Category: Politics

MDP MP attacks committee allowance protesters for invading MPs privacy

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Mohamed Musthafa has said that protesters against MPs committee allowance have invaded the privacy of MPs and violated MPs privileges, after the protesters put up posters of photos of MPs with their personal mobile phone numbers.

“MPs have been subjected to disturbances from citizens that hate them, and publishing the personal mobile number of MPs invades the privacy and privileges of MPs,” Musthafa said. “They have invaded our personal life by doing that.”

Musthafa said he had asked Speaker Abdulla Shahid to look into the matter, and said he was looking forward to hearing from the parliament.

“I think the parliament will issue a press release today, I am looking forward to it,” he said. “Shahid is currently abroad on an official trip so I sent him a text message to bring it to his attention.”

Musthafa said that some MPs have said they are unable to use their numbers any longer.

“One MP told me that he had been using his number for 12 years and the number was used for international relations as well, but he said now he has no other choice but to throw it away and get a new number,” he said. “How the NGOs acted on this matter is very disappointing, they could have done it a better way.”

He alleged that were “senior figures” behind the NGOs.

“MPs are members representing constituencies and become an MP with the consent of their constituency, so people should have at least some respect for them,” Musthafa said.

In the text message sent to Speaker Shahid, Musthafa said that it was very concerning that MPs personal contact numbers had been published on a poster with their photo in Majeedee Magu.

He told Shahid that the personal details of MPs could not be published without their consent, alleging that culprits had asked people to call and disturb the MPs.

“It is the legal duty of the parliament to find out the culprits, and they should be prosecuted and action should be taken,” Musthafa said.

Project Coordinator of Transparency Maldives Aiman Rasheed’s mobile phone and landline was not reachable and he was unavailable for comment.

Parliament meanwhile issued a press statement today noting that the constitution protected the privacy of individuals.

“Matters should be brought to MPs’ attention responsibly in a way that does not undermine their dignity and reputation or create difficulties in their personal lives,” it reads, adding that making MPs photos and contact information public “as a nusisance to them” was a “matter of concern.”

Noting that MPs had special privileges under the law, it continues, “any action that undermines MPs’ dignity can be seen as violating MPs’ privileges.”

The statement concludes by urging the public not to violate “social norms” in contacting MPs.

A Majlis media official confirmed to Minivan News today that only 19 of 77 MPs have written requesting that the lump sum of Rf140,000 not be desposited with their salaries. They include 16 MDP MPs, Independent MP ‘Kutti’ Mohamed Nasheed and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and his wife MP Visam Ali.

Last Monday Aiman told Minivan News that the campaign against the committee allowance will continue and there was hope for success.

“Today we presented the Finance Ministry 1365 letters signed by concerned citizens and eight cabinet members, plus high-profile people across the country,” he said at the time.

“We have made plans to continue the letter campaign and to make the citizens aware of the impacts of this committee allowance.”

MP salaries have increased 18-fold since 2004, according to a graph released by the NGO.

The committee allowance was Rf18 million, Rasheed said. “In comparison, the budget to combat drugs is Rf 14 million, the budget subsiding the fishing industry is Rf12 million, medical services Rf18 million and the budget for small and medium businesses is Rf16 million,” he said, adding that these areas would be impacted by the increased expenditure on MPs.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Lawyers contest legality of JSC appointment process

A group of lawyers filed a case at the Civil Court today contesting the legality of the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) evaluation criteria for selection of judges to superior courts, requesting a court order to halt the appointment process.

On August 29, the JSC announced that 17 shortlisted candidates have been invited for interviews on Saturday (September 10).

The group of lawyers, represented by Ali Hussein and Ismail Visham, contend that regulations drafted by the JSC containing the evaluation criteria conflicted with both the constitution and article 15 of the Judges Act. The lawyers requested that the regulations be abolished and the shortlist be cancelled.

In addition, the lawyers claimed that two shortlisted candidates had close ties – as a spouse and a business partner – with two members of the commission, suggesting a clear conflict of interest as neither had recused themselves from voting in the JSC panel.

Briefing press today, Ali Hussein argued that the evaluation criteria formulated by the JSC unfairly favoured graduates of the College of Islamic Education (Kulliya).

While article 15 of the Judges Act stipulate that candidates for superior courts must possess a first degree in “either Shariah or law,” Ali Hussein explained that under the regulations drafted by the JSC, a candidate with a masters degree and a graduate of Kulliya both receive 25 marks for educational qualification.

“We are saying this is not fair,” he said. “We especially note that the Faculty of Sharia and Law teaches shariah subjects to the same extent as Kulliya [Islamic College], but graduates of the faculty receive 20 marks while students from Kulliya receive 25 marks.”

Kulliya graduates also received higher marks than graduates of the Islamic University of Malaysia, he said.

As 25 marks are to be awarded for the interview, Hussein noted, candidates who were not shortlisted would not receive any marks: “They should also have the chance to receive those 25 marks,” he said.

Moreover, he continued, the JSC criteria also conflicted with the academic rankings of the Maldives Qualification Authority (MQA), formerly the accreditation board, which places Kulliya certificates below those of overseas institutions.

The lawyers noted that shortcomings of the judiciary and lack of public confidence were tied to the lack of qualified judges on the bench.

“One of the main points of concern is that the JSC is the independent statutory body with a legal mandate to develop and improve the judiciary,” said co-counsel Ismail Visham. “But their actions so far suggest that they are trying to service the existing judiciary instead of introducing foreign elements or trying to develop the judiciary.”

As judges are appointed for life, said Visham, “they should be screened better” to ensure necessary academic qualifications, integrity and competency.

The eight claimants against the JSC include Abdul Hameed Abdul Kareem, Hassan Fiyaz, Mohamed Fareed, Husnu Suood (former Attorney General), Anas Abdul Sattar, Mohamed Nizam, Mohamed Iyaz and Ahmed Abdulla Hameed.

In March this year, two senior judges accused the Supreme Court of violating due process and unfairly dismissing a case challenging the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of five judges to the High Court.

Criminal Court Judge Abdul Bari Yousuf – an applicant for the bench – filed a case at the Civil Court in January claiming procedural violations in the JSC vetting process.

The Supreme Court however transferred the case from the lower court a day later and conducted two hearings before dismissing it without issuing a verdict. The highest court of appeal had announced on January 21 that it was taking over the case as it involved “a matter of public interest”.

In a letter sent to President Mohamed Nasheed at the time, Chief Judge of the Family Court, Hassan Saaed, claimed that “the fact that the case was dismissed in violation of legal principles and procedures came as a shock to the judiciary.”

Saeed added that as a result of the incident, “the growing confidence that I and ordinary citizens had in the judiciary is lost,” urging the President to “stop this process continuing unlawfully.”

President Nasheed meanwhile appointed former MP Hussein Ibrahim as the President’s member on the JSC yesterday.

In August 2010, the JSC’s controversial reappointment of judges – the majority of whom were appointed by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who was the highest authority on justice under the old constitution – was characterised by the President’s former representative on the commission, Aishath Velezinee, as “nothing less than treason to rob the nation of an honest judiciary.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Z-faction formed new party “after failing to gain control of DRP”: Thasmeen

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom decided to form a new party because “particular individuals” were not elected to leadership posts at the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Congress in March 2010, and “because they failed to gain control of the party”, DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali told press today.

Flanked by DRP council members and leaders of coalition partner Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) at a press conference this afternoon, Thasmeen denied the former President’s claim that he was forced to quit the DRP because of a lack of internal democracy and inadequate efforts to hold the government accountable.

The breakaway Z-faction opted to form a new party after “they failed to influence the different organs of DRP,” Thasmeen said, accusing the ‘Zaeem faction’ of undermining the DRP leadership with “baseless allegations.”

“They have not provided any reason for the Maldivian people to believe the allegations made over the past year or so,” he said. “I have definitely never voted against the DRP whip since the party was formed. I have never failed to attend a vote in Majlis for any reason. And I have never failed to say what I must when the current government does something that is detrimental to the people.”

After months of factional strife and a litany of grievances aired in the media, Gayoom withdrew his endorsement of Thasmeen in March this year, accusing his successor of “acting dictatorially” and violating the party’s charter in the controversial dismissal of Deputy Leader Umar Naseer.

On allegations made by Umar Naseer that Thasmeen accepted a US$1 million bribe from Indian infrastructure giant GMR – which took over management of the Male’ International Airport under a concessional agreement last year – the DRP leader noted that the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) had “investigated thoroughly” and cleared both Thasmeen and Speaker Abdulla Shahid of any wrong-doing.

Thasmeen argued that there was “no reason to accept” the Progressive Party’s claim of “being an exemplary democratic party” as the Z-faction had disregarded the DRP’s charter, openly refused to accept decisions by the party’s organs and “worked in a way detrimental to the party that was worse than our political enemies.”

The minority leader of parliament also noted that the Z-faction had been functioning independently “as a separate party with a separate council, with a separate parliamentary group lately.”

“There’s no reason to believe they can do something they failed to do over the past year with just the name of a political party,” he said, adding that the Z-faction MPs had not informed the public about the shortcomings of the government’s proposed economic reforms.

Thasmeen insisted that “a substantial number of members” would not leave DRP for the Progressive Party: “We are calling the party’s leadership in the islands, the party’s councillors and heads of island branches,” he said. “Based on information we are getting, we are certain that a substantial number of people from DRP will not go to this new party.”

Local daily Haveeru reported today that 500 members have so far applied to leave the party. Thasmeen however expressed confidence that the DRP would remain the largest opposition party.

The DRP leader revealed that the party would conduct internal elections “in the next three months” for DRP island branches or chapters. The elections were last held in 2006.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Adhaalath Party raises alarm over visiting agricultural delegation from Israel

Deputy Leader of the Adhaalath Party Dr Mauroof Hussein has called for alarm after alleging that a delegation from an Israeli company, Teshuva Agricultural Products, was due to arrive in the Maldives to assess the country’s agricultural potential.

The  delegation was scheduled to visit Fihladhoo and Maafahi in Haa Alifu Atoll and Addu City, and would be hosted by the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture. On its website the company claims its advanced agricultural methods “allow for fresh culinary herbs to be grown in soil-less hydroponic systems.”

Dr Hussein said the relationship between the Maldives and Israel “is dangerous” and that it was “a threat to the national security of the Maldives”.

“Due to the close relationship with Israel, this delegation is not required to have a work visa, which is usually necessary for these type of delegations to have,” Dr Hussein claimed.

Dr Hussein called on island councilors to “be aware” of “this kind of delegation”, claiming Israel had been “cutting down olive trees in Palestine, setting fire to the crops and trying to bring down Masjid Al-Aqsa.”

He further alleged that citizens should be alert about “a rumor that the government is trying to enact a law that would enable foreigners to have land plots in the Maldives, on request of the Zionists.”

Dr Hussein said that Adhaalath Party had “always revealed the secret relationship between the Maldives and the Israeli government”, but said that the government had responded by “humiliating the Adhaalath Party by saying we talk about nothing else.”

In his statement Dr Hussein claimed the recently leaked diplomatic cables “revealed that what the Adhaalath Party was saying was true”, and that the Maldives “has been voting in the UN in favor of Israel.”

Press Secretary for the President Mohamed Zuhair did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

The last time an Israeli delegation visited the Maldives – a team of volunteer eye surgeons – protests erupted across Male’ that saw the burning of Israeli flags and calls to “ban all Israeli medical teams” from practicing in the Maldives.

Protesters burned several Israeli flags in Republic Square and demanded the deportation of the seven visiting eye surgeons, who were holding free eye camps in Male’ and island hospitals.

Religious NGO Jamiyyathusalaf at the time called on the government to provide citizens with military training “before Jews take over the country”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Uligamu islanders allege PA party registration fraud

Islanders of Uligamu in Haa Alif Atoll have alleged that more than 60 islanders that filled application forms for a computer course offered by Focus Education have been registered in the minority opposition People’s Alliance (PA) without their knowledge.

“It is believed that the person who ran the program on this island used the information of all persons that signed up for the course and filled application forms to sign up for PA,” an Uligamu Councillor, Ahmed Muiz, told Minivan News.

“The course was held early last year and people working in different sectors signed up for the course,” he said. “The reason why people allege that it was the person who ran the course on this island that has done this is because in all the forms filled to join PA, he has written his name as the witness.”

Muiz said that islanders have informed the PA and the Elections Commission (EC) about the fraud, but have not received an official reply so far.

“All the forms were fingerprinted too, but all the information except for the applicant’s named and some other basic information were wrong,” he said. “Like the mother’s name or father’s name was wrong in almost all of the forms that the Elections Commission has received.”

The People’s Alliance media coordinator did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

Former PA Secretary General Ahmed Shareef, now Secretary General of the Elections Commission, told Minivan News that he had no information on the matter.

“There have been many similar cases filed in the commission. When dealing with such matters, we first inform the political party that this has happened and ask them to clarify how it has happened,” Shareef said.

If anyone has been registered to a political party without their knowledge, Shareef said, the person should inform the commission in writing or contact the political party in which the person was registered.

Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam said the matter had not yet been reported to police.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court to hold passport of 82 year old historian Shafeeg

A Civil Court Judge overseeing a defamation case filed by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom today ordered that the passport of 82 year-old historian Ahmed Shafeeg be held.

The judge said the court would seize Shafeeg’s his passport after Gayoom’s lawyer said he had information that Shafeeg was about to leave the country.

Shafeeg was unable to appear at today’s hearing, with media reporting that it was the sixth hearing that had to be cancelled because Shafeeg could not attend the court because of his medical condition.

A medical certificate was presented to the court today by Shafeeg, which Gayoom’s lawyer said was against procedure and that Shefeeg would have to fill a form stating that he could not appear at court due to his medical condition.

Gayoom’s lawyer told the judge that Shafeeg was intentionally dismissing the summons “because he has been attending other functions.”

The lawyer requested the judge summon the doctor who had issued the medical certificate, citing an the incident where former president of Egypt Hosni Mubarak was summoned to the court despite his weak medical condition, and requested the judge to apply the same procedure to Shafeeg’s case.

According to daily newspaper Haveeru, before dismissing today’s hearing the judge said that Shafeeg’s doctor would be summoned to the next hearing.

A spokesperson of the Civil Court confirmed that the media reports were correct and that the judge has ordered Shafeeg’s passport held.

‘’I can confirm that the reports about his passport detention is correct. The judge also said that Shafeeg’s medical service provider will be summoned to the court during the next hearing,’’ he said.

The former President sued Shafeeg after he published a book alleging that 111 inmates disappeared in custody during Gayoom’s administration.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court reprimands Ibra for criticising judiciary

The Supreme Court has reprimanded President’s Advisor Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail for reportedly calling on the public to “rise up and sort out the judges” at a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) rally Friday night in Kaafu Thulusdhoo.

A press statement issued by the Supreme Court yesterday claimed that Ibra’s remarks “encouraging the illegal curtailment of the tasks of the judiciary” could lead to “the loss of peace and security of the Maldivian state and plunge the nation into chaos and unrest”.

While article 299(a) of the constitution demands “obedience to the constitution” and compliance with all its provisions, the statement noted, article 144(c) states that, “No officials performing public functions, or any other persons, shall interfere with and influence the functions of the courts.”

Moreover, article 144(d) states that, “Persons or bodies performing public functions, through legislative and other measures, must assist and protect the courts to ensure the independence, eminence, dignity, impartiality, accessibility and effectiveness of the courts.”

The Supreme Court asserted that “making such statements in a free, democratic society under lawful governance goes against the principles of civilisation” and “the constitution of the Republic of the Maldives does not allow any such illegal activity”.

The court’s statement concluded by assuring the public that the highest court of appeal “as the parent of the constitution and laws of the country” would not tolerate “any action that could undermine established democratic institutions and the rights of the Maldivian state and the Maldivian people.”

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) – oversight body for the judiciary – meanwhile conducted an “emergency meeting” Sunday night prompted by Ibra’s remarks and decided to request “relevant authorities” to carry out an official investigation.

Ibra’s remarks came after the Criminal Court barred journalists from observing the corruption trial of Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim on August 25.

“Judges are issuing verdicts any way they please. The effort we have to make against this is not inconsiderable. It was citizens who came out and ousted Maumoon from power. The matter of judges too can only be sorted out by citizens rising up,” Ibra, former Male’ MP and first elected president of MDP, was quoted as saying in newspaper Haveeru.

Speaking to Minivan News today, Ibra argued that criticism of the judiciary did not constitute a criminal offence or could be considered unlawful.

Responding to the Supreme Court claim that his remarks could “plunge the nation into chaos and unrest”, Ibra noted that ensuring law and order was “out of the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction.”

“Before making such serious allegations against a person they should at least attempt to find out the truth or see if any law was violated,” he said. “It is like the Supreme Court believes they are above the law or a law unto themselves.”

Ibra, who also served as chairman of the drafting committee of the Special Majlis – the special assembly convened to revise the constitution in 2004 – noted that according to article 16 of the constitution fundamental rights and freedoms could only be limited by a law passed by parliament and “only if demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

“I know of no law passed by the Majlis that says it is illegal to criticise the judiciary,” he said.

On the Supreme Court’s contention that he violated article 144(c) and (d), Ibra pointed out that he had not said anything about an ongoing case that could be construed as “interference or influence.”

Ibra went on to criticise the JSC for deciding to investigate his remarks: “It has nothing to do with the mandate of the JSC. What law says their job is to take measures against people who criticise the courts?”

Moreover, he added, the JSC could only ask police to investigate if there was a criminal offence involved.

“Whether it’s the executive, legislature or judiciary, if anyone is acting dictatorially and harming citizens, I will come out and I will do everything I can to stop it,” he said.

Former President’s member on the JSC and outspoken whistle-blower, Aishath Velezinee, told Minivan News that Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed had in his capacity as JSC President asked that police investigate Ibra, and then had the Supreme Court issue its statement.

“What are the police going to do? It sounds like the highest court in the land has already issued its verdict,” she said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Contentious religious unity regulations polarise religious factions

Press Secretary for the President Mohamed Zuhair has denied that the President’s Office brought any changes to the religious unity regulations drafted by the Islamic Mnistry, refuting allegations made by the Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari.

Islamic Minster Bari had told local media that the religious unity regulations were sent to the President’s Office and changed “the way they want it”, and that the ministry was now revising the regulation.

He also said that the Ministry would not give consent for the regulations to be gazetted before revising it thoroughly.

Zuhair said that Dr Bari had made his remarks not in the capacity of a cabinet minister, “but more as an ally of the Adhaalath Party.”

“We did not bring any changes to the religious unity regulations,” he said. “The first half of it was drafted by the then State Islamic Minister Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed and the other half by current State Islamic Minister Sheikh Hussein Rasheed.”

He said there were rules in the regulation that were inconsistent with the government’s policy and had asked the Ministry to comply with that policy.

“It is a responsibility of all the government ministries to uphold the government’s policy,” he said. “There should be no ministry that has to go against the policy.”

Minivan News understands that certain high-profile persons met with the President prior to the commencement of drafting the regulations and requested the President support the drafting of the regulations in a way that would stop the Maldives National Broadcasting Commission (MNBC) from broadcasting live sermons of Sheikh Ibrahim Fareed.

The President reportedly stated that freedom of speech was vital in a democracy and dismissed the idea.

Recently local religious NGOs Jamiyyathul Salaf and the Islamic Foundation of the Maldives requested the President not to gazette the religious unity the way it was drafted, citing concerns that the new regulations could be employed to silence religious NGOs.

The Islamic Foundation has also filed a case in the High Court, claiming that the Religious Unity Act of 1994 was inconsistent with the constitution of the Maldives and should be invalidated.

“How can a regulation enacted under an unlawful Act be valid, there is a case we have filed in the High Court to invalidate the Act,” said Ibrahim Fauzee, president of the NGO. “We call on the government to wait until the case in High Court reaches a conclusion.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

RaajjeTV condemns newly formed PPM for barring journalist from press conference

Private broadcasting television RaajjeTV has condemned the newly formed Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), led by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, after senior officials of the party denied entrance to  a journalist from RaajjeTV to a press conference held by the party yesterday.

In a statement, RaajjeTV said that the action of PPM senior officials was undemocratic and uncivilised, and claimed that the PPM has boycotted the TV channel.

‘’To date, Raajje TV was never invited to any event organised by PPM, and has constantly refused to provide any information to us,’’ the statement said. ‘’It is questionable whether a party formed for the benefit of the citizens would do something that would destroy democracy while it is still in its infant stage.’’

RaajjeTV said that it would try to bring “true news” to the citizens of the Maldives, despite the situation.

The TV channel also called on the former President and his family to share information to the media equally and to be consistent in its words and deeds.

MP Ahmed Nihan, who is the current Media Coordinator of PPM, today told Minivan News that he knew about the incident last night and said that it was regrettable.

‘’We do not have any issues with the TV channel, but there might be some individuals in the party that have issues with it,’’ Nihan said. ‘’We have not made any decision to boycott RaajjeTV.’’

Nihan said he personally had given two live interviews to RaajjeTV and has been sharing information equally.

‘’We give very high priority to the media because it is the fourth pillar of democracy,’’ he said adding that the reports broadcasted on RaajjeTV were “usually against former President Gayoom”.

‘’Although they air such reports, we do not have any issue with that as long as they keep to the laws,’’ Nihan said.

Spokesperson of PPM Ahmed Mahlouf did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)