Category: Politics

Cabinet decides to only accept Maldivian rufiya as taxes

Cabinet has today decided that all fees and taxes payable to the government must be paid in local currency, in a bid to overcome the dollar shortage currently being experienced in the country.

The decision comes after President’s official visit to Seychelles, following which President Mohamed Nasheed met with the press and shared advice from the Seychelles Finance Ministry and Central Bank Governor to insist on the use of local currency as legal tender.

Speaking to the press, Nasheed said he met with the Governor of Seychelles Central Bank and Finance Ministry’s Principal Secretary for Finance and Trade Ahmed Afif.

‘’I had a long discussion with Mr Afif and Governor of Seychelles over this issue,’’ President Nasheed said. ‘’We are on the right path now, we can reform our economy better than Seychelles.’’

Nasheed said Afif continuously told him to use local currency as the legal tender to overcome the dollar shortage.

‘’They advised us to use local currency as the lead currency, so for example all taxes have to paid in Maldivian rufiya.’’

Nasheed explained that if the Maldivian rufiya was used as the lead currency, all resorts and individuals would have to change dollars into Maldivian ruffiya to pay the taxes and fees to the government.

‘’To get Maldivian ruffiya they will have to go to the banks, which will increase the amount of dollars that the banks will have,’’ Nasheed added.

The President also noted that the inflation rate of Maldives was low compared to neighboring countries.

‘’I did check the price of diesel and rice and flour, it is still cheaper in the Maldives,’’ he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Adhaalath Party concerned over “second chance” offered to criminals in Maafushi Jail

Adhaalath Party has said it is “very concerned” over the decision made by the President to offer a second chance to more than 400 convicted criminals imprisoned in Maafushi Jail.

‘’Releasing convicted criminals without involving the Parole Board and solely by the decision of the President will disrupt the peace of our society and cause disorder,’’ said the Adhaalath Party in a press statement.

The party said given that the actions of the government in releasing the criminals were “uncivilised” and “undemocratic”, and accused the government of seeking political gain from the release of the convicts.

‘’Offering such an immunity to the criminals, putting aside the rights of  society to security is, the Adhaalath Party believes, a violation of rights,’’ the party said.

Most of the criminals to be offered a second chance were imprisoned for theft and robbery, drug abuse and other ‘serious’ criminal offences, the Adhaalath Party alleged.

‘’It is to be noted that while the government is releasing drug addicted criminals, there is no adequate mechanism to rehabilitate drug addicts in this country,’’ the party said, adding that the decision would not end up with a favorable result despite the government’s efforts to provide the former inmates shelter and job opportunities.

If the government wished to release inmates responsibly, the government should decrease its expenditure and spend money to upgrade the prisons, Adhaalath suggested.

‘’All citizens know that illegal drugs are available in the prisons, and that inmates are testing positive to drugs is evidence that they are not being adequately looked after inside the prison,’’ said the party.

Press Secretary for the President, Mohamed Zuhair, recently said the impending release of close to 400 convicts would not result in a spike in crime rates in Male’.

“Our statistics show that there will be nearly 400 convicted criminals that have been granted a second chance,” Zuhair said. “Out of the 119 people released on a previous occasion only two people had to be taken back to prison for committing an offence.”

Zuhair added that the inmates will be released on the condition that they will be returned to prison to complete the rest of their sentences if they commit any sort of offence in the next three years.

Apart from being hired for government jobs, the released inmates will be required to participate in rehabilitation programmes as well as national service programmes over the next two years.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Maldives can learn from Seychelles economic recovery, says President Nasheed

The Maldives can learn from the economic and fiscal reform of the Seychelles in reforming its own stricken economy, President Mohamed Nasheed has said during his visit to the neighbouring island nation.

“Our fishing industry is worth about US$500 million a year. We want to see how we will be able to work with Seychelles on improving on its productivity,” said President Nasheed, following the meeting with his Seychelles counterpart President James Michel.

President Michel said small island states shared many similar challenges, “such as economic development, climate changes, fisheries, tourism, and piracy. We have many commonalities and we share the same ocean. We must do more to improve our regional trade and share our expertise, especially as we are both focused on fisheries and tourism, and in this way develop sustainable solutions to regional challenges,” he said.

The two countries have discussed developing a maritime company in the Maldives, and the possibility of developing a joint airline corporation.

During the delegation’s visit, President Nasheed was briefed by the Governor of the Central Bank of Seychelles, Pierre Laporte, on the economic reform strategies adopted in the Seychelles.

Not far from home

The Seychelles is an upper middle-income country that, like the Maldives, has enjoyed rapid growth led by a tourism sector that, after emerging rise in the 70s, now provides 70 percent of the country’s foreign currency earnings and 30 percent of its employment.

In 2006, the government of the Seychelles allowed its rupee to depreciate after years of allowing it to be overvalued – a similar situation to the Maldives, which earlier this year launched a managed float of the rufiya, within 20 percent of a 12.85 peg, which saw it rocket to the maximum 15.42 where it now remains.

The value of the Seychelles rupee plunged 10 percent in the first nine months of 2007, and the country was subsequently hit by the economic recession and a foreign exchange shortage – another problem familiar to the Maldives. This culminated in a debt crisis in 2008 that threatened the country’s comparatively high standard of living.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) in its country report on the Seychelles (published in January 2011) commented that in the years following 2008, the Seychelles had “achieved a remarkable turnaround of economic policies, including foreign exchange market liberalisation and floating of the rupee” – achievements, the IMF noted, that were “all the more remarkable since the Seychelles had to confront at the same time a global crisis that lowered tourism receipts”.

The IMF’s 2011 report documents the remarkable economic recovery of a small island nation, during a recession affecting its core business. In particular, the report praised the Seychelles for renewing the confidence of private investors, “which translated into increased foreign direct investment to develop the islands’ exceptional tourism potential”, the stabilisation of the exchange rate, price stability, and the rebuilding of reserves “which offer room for more expansionary policies.”

Prior to 2008, the Seychelle’s overall deficit had reached 9.8 percent and the country was facing “an acute balance of payments” as public debt was predicted to rise a further 20 percent in two years. Ratings agency Standard & Poor – which this week lowered the credit rating of the US for the first time in history – had downgraded the Seychelles to “selective default”.

Several attempts to increase the value of the rupee against the US dollar had been unsuccessful, and did little to address the country’s foreign currency shortage – at the beginning of 2007, the rupee was officially valued at 6 to the US dollar, while the blackmarket exchange rate sat at almost double.

In late 2007 the government of the Seychelles devalued the rupee, setting the official exchange rate to 8 rupees to the US dollar. As in the Maldives following the government’s effective devaluation of the rufiyaa from 12.85 to 15.42 to the US dollar via a ‘managed’ float, the blackmarket in the Seychelles simply adjusted for the increase, settling at 13-14 rupees to the dollar.

In November 2008, the government of the Seychelles dropped its peg and floated the rupee against the US dollar. The rupee immediately leapt to almost 18, and remained substantially volatile for much of the next year. By late 2009 it had plunged to 10 rupees against the dollar, and a year later had settled around 12, where it remains.

Despite several concerns about the lack of diversification of the economy and the impact of piracy – the Seychelles coastguard rescued 27 hostages in March last year after firing 10,000 12.7mm rounds at the engine of the pirate vessel – the IMF describes the outlook for the Seychelles as favourable and predicts medium term growth of five percent as the country’s tourism industry expands and promotes itself outside traditional markets.

“The Seychelles’s stabilisation success offers perspectives for a less painful path toward fiscal sustainability, but caution is needed to maintain external stability and growth prospects,” the IMF noted.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MPs clash over maritime agreement with Sri Lanka

MPs clashed today over a motion without notice calling on the government to terminate a reported agreement with Sri Lanka to allow its vessels passage across Maldivian waters, raising fears of increased illegal fishing in the country’s economic zone.

The motion was proposed by MP Ali Saleem of the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) in the wake of reports in the Sri Lankan media about the maritime agreement and contradictory statements by Fisheries Minister Dr Ibrahim Didi and President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair in the local media yesterday.

“Parliament has to look into what is hidden behind this,” said Saleem in his opening remarks. “Did you know that even if Sri Lankan fishing vessels traveling to the Arabian sea are carrying sharks or fish catch, there is no way to know because of this agreement signed yesterday?”

The motion states that there was room to suspect “the beginning of hidden deals” behind the agreement and asks to clarify which maritime law facilitated the arrangement of vessels informing the Sri Lankan embassy 48 hours in advance to ensure safe passage.

In the ensuing debate, MP ‘Colonel’ Mohamed Nasheed of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) suggested that “it would be better for us to find out accurate information on the matter” if fears of illegal fishing had resulted from misinformation.

DRP MP for Mathiveri Hussein Mohamed called on the government to inform the public  of “measures to protect Maldivian fishing areas and incomes of local fishermen if this [maritime agreement] is going forward.”

DRP MP Ali Arif argued that Maldivian foreign policy should remain “non-aligned” and neutral as “a small authorisation like this” could threaten “hundreds of years of independence.”

“Because the Sri Lankan government authorised many MDP activities in that country before the 2008 election when MDP was formed, I believe this is a gift to them in return for that,” claimed Jumhooree Party (JP) MP Ibrahim Muttalib.

The government’s foreign policy was threatening sovereignty and independence, Muttalib continued: “We heard recently that from now on we will vote the way India wants at the UN. This is slavery, this is enslavement,” he said.

MDP MP Mohamed Shifaz meanwhile concurred with other MPs that the Maldives did not have the capacity to monitor foreign fishing vessels. All MDP MPs agreed with the consensus view that unmonitored illegal fishing posed dangers to the local fishing industry.

DRP MP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali noted that Sri Lankan trawlers had been found fishing illegally in Maldivian waters in the recent past.

“And it is a fact accepted by all our fishermen that our country, our government, does not have the capacity to identify, locate and stop foreign vessels illegally fishing in our seas,” he said, warning that the new maritime agreement would further complicate monitoring of the economic zone.

Thasmeen added that Sri Lankan fishing vessels were known to engage in shark fishing, which results in dwindling fish stocks.

There must be “broad consensus” before such a maritime agreement was signed, the opposition leader said.

MDP MP for Billedhoo Ahmed Hamza however pointed out that previous government in 1982 had acceded to the UN Convention on Law of the Sea, which stipulates that foreign vessels must be granted passage across territorial waters for sea travel.

While the convention allowed “innocent passage,” said Hamza, fishing by such vessels was strictly prohibited.

Hamza urged MPs to continue the debate after seeking official documentation to determine whether the maritime agreement with Sri Lanka was required by the UN convention.

“Why are we concerned about passage across Maldivian waters? [Because] we are talking about at least 424 nautical miles [of territory from the shore],” said DRP MP for Kelaa Dr Abdulla Mausoom.

While innocent passage was not an issue, said Mausoom, “history shows for certain” that Sri Lankan vessels would fish in Maldivian waters as trawlers from the neighbouring country had been detained by the authorities in the past.

MDP MP Ilyas Labeeb meanwhile accused the previous government of “selling the EEZ [Exclusive Economic Zone]” to enrich senior officials of the regime.

“We do not want to do anything that could harm Maldivian fishermen,” he said. “Before this government, fishermen got Rf3 or Rf4 for a kilo of fish. Now fishermen are glad that they get Rf20 or Rf30 [for a kilo].”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

“Don’t call Sri Lanka thieves”, Reeko Moosa tells opposition

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairperson and MP Moosa Manik has expressed concern over remarks made by the opposition over an alleged maritime agreement with the government of Sri Lanka, allowing Srilankan vessels to cross Maldivian waters with prior permission from the Maldivian authorities.

Head of the DRP’s fishermen’s branch, Ali Solih, had earlier condemned the deal as “an insult to Maldivian fisherman” and “a dangerous deal,” since the Maldives did not have the capacity to monitor illegal fishing.

Moosa said today that calling neighboring countries “thieves” was “very serious” and something about which the MDP was “very concerned”.

”It is a very irresponsible allegation made by the opposition to say that the government has signed an agreement with the Sri Lankan government to open Maldivian waters for Sri Lankan fishing vessels,” Moosa said. ”Even while they are making these claims, they are not even sure if such an agreement was even signed.”

”I cannot believe that the government will do anything to damage the fisherman,” he said.

The agreement to allow Sri Lankan vessels to cross Maldivian waters enroute to the Arabian Sea has caused a rare split in the MDP ranks.

Yesterday MDP MP Mohamed Musthafa called on the government to withdraw the agreement before he submitted a resolution to the parliament forcing the government to withdraw it.

He claimed that if the agreement was implemented, Sri Lankan fishing boats would enter Maldivian territorial waters and ”steal all our fish.”

“Their intention is to steal our fish, but I cannot just stand aside and watch while they take away our fish, which is the only source of natural resource we have in abundance,” he said. “It is a right that has to be preserved for future generations.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP presents mortgage bill to parliament

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has presented mortgage bill to the parliament.

The bill was presented to the parliament by MDP MP for Ihavandhoo constituency Ahmed Abdulla, who said the objective of the bill was to regulate and enhance policies of mortgage transaction.

The bill enables the mortgaging a property for more than one loan, he said.

However, opposition MPs claimed that the bill was drafted in a way that would authorise the government to sell mortgaged properties without going through judicial procedure, and that it would be a threat to opposition politicians.

Leader of the opposition Jumhoory Party (JP) ‘Burma’ Gasim Ibrahim called for the bill to be withdrawn and re-drafted.

Gasim claimed that if the bill is passed the way it was drafted, the banks would sell the properties of citizens which would lead many to live in poverty.

In response, MPs who supported the bill said there was no harm caused to those who are paying loans according to the terms, and that the threat of foreclosure was only there for those were not paying loans.

The preliminary debate on the bill was stopped by the Speaker when the time allocated was up, and will be continued in a subsequent sitting of the parliament.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Naifaru islanders protest council’s alleged invalidation of preaching license

Islanders of Naifaru in Lhaviyani Atoll gathered in front of the island council office to protest today after the island council invalidated all preaching licenses issued by the Islamic Ministry.

An islander told Minivan News that the council announced Thursday that all preaching licenses issued by the Islamic Ministry had been invalidated and scholars who wish to preach or give religious lectures would have to seek permission from the council.

“That is definitely a decision made against Sheikh Ibrahim Rasheed,” he claimed. “We know that because there is this one councilor named Mohamed Ali – who was a former fisherman and who does not have any educational background – holds a personal grudge against the Sheikh, this is his doing.”

He further claimed that the councilor had recently sent a letter to the Islamic Ministry complaining that the Sheikh has been showing young children pornographic pictures containing instructions for performing sexual intercourse.

“Today we gathered near the council office to meet with the councilors and a delegation of us met with them and the councilors have now withdrawn the decision,” he said. “We had 50 islanders gathered near the council, we are all very disappointed because the Sheikhs have said they will not preach unless they gave the permission, Sheikhs said it was obligatory to obey leaders.”

He said that islanders viewed the decision of the council as an attempt to prevent scholars from preaching.

However Naifaru Island Council Chair Ahmed Hussein claimed that the Adhaalath Party’s Naifaru Wing had politicised the issue to attack the council.

“We issued a notice to avoid usage of assets in the mosques, such as mics, speakers without the permission of the council,” Hussain said. “We did not say that all the licenses issued by the Islamic Ministry were invalidated.”

Hussain added that the councilors of the island were always available to the public but the protesters had issued false press releases and distributed flyers through the island to incite hatred against councillors.

“If they had an issue why had they not come to us and discuss it, we are on the same island and we are always available,” he said.

He explained that during the meeting with the delegation from protesters today, the council made it clear that licenses were not invalidated and that the notice was made regarding use of equipment at the mosque without permission.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Gayoom and Nasir unlikely to face their Mubarak moment

A large screen set up outside the court premises streamed images of historic trial from within, while a banner under it proclaimed ‘O Judge of Judges, you have nothing to fear but God!’

Inside the building which once bore his name, former Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak pleaded not guilty to charges ranging from graft to “intentional killing of demonstrators” during the January 25 uprising that toppled his regime.

Lying on a stretcher, inside a specially built cage within the same building where, less than two days before the revolution started he had addressed his security forces whose support he enjoyed during nearly three decades of absolute power – he pleaded not guilty on all charges.

Recordings of his not-guilty plea in Arabic – “I categorically deny all charges” – have reportedly become popular ring tones, and images of the once powerful dictator inside a metal cage are being circulated widely on Internet groups.

Mubarak’s trial marks the first time in recent memory that the leader of an Arab nation – long accustomed to ruling until they die or are assassinated – has been made answerable to his own people for alleged abuse of power.

Over 850 people died in the 18 days of uprising early this year, before he stepped down.

In fact, the presiding Judge asked a lawyer at one point “Could you write down the (victims) names, or will it take hours?”

Even as Mubarak fights charges that carries a possible death sentence if convicted, many would agree that even in the scenario of his being acquitted, the dictator’s fall from grace is complete, and that this trial ultimately only provides catharsis and a warning to his embattled peers elsewhere in the middle east.

Images of his trial may aggravate the situation in Saleh’s Yemen, Gaddafi’s Libya, and Assad’s Syria, where authoritarian despots are clinging to power hoping to last through the unabated turbulence of the Arab spring.

It is quite possible that these dictators would blame Mubarak’s current predicament on his softness, and relatively quick exit from power – a mere 18 days after crowds assembled in Tahrir Square. With the stakes now even higher, these regimes might resort to a violent fight to the finish, unless they can be coerced into catching a flight to Jeddah.

At least 1700 civilians are believed to have been killed in Syria since uprisings began, and estimates range between 2000 to 12000 killed in Libya, with no signs of the an end to the rebellion.

While the Mubarak trial holds special symbolic meaning for the Arab people, it also holds some significance in the Maldivian context.

It was, after all, from the halls of Egypt’s Al Azhar University that former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom emerged.

When democracy arrived in the Maldives after a prolonged period of public protests, many expected Gayoom to be prosecuted – and his political cronies to be put on trial.

Throughout the democratic uprising, after all, opposition leaders had publicly accused President Gayoom of a wide spectrum of allegations ranging from corruption to torture.

However, Gayoom continues to be a free man, and no charges have yet been brought against him by the first democratically elected government.

It might be that despite the alleged excesses of his former government, Gayoom continues to hold a massive sway over a significant portion of the population, as evidenced by the 40 percent of votes he garnered in the first round of the Presidential polls.

President Mohamed Nasheed has stuck to his stated stand of ‘humility in times of victory’, and while there still remain occasional calls for Gayoom’s arrest from parliamentarians like “Reeko” Moosa, the public attention has long since shifted to more immediate matters of a weakening economy and dollar shortages.

Gayoom’s predecessor, President Ibrahim Nasir had also modeled himself after Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, a modernist with dictatorial tendencies.

After he became the First President of the Second Republic, Nasir was the hero of the Nation’s independence.

However, during his earlier stint as Prime Minister, Nasir’s heavy-handed tactics such as personally leading gunboats to forcefully depopulate Thinadhoo in 1962, in the aftermath of the southern rebellion, has been condemned by many as being especially ruthless.

Nasir never stood trial in a public court. Following Gayoom’s ascent to power, Nasir lived out the rest of his life in exile in Singapore.

Nasir died a few days after the Gayoom regime fell, and was buried with his royal ancestors at the cemetery attached to the hukuru miskiy. Tens of thousands paid him their last respects, and a national holiday was declared in his honour.

He has recently been honoured again by the MDP government, which renamed the Male’ International Airport as Ibrahim Nasir International Airport in recognition of his efforts towards building it.

The news of the airport renaming was met with some disappointment by many Huvadhu islanders, some of whom still remember Nasir as the man who tore their families apart. Sounds of gunfire are still fresh in their memories.

Humiliating scenes of men being forced to step off their islands, supervised by the political strongman himself, continue to persist on the Internet.

It is increasingly likely that the alleged crimes and corruption of Gayoom and Nasir will never face their Mubarak moment. Furthermore, the government has so far given no indication of making a even a symbolic public apology for the southern outrage that was Thinadhoo.

While Mubarak’s trial assuages some of Egypt’s hurt and brings hope to rebels in the Middle East, it reopens some old wounds for many Maldivians, who feel justice has been denied to them.

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)

MBC to sue Finance Minister for withholding its budget

The Maldives Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) has declared it will sue Finance Minister Ahmed Inaz for withholding its annual budget approved by the parliament for the year 2011.

The parliament-created MBC and the 100 percent government corporation the Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC) have been engaged in a long-running tug-of-war for control of the assets of the state broadcaster, formerly Television Maldives (TVM) and Voice of Maldives (VoM).

The government contends that the MBC board is stacked with opposition supporters and that its attempt to gain control of MNBC is effectively a media coup, while MNBC has been criticised for favouring the ruling party. Proponents claim that given the opposition’s influence over private broadcast media the consolidation of media ownership in the hands of a few opposition-leaning MPs, the government has no alternative.

Even the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has waded into the debate at the behest of the Maldives Journalists Association (MJA), in support of MBC and an independent state broadcaster.

In a statement issued yesterday the MBC said that the corporation had been unable to pay rent for its office building as well as other bills, and had been fined as a consequence.

“MBC decided to sue the Finance Minister after informing the ministry about all these issues and repeatedly seeking to solve them, but the ministry has failed to explain why the budget was withheld,’’ the statement read. ‘’The MBC has been unable to find a solution to this through the parliament and Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC).’’

The MBC said the court was the last resort after exhausting all other avenues.

Finance Minister Ahmed Inaz told Minivan News that he did not wish to comment on the matter.

The MBC was formed by a law enacted by the parliament, which attempted to force a transfer of MNBC’s assets to the new corporation.

The MBC won its first suit against the government on June 12, with the Civil Court ordering that all the assets and staff including the land of MNBC was to be be transferred to MBC within 20 days.

However, the government claimed that the MNBC was a private TV station and that as long as the MNBC board opposed the transfer of assets and staff it would be violation of the corporation’s rights.

Now the government has appealed the Civil Court’s ruling in High Court on July 6, which ordered the Civil Court’s decision be delayed pending a final ruling.

Meanwhile Independent MP Mohamed Nasheed said last week that staff at the former Television Maldives (TVM) and Voice of Maldives (VoM) could not work with the parliament-approved MBC board.

Responding to a question by a journalist at a forum organised by the Maldives Media Council (MMC) on July 25, Nasheed explained that the MBC Act was intended to transform the corporatised state media into a public broadcaster but the board voted through by opposition MPs was engaged in “political football.”

“Everything went right, but because of those who were chosen for the director’s board, the whole thing turned into political football,” MP Nasheed said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)