amendments to the number of judges that should hear a case concerning death penalty.

Salaf proposed that at a lower court level, the case should be heard by a panel of three judges, while a four member panel should hear such a case at the High Court and a five member panel at Supreme Court level.

Salaf also urged that such cases concerning the death penalty must be heard by male judges only. The NGO also recommended that a clause be included in which before the execution the convict should be given the opportunity to repent and carry out a short prayer.

According to current stipulations in the bill, a suspect found guilty of murder should also be provided with the opportunity to meet his family on the day of execution and say their last farewell.

Salaf in its recommendations called upon the attorney general to remove the clause in the draft bill giving the President the power to commute any death penalty sentence to a life imprisonment sentence, claiming that such a clause defeated the overall purpose of the bill.

Meanwhile, the attorney general’s office has said that it has looked to procedures followed by Egypt, Malaysia and the US in carrying out the death sentence, while also obtaining the opinions of religious scholars and lawyers.

Push for the death penalty

In October last year, the government announced its intention to introduce a bill in the People’s Majlis to guide and govern the implementation of the death penalty in the country.

“It is currently a punishment passed by the judiciary and a form of punishment available within the penal system of the Maldives,” said Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel at the time.

“But for full guidance and matters governing the matter, legislation is required,” he added.

The last person to be judicially executed in the Maldives was Hakim Didi, who was executed by firing squad in 1953 after being found guilty of conspiracy to murder using black magic.

Statistics show that from January 2001 to December 2010, a total of 14 people were sentenced to death by Maldivian courts.

However, in all cases, the president at the time has commuted these verdicts to life sentences.

Speaking to Minivan News, President of Jamiyyathul Salaf Abdulla Mohamed stated that the current bill by the attorney general was “incomplete” as it had only focused on death penalty, and said that the principle of Qiasas was much broader.

“For instance, the bill does not give a remedy to the victims who are subjected to assault and other bodily harm. They should also get a legal remedy. However the bill is more focused on death penalty,” he said.

Asked if the NGO was of the view that victims could get a fair trial, given the present concerns raised over the impartiality and competency of the Maldivian judiciary, Abdulla Mohamed said the NGO had proposed recommendations to the judiciary on the issue.

“We have previously sent recommendations to the authorities concerning the state of judiciary. We have clearly highlighted the necessary qualifications and standards that a judge should have,” he said.

However, he rejected claims made by critics of judiciary that the judiciary was unprepared to implement death penalty, stating that it was just a “mere excuse” to avoid the laws of Allah prescribed in Sharia’ law.

“There are other laws passed such as the law against the abuse of women and several other laws where the authorities make efforts to ensure they are enforced and that justice is delivered. Why can’t it be the same in a law that lays down the principles of Islamic Sharia’?” he questioned.

He further said that Islamic Criminal Law was very broad and very detailed, such that there are several conditions and requirements that have to be fulfilled before giving a punishment.

“The purpose of death penalty in Islam is to ensure that the orders of Allah are followed. It is an obligation to all of us as Muslims. Secondly, Islam greatly values a human being’s right to life. No one has the right to take the other person’s life. If he does so, he has to be punished,” he stated.

However the death penalty does not always mean one has to be executed, he explained. There are alternatives, as if even one heir decides to forgive the convict, he cannot be executed. Similarly, it is up to the heirs to demand blood money instead of the death penalty, and that even blood money can be forgiven if the heirs wish to do so.

Speaking to Minivan News previously, former Foreign Minister and UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Iran Dr Ahmed Shaheed has identified the “pathetic state of the [Maldives] judiciary” as one of the key human rights concerns he believed needed to be addressed in the country.

“[The judiciary] is not only corrupt, but also coming under the influence of radical Islam, even to the extent of violating codified laws of the Maldives and clear international obligations,” Dr Shaheed claimed.

“Disregard for rule of law has also meant that a culture of impunity is deeply entrenched, rendering many of the human rights of the people meaningless.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Letter: National Drug Agency response to Minivan News article on National Drug Use Survey

The following letter was issued by the National Drug Agency to Minivan News February 24, 2013 in response to the story “Experts lambast results of US$2 million National Drug Use Survey” published February 20, 2013.

The National Drug Agency is highly concerned about the certain misinformation mentioned in the article named, “Experts lambast results of US$2 million National Drug Use Survey” on the 20th February 2013 online edition of Minivan News.

The information in the mentioned article was not verified by any of the concerned agencies related to the recently released National Drug Use Survey (NDUS) report, namely National Drug Agency (NDA), United Nation’s Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) and Inova Pvt Ltd.

The NDUS research is one of the activities from among more than 35 major activities carried out over the past three years under the project named “Strengthening the national response to prevent drug abuse in the Maldives”.

Hence the survey budget which is substantially a small amount of the overall budget of expenditure pertaining to the NDUS research, as informed by the UNODC is USD $170,000 only, for the period of two years spent on the research.

Apart from the misinformed expenditure amount, the article includes other misinformation, inaccuracies, and misinterpretations including a lot of factual errors.

National Drug Agency remains concerned of the message portrayed due to misinformation, and urge Minivan News to verify and substantiate information received before it is published. The NDA recognize the influence of media and reiterate the importance of presenting unbiased and factual information.

In this regard, National Drug Agency would like to take this opportunity to invite Minivan News to clarify the facts and information related to the National Drug Use Survey (NDUS) and bring about the necessary corrections to the factual errors and the misinformation mentioned in the article stated above.

Thanking you.

Yours Sincerely,

Lubna Mohamed Zahir Hussain

Lubna Mohamed Zahir Hussain is State Minster for Health and the Chairperson of the National Drug Agency

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(0)Dislikes(0)

“No idea” why criminal court has taken so long to process museum vandalism case: PG’s Office

The Prosecutor General’s (PG) Office has revealed it has “no idea” as to why two individuals charged with vandalising the national museum last year have yet to be brought to justice.

The two men, accused of damaging archaeological evidence of Maldives’ pre-Islamic Civilisation in the national museum in Male’ on February 7, 2012, failed to attend their trial hearing at Criminal Court scheduled for today (February 25).

A media official from the PG’s Office told Minivan News that the two suspects had originally been charged between September and October last year, but were yet to face trial in court.

Asked as to why the Criminal Court had taken so long to process the case, the media official said “we have no idea”.

The official was then asked if the PG’s Office had made any attempt to question the court over the delayed trial, to which he responded: “No, we haven’t questioned the court, we have taken no action yet.”

Last month private broadcaster Raajje TV aired leaked security camera footage showing a group of men vandalising around 35 exhibits after they stormed the museum amid the political chaos of February 7 last year.

Police in May 2012 forwarded cases against four suspects to the PG’s office, however the case was initially returned to police for further clarification.

Speaking to Minivan News, Police Superintendent Abdulla Nawaz said the case was then sent to the PG’s Office on July 8, 2012.

Local media reported that two men – Mohamed Nishan of M. Haadhoo and Yousuf Rilwan of G. Adimagu – were due to attend a trial hearing at 10:00am this morning over charges relating to the case.

However, a Judiciary Media Unit official said the hearing was cancelled after the two defendants did not receive their summoning chit to the Criminal Court.

“The chit was sent by the court to the homes of the defendants, but they did not receive it. So now the court will have to send a new summoning chit for a new trial hearing,” the official added.

Minivan News contacted the Criminal Court Spokesperson who, when asked for information regarding the case, gave an unclear response. When Minivan News asked for clarification, the spokesperson hung up.

Minivan News then attempted to contact the spokesperson, but he was not responding to calls at time of press.

“99 percent of Maldives’ pre-Islamic history destroyed”

According to museum director Ali Waheed, the vandals destroyed “99 percent” of the evidence of the Maldives’ pre-Islamic history prior to the 12th century, including a 1.5-foot-wide representation of the Buddha’s head – one of the most historically significant pieces at the museum.

An official at the museum told Minivan News following the incident that the group “deliberately targeted the Buddhist relics and ruins of monasteries exhibited in the pre-Islamic collection, destroying most items beyond repair.”

“This is not like a glass we use at home that can be replaced by buying a new one from a shop. These are originals from our ancestors’ time. These cannot be replaced ever again,” the official said.

In September 2012, the United States government donated US$ 20,000 (MVR 308,400) to help restore and repair the damaged artifacts, as part of an effort to preserve Maldivian cultural heritage.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)