Month: February 2012

EU targets judicial reform discussions with President Waheed

The European Union has said it will continue trying to work with Maldivian authorities to reform the country’s judiciary following requests for assistance made by Mohamed Nasheed “shortly” before Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan became president this month in an alleged “coup d’etat”.

Nasheed was replaced by his Vice President Dr Waheed after “resigning” his presidency on February 7 – a decision he  later claimed had been forced upon him by opposition figures  and security forces unhappy, in part, with his commitments to reform the nation’s judicial system.

A spokesperson for Catherine Ashton, the Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, has said the bloc now hoped to open discussions with Dr Waheed’s government over judicial reform on the back of concerns raised by former President Nasheed about the conduct of the nation’s judges.

“Shortly before the events of February 6 to February 7, we were asked for assistance [with judicial reform], as were the UN and Commonwealth. We were ready to look into this matter and hope to discuss the matter further with the Maldivian authorities,” added the spokesperson for High Representative Ashton.

“The HR/VP’s spokesman has already reiterated the importance we attach to the correct functioning of the democratic institutions in the Maldives; we had previously offered the Nasheed government support under the Development Cooperation Instrument for the improvement of governance across the board.”

The country’s judges and their conduct became a major focus for President Mohamed Nasheed in the run up to him being replaced by Dr Waheed earlier this month.  Nasheed had raised concerns over allegations of perjury and “increasingly blatant collusion” between senior judicial figures and politicians loyal to the former autocratic President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

However, Nasheed came under criticism from some international bodies after detaining the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed.  The former president claimed the detention was designed to prevent the judge from sitting on the bench whilst charges against him were investigated.

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

“Catch-22”

Nasheed’s government had eventually consulted international organisations like the UN, the Commonwealth and the EU after describing itself in a “Catch-22 situation” in terms of a lack of mechanisms to investigate the judiciary independently. In November, the national court watchdog, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), was ordered to cease an investigation into Judge Abdulla Mohamed by the civil Court under an action he himself instigated.

Amidst the violent upheaval and pro-government and anti-government protests that have taken place since President Waheed came to power, the EU has said the issue of the country’s judiciary was among a number of concerns foreign governments wished to investigate in light of the transfer of power.

Judicial interference

In an interview with local and foreign media on Friday, President Waheed confirmed that Judge Abdulla Mohamed had taken a month’s leave from his post for “personal issues”, but did not elaborate whether he had been reinstated to the bench.

“It is for the judiciary to decide what to do with him, not for me. I don’t want to interfere in the judiciary. I want our constitution to be respected, and work with everybody to make our constitution work. This is a new constitution, and it is the first time we are trying it out. And so there are difficulties in it,” the president claimed.

“We need to find ways of solving it. It is time for us to work together, and if there are problems with the judiciary we need to work together to solve them – they are intelligent good people in the judiciary and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC). We welcome assistance from the Commonwealth and United Nations to develop programmes and build the capacity of the judiciary.”

EU position

While currently preparing an official statement on the main concerns the EU holds over the ongoing political disputes facing the Maldives, the spokesperson for High Representative Ashton said the bloc hoped to see more consensus by rival political groups including the MDP to move forward democratically.

“It is essential that the business of government can continue and that multi-party democracy and the constitutional checks and balances are preserved,” the spokesperson added. “The army and police should exercise maximum restraint in the execution of their duties which must remain strictly within their constitutional mandate. Further violence must be prevented.”

The spokesperson claimed that the EU continued to support calls for an impartial investigation to ascertain whether President Waheed came to power legitimately or under a “coup”, though provided no details of how this may be achieved within the country’s highly partisan political arena.

“The EU supports an impartial investigation on this. In the mean time we hope there is a general understanding, following our Heads of Mission (HoMs’ ) visit to Malé, that all parties, including Mohamed Nasheed’s party, the MDP, need to cooperate to prevent the country falling victim to political factionalism, which can only lead to further unrest,” the spokesperson added.

In a statement released earlier this week by the European Parliament’s Delegation for relations with South Asia, “deep concern” was expressed by the group’s chair Jean Lambert over a “sword of Damocles” he said was hanging over ousted President Mohamed Nasheed.

“The European Union had deployed a team of experts to observe the first democratic Presidential elections held in the country in 2008; a sword of Damocles now hangs above the winner of these elections, with his arrest warrant already issued on unspecified grounds,” said a statement from Lambert.

“We understand a number of MPs and local councillors have also been detained or are in hospital following continued police violence,” Lambert added, further noting that several EU countries have issued travel advisories for the Maldives as “public resentment and violence are now spreading well beyond the capital.”

Since the statement was made, Dr Waheed has denied setting a deadline for the MDP to join with other parties in forming a “unity” government up until the next general election presently scheduled for 2013.  The MDP has maintained it’s belief that Dr Waheed’s government is “illegitimate” and called for power to be transferred to the parliamentary speaker ahead of early elections.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Operation Haram to Halal – the Islamist role in replacing Nasheed with Waheed

‘Since Mohamed Nasheed of Kenereege who held the post of the President of the Maldives is an anti-Islamic, corrupt, authoritarian, and violent individual who abused the Constitution; and given that Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik is the man to steer the country to a safe harbour, the Consultative Committee of Adhaalath Party has taken the unanimous decision to pledge allegiance to Dr Waheed and to support his government until 2013’. – Adhaalath Party, 7 February 2012

Maldivian Islamists played an instrumental role in the events of 7 February 2012, which forced the country’s first democratically elected president Mohamed Nasheed to ‘resign.’ Coup Deniers and followers of Islamists vehemently object to any such claim. The Islamists themselves, however, have been very public, and very publicly proud, of the ‘religious duty’ they performed by facilitating the removal from power of Nasheed – in their opinion an anti-Islamic heretic.

This is clear from the many proclamations and announcements they made in the lead up to and in the aftermath of Nasheed’s ‘resignation’. Having declared Nasheed a heretic on 7 February, Adhaalath Party put out a press release on 8 February, the worst day of violence since transition to democracy. It called on people to stand up against Nasheed, “with swords and guns” if needs be. Any Maldivian who failed to do so was a sinner, and had no right to live in the country. Fight Nasheed or emigrate; Jihad against him or be eternally damned, it said. The ‘truth’ of their words was bolstered by selective quotations from Islamic teachings. Accepting Waheed—”a just ruler”—was portrayed as a religious duty of Maldivian Muslims.

Replacing Nasheed with Waheed, the ‘haram’ president with the ‘halal’ president, appears to be what Adhaalath President Sheikh Imran Abdulla referred to on 31 January as ‘Phase Two’ of ‘the work we have been doing until today.’ What was the work Adhaalath and its allies had been doing until then?

Setting the stage: grooming the population

Out of necessity, Nasheed had to include Adhaalath Party in the coalition government he put together in 2008. To put it mildly, the liberal minded president and the ultra-conservative Adhaalath Party had nothing in common. Despite the frequent clashes over various issues—selling alcohol on inhabited islands, making Islam an optional rather than a compulsory subject in secondary school, introduction of ‘religious unity regulations’, provision of land for an Islamic College in Male’—Nasheed had no choice but to stick to his coalition agreement. The turbulent political marriage of convenience came to an end only in September 2011 when Adhaalath voted to sever the coalition agreement citing Nasheed’s lack of cooperation in its efforts to ‘strengthen’ Islam in the Maldives.

In the intervening period, driven by pragmatic reasons and by an oversimplified belief that freedom of expression is sacrosanct—no matter what the consequences—Nasheed failed to impose any restrictions on the increasingly extremist and hardline rhetoric of the Islamists. With Adhaalath’s Dr Abdul Majid Abdul Bari at the helm of the Islamic Ministry, radical preachers from abroad and from within the country were given free-reign, and funds from the public coffer, to address the Maldivian population. 2010 saw, for example, the Indian televangelist Dr Zakir Naik, as well as Jamaican Dr Bilal Philips and British Sheikh Abdurraheem Green address the Maldivian public. In addition to the foreign preachers, Maldivian missionaries trained at madhrasaas in Pakistan and ultra-conservative schools and universities in India, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere bombarded Maldivians with radical rhetoric from every available public platform.

Anti-Semitism, xenophobia, and intolerance of other religions became a part of daily discourse, broadcast on national television, played incessantly in public spaces from taxis and ferries to loudspeakers on the streets. Close to 90 percent of books stocked in most Maldivian bookshops during this period came to be those authored by the extremists whose words were designed to influence every little detail of a Maldivian’s life from toilet to conjugal relations. While extremist literature flourished and their voice took over the public sphere, the liberal voice floundered. When concerned liberals approached Nasheed asking for his help in countering the voices of extremism, his response was—more on less—to tell them ‘do it yourselves.’ The government, he said, could not impose restrictions on speech.

Despite the strong civil society that flourished during Nasheed’s government, the extremist movement had become too strong by then for individuals—acting without any support from the State—to organise against it. The labels of apostasy, heresy and anti-Islamic agent’ had become too powerful as political tools by then for any anti-extremist group or movement to be able to get a foothold in the public sphere. Many individuals attempted to organise into groups, but were shutdown as anti-Islamic before they could become a coherent voice in society. Anyone who expressed doubt about their faith in Islam was branded an apostate and ostracised. The strength of these prevailing sentiments was seen in the suicide of Ismail Mohamed Didi, a 25-year-old man who hanged himself in July 2010 after being hounded by friends and family for expressing doubt over his belief in Islam. The extremists were determined that the myth of ‘Maldives is a hundred percent Muslim nation’ will be maintained, even if it meant the oppression and death of those who did not believe.

Phase One: Nasheed as heretic

The push to drive Nasheed out began in earnest at the end of 2011. Many incidents towards the end of the year proved fortuitous for the extremists. In November Maldives hosted the annual summit meeting of SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation). Among bilateral gifts exchanged were various monuments and statues depicting the culture and traditions of the gifting country. In the spirit of ‘building bridges’, the summit theme, Maldives displayed a welcome banner at the airport in which religious figures dear to all members of SAARC were included. An image of Jesus was on the banner. Alleging that the banner promoted Christianity and that several of the gifts—including one from Pakistan—were anti-Islamic idols of worship, religious organisation and parties galvanised the public into what can aptly be described as mass-hysteria. The banner was taken down, and the monuments were put under police protection until they were destroyed. All in the name of protecting Islam.

On 24 November 2011, visiting UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay addressed the Maldivian parliament and spoke out against the practice of flogging, which continues to this day. The public furore incited over the ‘idols’ had not yet died down down. Islamists saw another opportunity to keep the hysteria alive. They led about a hundred or so angry people to the doors of the UN building to protest against Pillay’s call for a humanitarian approach to punishment. Although Nasheed’s Islamic Ministry unequivocally condemned the speech, Nasheed himself spoke in favour of Pillay’s stance. For the ultra-conservatives in Parliament and in socio-political positions of power, it was a sure sign that Nasheed was an anti-Islamic ‘Western puppet.’

The next plum opportunity for the Islamists came on 10 December, the International Human Rights Day, when a handful of young Maldivians staged a minor ‘silent protest’ against the growing religious intolerance in the country. Despite the fact that Nasheed’s government imprisoned one of the protesters, the Maldives’ only openly gay activist, religious conservatives were furious with Nasheed for not meting out severe punishment against the protestors. It was deemed as further evidence of Nasheed’s heresy.

It is against this backdrop, and armed with these pretexts, that the campaign to depose Nasheed was launched. Its first major public display was on 23 December in the form of a protest under the banner: ‘Maldivians Defending Islam.’ Having been bombarded since November by messages that Nasheed is a threat to their faith, and convinced by the relentless extremist rhetoric of years, thousands of Maldivians spilled onto the streets of Male’ in ‘defence of Islam’. What a majority of the people had not had the time or space to understand is that the threat to Maldivians’ faith has come not from Nasheed but from the extremists.

For hundreds of years, insulated as the country had been from the rest of the world, Maldivians were largely ignorant of the various conflicts within and around the ‘Islamic world’. The Islam that Maldivians practised was personal—a deeply held faith that did not need mediation by ‘scholars’ or preachers. Public displays of piety, such as having women shrouded in black or men hiding behind waist-length beards, were never part of the Maldivian belief system. Suppression of women as second-class citizens, violence in the name of religion, disputes over which prayer to be said at what time, insistence on imposing the death sentence, child brides, sex slaves—these were not part of the fabric of ‘Maldivian Islam.’ The extremists introduced such ideology and practices into the Maldives, and spread it across the country using the very freedoms of democracy they rally against. The success of the extremists had been their ability to use its newfound freedom of expression as a tool for convincing an unsuspecting population that until the arrival of these missionaries, Maldives had been ignorant of the ‘right Islam’.

It was in the defence of this extremism, which Nasheed had failed to act against—and which he was now being accused of threatening—that thousands of Maldivians gathered in Male’ on 23 December.

Phase One, Stage Two: the unholy alliance between ‘democrats’ and Islamists

It would be a mistake to assume that the Islamists, as widespread and powerful as their influence among the general population has been, would have been able to successfully depose Nasheed on their own. Rather, this occurred when opposition parties, having proven time and again their penchant for regarding Islam—and democracy itself for that matter—as open to opportunistic appropriation, allied with the Islamists with this very goal in mind.

Eight opposition parties of the Maldives and allied NGOs put their organisational and rallying tools behind the 23 December protests. That this was an alliance, for the political parties at least, wholly devoid of any Islamic piety is clear from who appeared as its leading members. A core group of them were resort owners—rich tycoons who have no qualms being purveyors of alcohol, pork, and ‘hedonistic’ pleasures to ‘infidels’. What smacked of hypocrisy and opportunism even more was the involvement of figures who had previously spoken out against the rising extremism in the country. Present among them were, for example, Dr Hassan Saeed who co-authored the book ‘Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam’ which argues that Islam is a religion of tolerance. He is now the newly appointed President Waheed’s special advisor.

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom had a statement read out in favour of the protests despite his long career being rich with seminars and papers arguing the tolerance and liberalism of Islam. Without the easy manner in which these figures dismissed their own convictions for the sake of political power, the Islamists would not have been able to push their agenda onto the Maldivian people so easily. It was a case of political parasites feeding off each other.

The next step was the publication of a pamphlet by Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), or Maldivian National Party, that provided alleged details of a secret agenda pursued by Nasheed to undermine Maldivians’ Islamic faith. The 30-page pamphlet, ironically, can easily rival Dutch politician Geert Wilder’s hate-filled anti-Islamic film ‘Fitna’ in its use of the Qur’an to incite hatred. There was very little that matters to Muslims that was not exploited for political gain in the publication. Nasheed government’s decision to foster business with Israel was depicted as an ‘alliance with Jews’ at the expense of Palestinians and his bilateral ties with Western governments was portrayed as friendships with ‘enemies of Islam’. Blatant lies, such as Christian priests being appointed as Nasheed’s emissaries, were mixed in with facts that were twisted beyond recognition.

While using the democratic principle of freedom of expression, freely granted by Nasheed, it sought to convince Maldivians that modernity and Islam are diametrically opposed to each other. Equating the overthrow of Nasheed’s government with a religious duty, it called on all Maldivians to do what they can to unseat the immoral heretic from power. Dr Hassan Saeed, author of the book ‘Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam’, is the deputy leader of DQP. Its leader is Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed. He is now the Minister of Home Affairs in Dr Waheed’s newly formed cabinet. In 2007 Dr Jameel was Gayoom’s Justice Minister, and resigned seemingly in protest against Gayoom’s failure to reign in the increasing Islamic militancy in the country. Less than five years later, his supposedly staunch principles were nowhere in sight as he pushed Maldivians to protest against Nasheed’s liberal government and embrace Sharia.

Phase One, Stage Three

Nasheed’s orders to have Judge Abdulla Mohamed arrested on 16 January 2012 was like a manna from heaven for the politico-religious coalition which was now calling itself the December 23 Alliance. Here was an opportunity to marry Nasheed’s alleged anti-Islamic activities with his violation of the constitution. Not one member of the opposition, nor the self-proclaimed champion of the constitution, President Waheed, has ever spoken out against the unconstitutional acts that has allowed Judge Abdulla to remain on the bench. The very same leaders, who now bellowed and whipped the people into a frenzy over the Judge’s detention, had presided over—and evidence exists, orchestrated—the events which allowed convicted criminals and sex offenders to remain on the bench in violation of Article 285 of the Constitution.

Deleted from public discourse, and therefore missing from public understanding, was the sad truth that at the time of Judge Abdulla’s arrest there were no democratic institutions capable of reigning in his many unlawful acts on the bench. He had no scruples over letting dangerous criminals walk free, espousing political views, and displaying sexual depravity in the courtroom. And he bestowed on himself the authority to overrule the Judicial Service Commission, the independent institution established by the Constitution to oversee the ethical and professional standards of the judiciary. That the opposition’s use of the judge’s arrest for inciting public protests was nothing more than political opportunism becomes clear in the fact that following Judge Abdulla’s release—on the same day that Nasheed was deposed—there has been no move to investigate the charges against him. Nor has President Waheed, taken any steps to initiate an investigation into the failures of the JSC. It is as if Judge Abdulla has no pending complaints of judicial misconduct against him, nor a criminal background. Exhausted by the ‘ordeal’ in which he seems to have had no role to play, he is now on a month-long holiday.

Phase Two: in the name of God and country

The two hundred or so members of the public who came out to protest against Judge Abdulla’s arrest for 22 consecutive nights were a motley crew. Some were there to defend extremism, others were there to defend the Constitution and demand the freedom of a politically biased, criminally convicted judge who remained on the bench in violation of the Constitution. It was their honestly held belief that reinstating a judge found guilty of political bias was the way to give themselves an independent judiciary. The rest were people who would protest the opening of an envelope, social deviants, and hired thugs egged on by opposition MPs and party leaders who incited them to continued violence daily for three weeks.

On 31 January, a week before Nasheed was forced to resign, the 23 December Alliance met in the wee hours of the morning. Presiding over the meeting was the President of Adhaalath Party Sheikh Imran Abdulla. At his side, displaying proudly the alliance between the political opportunists and the Islamists, is the Vice President of former president Gayoom’s new Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Umar Naseer. They both announced that since Nasheed had stepped outside of the boundaries of the constitution, their alliance had made a unanimous decision to pledge their allegiance to the Vice President. Their decision was reached, they said, after meeting with Vice President Waheed earlier that night. Umar Naseer, who had repeatedly incited violence during the weeks of protests, calmly called upon the armed forces of the country to refuse to obey any orders by their Commander in Chief Nasheed as he had ‘violated the Constitution.’ Umar Naseer appeared not to know—or not to care—that calling on the nation’s security forces to disobey their leader did not figure anywhere in the constitution either. Giving credence and weight to this call to unlawful acts, at least for those who were convinced Nasheed was also a heretic, was Sheikh Imran and other religious ‘scholars’.

Would the mutinying police and military officers that joined them have helped overthrow Nasheed’s government were they not convinced they were acting, not just for the country, but for Allah too? It is possible—for reports suggest that Allah was not the only God worshiped on that day; Mammon, too, commanded much devotion. Yet, it is Allah that the men in uniform who took over the state broadcaster with such violence thanked loudly for their success. ‘Allah Akbar, Allah Akbar!’ is what a band of military men marching on the streets of Male’ on that day were calling out in unison. It is Allah’s name that 2013 presidential candidate and owner of the Villa Resorts chain took when announcing Nasheed’s resignation to the public before it happened. One of the first acts of violence carried out on 8 February was the destruction of Buddhist relics from the pre-Islamic history of the Maldives dating back to the eleventh century. It is not the first time that Madivian Islamists have emulated the Taliban in their actions, and it will not be the last for many are disciples of the same form of Islam practised by the Taliban and several are alumni of the same madhrassas and universities Taliban leaders attended.

It cannot be denied that a large number of those who celebrated the departure of Nasheed were glad to see him go ‘because he violated the constitution.’ But those who do genuinely believe in the constitution, and are convinced that following it is the way forward for the country, know that deposing a democratically elected president by a coup is hardly constitutional. They are the many hundreds who have taken to the streets in ‘colourless’ protests—they are not supporters of MDP, nor necessarily of Nasheed. They, however, disagree with how the democratically elected leader has been forced out.

Apart from the diehard supporters of former president Gayoom and his allies, paid-for supporters of Gasim, and other tycoons who have the country’s politics in a stranglehold, the only people who remain jubilant at the overthrow of Nasheed are those convinced beyond any reasonable doubt that he was an anti-Islamic heretic. In helping depose him, in celebrating his departure, they have performed a religious duty. Replacing the haram Nasheed with the halal Waheed may not be democratic but it has assured them of a place in heaven. Little do they understand that, in this life, the rewards of their toil will be reaped not by them or their children but by those who have so shamelessly exploited their belief in Allah.

Phase Three?

President Waheed denies any knowledge of a coup, and refutes all allegations that he was party to the plot that forced Nasheed from office. Even if he is given the benefit of the doubt, and under the unlikely circumstance that he is, indeed, ignorant of the machinations of the politico-religious alliance that facilitated his assumption of office, he should be aware that his position is precarious indeed. The only reason he has been given the seal of approval, Adhaalath has made clear, is because he has not openly sided with Nasheed in his many stand-offs with the extremists. Reading between the lines of President Waheed’s utterances since assuming office, this was not out of choice—Nasheed did not allow him to participate in any decisions that mattered. This is, in fact, President Waheed’s biggest gripes against Nasheed, seemingly on a par with the deposed president’s unconstitutional arrest of the judge.

President Waheed has close to him as his Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed and as his Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed. Two leaders of the party that authored the pamphlet of hate against Nasheed. One of the ‘sins’ the pamphlet alleges former president Gayoom committed as a leader was not forcing his wife to cover-up, and not bringing his children in line with hard-line Islamic principles. For this, the pamphlet condemns Gayoom. President Waheed’s wife is guilty of the same ‘sin’, and his children, Western-educated and brought up in the United Sates, are unlikely to heed any paternal demands to toe an ultra-conservative Islamist line. At least one of his children is a liberal and an outspoken supporter of democracy. Already, President Waheed is treading a thin line.

It is only a matter of time before the Islamists begin re-instating their position, and President Waheed becomes the focus of their ire. It makes little sense for them to have brought down ‘Nasheed the Heretic’ if not for a promised bounty that is not yet known. In their 8 February press release, it quotes from Islamic teachings as saying:

‘It is the duty of every Muslim to wage a Jihad against those who apply any law other than that of Islamic Sharia. And, until such time as they have accepted Sharia and begun applying Sharia among the people, it is your duty to wage war against them. ‘

Clearly, the Islamists’ work has only begun. Would President Waheed, who describes himself as committed to democracy, allow Islamic extremism to further takeover the country and destroy hundreds of years of peaceful, traditional Maldivian Islam? Would he stand up for his principles? Or would he allow them to be sacrificed at the altar of his political ambitions? It remains to be seen. As do details of the deal that was done between political opportunists and the Islamists to ensure Nasheed the haram president was replaced by Waheed the halal president.

Azra Naseem holds a doctorate in International Relations.

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)

US “working closely” with India to resolve political crisis

The US has said it is “working closely with India” to resolve the political crisis in the Maldives.

“Our understanding is that we are pretty well in lockstep with India in terms of calling for unity and calling for a democratic, peaceful path forward,” said State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland.

“We welcome the efforts that all sides appear to be making to find a peaceful way forward,” she said.

“We also welcome the ongoing dialogue among Maldivians regarding the role of a unity government in addressing these issues and possibly creating the conditions for early elections. We’re continuing to urge all parties to work together to find a way through this,” she added.

Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake recently travelled to the Maldives to assess the situation.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Commonwealth ministerial mission arrives in Maldives

A Commonwealth ministerial mission has arrived in the Maldives capital, Malé, to gain a better understanding of recent events.

The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) ministerial mission will remain in the Maldives February 17-20, 2012.

“We are here following an extraordinary meeting of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) held by teleconference on 12 February 2012,” the mission said in a statement.

“This is a political mission, designed to enable ministers to gain a better understanding of the situation in Maldives. The Commonwealth’s response must be informed by a proper understanding of the facts.

“Over the next couple of days, we will be meeting a range of stakeholders which will enable us to brief CMAG on all relevant aspects of the situation. This mission is seen in the context of the Commonwealth’s long-standing engagement with Maldives and we hope that we can contribute to peace, stability and prosperity in the country.”

The mission was appointed due to a need to “urgently to ascertain the facts surrounding the transfer of power [in the Maldives], and to promote adherence to Commonwealth values and principles”.

The ministerial mission is being led by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Communications of Trinidad and Tobago, Surujrattan Rambachan. He is accompanied by Dr Dipu Moni, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, and Dennis Richardson AO, Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Protests to continue until date given for early elections: Nasheed

Yesterday’s large anti-government protests ended peacefully in the early hours of the morning, and look set to continue for a second day.

Demonstrators danced into the night as a bodu beru band played, and were joined by a number of elderly women. Police kept a low profile.

Amid the yellow banners, capes, badges and bandanas of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters, were a noticeably large number of the formerly politically un-engaged, most of them young. Many said they were joining or had already joined the MDP, and there were reports that the party had temporarily run out of application forms.

“We never used to discuss politics around the dinner table,” one yellow-shirted demonstrator, previously unaffiliated with any political party, told Minivan News. “But after I was beaten [by police] on Wednesday, my whole family – sisters, cousins – have joined the MDP.”

Former President Mohamed Nasheed took the podium shortly after midnight, stating that all-party talks were scheduled for Sunday to decide a date for an early presidential election. He said he was confident a date would be set before Parliament resumed on March 1.

Nasheed – who said he was forced to resign under duress in a bloodless police and military coup d’état February 7 – said people had stood up against the 30 year regime of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom because of the inhumane treatment people suffered at its hands and had witnessed, a day after the first democratically-elected government was overthrown, a brutal police crackdown on the people who protested against the coup.

“I was repeatedly asked to unlock the arsenal and if so the mutinous police officers would have been easily arrested. But I was not elected to hurt the people of this country,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed explained that for a while after the coup he was “unable to get out of Muleeage [the President’s residence]” and was not able to call anyone to explain what had happened.

“The international community had not received word of the coup as I was unable to leave Muleeage,” he said. “It took some time for them to realised that the information they had been receiving was not genuine, and by then some had urged us to join this illegal government. But I have now informed them of the real situation.

“The coup leaders did not conceive of or anticipate the people’s reaction to the change in government,” Nasheed added.

They believed, he said, that they could consolidate their hold on power “by arresting me after the coup and beating members of the MDP and the Maldivian people into submission.”

He added the public, who had been “nurturing the country on the path to freedom”, were not willing to recognise as legitimate a government they did not elect.

The “peaceful political activity” would continue until a date for early elections was announced, Nasheed said, urging people to return the following day.

“People can swim, play sports, music and give political speeches here. Our aim is to gather people from all over the nation,” he said.

Following talks with India’s Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai on Thursday, Nasheed said Dr Mohamed Waheed’s government was supposed to announce early elections on Friday night, after which other parties, MDP and Nasheed were to welcome it.

The announcement did not come, except for a vague press conference by new Attorney General Azima Shukoor. The all-party discussions have been set for Sunday.

MDP’s President, former Fisheries Minister Dr Ibrahim Didi, said that Maldivians had voted for the MDP’s manifesto for five years, “and hence the rule of this party should remain even now. That is why we are pressing for an election and by the grace of God it will be achieved.”

Dr Didi claimed that Ahmed Thasmeen Ali’s Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DRP), the second largest party in the Maldives and the subject of an acrimonious split with Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) last year, had “given the green light” for early elections.

A statement on the DRP website said the party “welcomes and supports this important initiative because we value the importance of strengthening the democratic foundations of the Maldives and the restoration of peace and calm amongst our people. We believe this initiative would help to further strengthen the role of independent institutions in the Maldives and prevent serious distruptions to economic development and prosperity.”

“In supporting this initiative the DRP is willing to participate in a dialogue among all relevant political parties regarding the holding of early elections as stipulated in the roadmap. The DRP would also extend its cooperation in carrying out any necessary amendments to the constitution in order to facilitate such an election.”

Dr Mustafa Lufty, Chancellor of the Maldives National University, former Education Minister and one of the founding members of President Waheed’s Gaumee Ittihad Party (GIP), also addressed the crowd.

“Pointing a gun at the head of our beloved president and forcing him to resign is the same as pointing a gun at all of us,” Luftee said. “If we give up now generations to come will have to live at gun point.”

“I came here today because I could no longer bear this travesty.”

“This has been carefully planned. One plan was to force Nasheed to resign and if he did not, then the arsenal would have been opened for the opposition. That would have meant major bloodshed and military rule – they would have kept the country under such rule for a long time. Nasheed was wise enough to step aside and save the country from a massive tragedy.

“The second plan was to arrest Nasheed when he resigned, which would prompt his supporters to take matters into their own hands giving an excuse to beat them down. They would have charged us under terrorism.

“Freedom is a god given right of every human being and must not be violated under any circumstances,” he said.

Mathai had endorsed a ‘road map’ backing early elections “as soon as feasible”, and said at a press conference that MDP had as a result been “reconsidering” Friday’s demonstrations.

In a statement yesterday from the President’s Office, Dr Waheed said he was “disappointed” with Nasheed’s decision “to go ahead with his demonstration in Male’ today despite assurances and promises that were given to the Indian Foreign Secretary Mathai yesterday that it would be cancelled and a smaller meeting will be held in its place.”

Dr Waheed said MDP’s claim that he had not respected agreements reached in the Indian-mediated negotiations was “a completely untrue and irresponsible suggestion”.

“I can understand whilst it is easy to march your forces to the top of the hill, it is much harder to march them down again. I also understand that at this critical juncture in our country’s history that showing strong leadership can be challenge. But I’m hopeful that Mr Nasheed can show the good judgement in the future that will be necessary to make the road map a reality. It’s the very least that the people of the Maldives deserve,” he said.

Meanwhile, a member of yesterday’s crowd told Minivan News that he was “proud of everyone who came today in spite of intimidation by the military and the PPM rumor mill warning of large-scale violence. Not to mention whatever lies the media axis of evil is spewing. A lot of people were apparently scared off.

“A friend I met there who had sat in the square with Anni in 2005 said he didn’t think we’d have to do it all over again. I always tell people that the post-2003 pro-democracy movement separated the conscience-challenged cowards from those who value justice and were willing to fight for it. People are clearly not scared anymore.

“It wasn’t that long ago that they got the courage to paint their houses yellow in defiance of Gayoom. Today they are willing to wave a yellow flag under a military government.”

Time lapse footage of the crowds:

Bodu beru in the evening:

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP protesters gather in thousands against Dr Waheed’s government

Thousands of protesters gathered in the open area near the tsunami monument in Male’ this afternoon, demonstrating against what they contend is the illegitimate government of Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan.

Numbers were difficult to ascertain as demonstrators spilled out of the open area into side streets and along Boduthakurufaanu Magu in both directions, but may have approached 10,000 at the height of the demonstrations this afternoon.

The afternoon protest had a decidedly carnival atmosphere to it. Maldivians of all ages waved yellow flags and banners, the colour of Mohamed Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), while MDP supporters handed out biscuits and water to the crowd.

Many protesters had come from the islands. Fishing boats bedecked in yellow flags moored off shore, while the occupant of a canoe paddled out and waved a banner. A surfer could be seen wearing a yellow rash vest.

All the former ministers were at the front of the crowd near the stage, including Nasheed, who did not speak this afternoon but was wildly received by the crowd on raising his hand.

The visible police presence was minimal, with uniformed officers only stationed in side streets away from the square. Officers present were taunted by demonstrators yelling “Laari laari yes sir”, in reference to allegations that some officers accepted money to side with the opposition on February 7.

After prayers, the protests continued into the evening from 8:00pm, with the tone of the speakers rising in anger and frustration.

Nasheed’s MDP have refused to recognise a government with Dr Mohamed Waheed at the helm, and have called for an interim government under the Speaker of Parliament with elections to be held in two months.

There were mixed reports about whether calls for early elections had been accepted on Thursday, following mediation. Rumours trickled out of the MDP all day that elections had been agreed during mediation sessions conducted by India’s Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai.

Mathai claimed that the MDP had “reconsidered” its need to rally on Friday after suggestions that elections would be held, and put forward Dr Waheed’s ‘roadmap’ requesting the MDP’s cooperation in a National Unity Government, which would “work towards the conditions that will permit such elections to take place including the necessary constitutional amendments.”

Dr Waheed appeared less committal towards early elections in a press conference held yesterday for foreign media: “I believe the conditions have to be right. We have to have a calm atmoshpere, we have to address some of the deep rifts that we have in the political situation in the country, and then move towards free and fair election,” he claimed.

Halting street clashes, he said, was “not the only factor”.

“There is an economic factor here – our financial situation is not great and it hasn’t been for the last couple of years. We need to have guarantees that we are going to respect the rule of law, that we are going to uphold the Constitution and our judiciary is going to be independent – that it is going to be in such a way that anyone who fears justice deserves justice. If you don’t have justice, how can you go ahead?” Dr Waheed said.

Nasheed resigned on Tuesday February 7 under what he later claimed was duress. Earlier that morning, opposition protesters, aided by elements of the police and military, assaulted the Maldivian National Defence Force (MNDF) headquarters and took over the state broadcaster.

Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) rallied its supporters the following afternoon. A police crackdown on the protesters followed, leading to other protests across the country, and subsequent retaliations for the destruction of police property.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan

The following is a transcript of a press conference given by President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan to foreign media at 4:30pm on 16/2/2012. Also present besides the media was the President’s Political Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed and two unidentified men, one of whom identified himself as from Malaysia – “a friend passing through”.

Addendum: The individual was subsequently identified as Dr Ananda Kumarasiri, a 30 year career ambassador with the Malaysian Foreign Service.

SBS TV Australia (SBS): Can you comment on the decision of your brother, Naushad Waheed Hassan, to resign as Deputy of the UK High Commission?

Dr Mohamed Waheed (DMW): I didn’t appoint my brother to the high commission, he was appointed by the former president. I know where his loyalty is. He decided to quit and I respect his decision.

SBS: But he was very close to you?

DMW: This a very small country so you will find in any house there are people who belong to different political parties. It doesn’t surprise me.

SBS: But what he said must have been very painful – he wasn’t just resigning, he was saying you lacked character and you had been fooled into taking the role you are taking. It was very personal.

DMW: I have no comment.

Journalist: Is there a possibility of holding early elections or will you wait until 2013?

DMW: No. I really believe in elections. I have been through elections and I have fought for elections. I have been taken into custody for these reasons. I ran in a public election and was elected as a member of parliament for Male’ – the biggest constituency.

I ran the first modern political campaign in the country, ever. And then I ran with President Nasheed as his running mate. I really believe in free and fair elections. If I believe that was the time to hold elections then we would have free and fair elections – I would be the first. But I believe the conditions have to be right. We have to have a calm atmosphere, we have to address some of the deep rifts that we have in the political situation in the country, and then move towards free and fair election.

I know there are calls for an early election, and I am ready to engage in discussions with all the parties on this, but there has to be also commitments from everyone for a peaceful situation and engagement in peaceful dialogue.

SBS: I know of your reputation, you have a fine reputation – but I can’t understand why a man like you would be involved in a military takeover. I can’t understand that. What reasons do you have for that given your personal background?

DMW: I deny that it was a military takeover. I think the records have to be put straight. I have said I am open to an independent inquiry, and I am in the process of identifying people for such an inquiry position. I have sent some names already to MDP to see if they are acceptable to all the parties. As soon as we have a team acceptable to the parties we start an inquiry into this.

We have gone through the constitutional process. If a President resigns, if he is unable to serve, or has submitted his resignation, then the serving vice president has to step in. I was invited to do so by the speaker of the parliament.

SBS: [Nasheed’s resignation] was under duress. You are an educated man who has been deeply involved in the United Nations, you know that that when a General puts a gun to your head, even metaphorically, that is not a resignation. Do you not accept that?

DMW: I do not accept that.

Dr Ananda Kumarasiri: If I may inject, from the video tapes, I do not see how my colleague has got this impression that there was a coup. If there was a coup then [it would show] from the tapes… from the evidence.

DMW: I would not have associated myself with any coup. There was no irregular or unlawful takeover of power. This was not the case. I was watching what was going on on televsion like everybody else, and if you watch the tapes you wonder what really happened that day. I don’t really know what happened. There shall have to be an inquiry into it. As far as I know, what happened was the President resigned – we have videos of it, there was evidence of it, and his cabinet members were there – I was not asked to be there – he publicly announced his resignation in front of television. He could have said something, indicated that he was under duress – but he didn’t. And then I get a call from the Speaker telling me that he is expecting to receive resignation from the President. And as soon as he received that resignation he told me to come and I was sworn in by the Chief Justice.

As far as I’m concerned the whole process was legal, and I maintain the legitimacy of this government.

SBS: So you intend to continue the term? Don’t you think it would be appropriate for an interim government at the very least and move to an election? At the moment we’ve having tear gas and batons decide. We haven’t heard the people. Isn’t it your responsibility to ask the people what they want?

DMW: Absolutely. I know the constitution has provisions for an election in the next year and I can tell you that I will not be party to delaying that election in any way. I am committed to holding elections, as per the constitution, and if early elections have to be held, there are provisions for that too. You have to have a constitutional amendment.

SBS: Does it concern you that people in this country are terrified of you and the people around you? Does it concern you that dozens of people, whom you were colleagues with, were brutally beaten?

DMW: People are terrified because some people are propagating violence. We have seen so many police buildings burned down.

SBS: Those were buildings, not people.

DMW: The people have been affected by this. When people come out on the street and burn down buildings, and provoke violence, the police have to take action. Law and order has to be maintained. I do not condone violence. I have repeatedly told police they have to restrain themselves, and I will not tolerate police violence. I have been told MDP is planning violence activities [on February 18]. I can assue you police will maintain professional standards. I call on all our police forces to restrain themselves and abide by principles of human rights and the guidelines they have been given.

JJ Robinson: Is it true the MDP has been given a three day ultimatum to participate in a national unity government?

DMW: No ultimatum has been given to anyone. I can assure you. We will continue to remain open to discussion and dialogue, forever.

Journalist: You have informed that the MDP should join a national government by February 20.

DMW: No we haven’t, I deny that. I am not aware of it. If somebody has, then somebody else is doing this.

Journalist: On the President’s website there is a statement that says ‘inform us by Feb 20 if you want to join the national unity government’.

DMW: No, that is not true. I have certainly not signed anything to that effect, and until now I have not even heard about it.

Journalist: But it is on the website.

DMW: Anything can be on the website. I am categorically denying that there is an ultimatum to MDP. There is no ultimatum. I continue to remain wanting to engage with them, and I will continue to the last day.

JJ: Dr Waheed, how much control do you believe you have over the police and the military?

DMW: I have full control over them. I am not shy to take responsibility. Including for the law enforcement agencies.

Journalist: If the MDP continues not to join the government, what are the next steps?

DMW: We will continue to seek ways of working with them. I cannot force them – but there is no other choice. This country cannot afford a confrontational and violent approach.

Journalist: Nasheed, talking to the media, has said that India is losing its leverage [in the Maldives], and that China may get into the Maldives. He had not signed a defence agreement with China which the Maldives defence forces were to sign. What do you have to say about increasing Chinese influence in the Maldives?

DMW: Ultimately we have not signed any agreement since I became President. Whatever agreement we have is an agreement signed by the previous President and his ministers. So I categorically deny that. We have a very close relationship with India, and we will respect all the strategic and commercial agreements we have signed with India. This is not to be questioned.

Journalist: There are no defence deals with China?

DMW: We haven’t had any agreements with any country since I took over.

Journalist: What is the relationship between China and the Maldives and what will you do to promote the relationship between the two countries?

DMW: As you know while President Nasheed was in power, we established a Chinese mission in the Maldives. So we have a mission in the Maldives now, we have good relations with China, and like everyone else in the world we are trying to promote our trade with China. China emerging as one of the most powerful countries in the world and we will continue to work with China, for more trade and cultural relations.

JJ: One of the Maldives’ top diplomats – the Maldives Ambassador to the UN, Abdul Ghafoor Mohamed, stepped down live on Al Jazeera – not questioning the legitimacy of your presidency, but that he had ethical and moral concerns in particular the people with the people who had negotiated Nasheed’s surrender on February 7 then becoming police commissioner and defence minister in the new government – both of whom have strong links to the former government under Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Do you share those concerns?

DMW: Mr Ghafoor is very far away from Male’. I respect his moral judgement and so on, but it is not for me to say whether it right or worng. He is entitled to his moral position, but he was very far away when things were happening. We were right here.

JJ: For the international community many of the faces in the cabinet are new to them. But for a lot of Maldivian people they see people who have been in the former government, people who served under Gayoom. To what extent does the current composition of the cabinet suggest an old government, rather than a new government?

DMW: OK. Anything other than President Mohamed Nasheed’s government is now being painted as the old government, as a return to the old regime. Which is a really misleading way of looking at it. In this country most of us grew up and got education during the last 33 years, and most of the well educated people in this country worked in government. The government was the biggest employer in the country and continues to be so.

Therefore don’t be surprised that some people served in President Gayoom’s government. That doesn’t mean that anyone seen in the last 33 years has allegiance to a particular person. This is a very narrow way of looking at it. If you look at cabinet you can see I have been very careful in my selections. Most of them are very young and dynamic and well educated.

I have tried not to put many political leaders in it – it is mostly a technocratic government because we need to move forward in the next two years to an election, and get as much done as possible – including many good things that have been started in the last couple of years. We will implement the programs and it is necessary to have well educated people.

Journalist: Talking of the cabinet, there is a fear of growing religious hardliners and at the same time – your Home Minister [Dr Mohamed Jameel, former Justice Minister under Gayoom] has in the past made statements against India and certain communities and companies. How do you respond?

DMW: This is a Muslim country and there will be some traditional Islamic values. In that case we will have a representative from the Adhaalath Party in the government – we had one even under President Nasheed. That doesn’t mean I am encouraging people in a certain direction.

As for the Home Minister, he one of the best qualified people in criminal justice. He is a graduate from England with a PhD, and his views in a political rally or any other context should not be transferred to what he asked to do now. I am confident that members of cabinet will toe the line that we step in terms of policy, and any previous remarks will not affect the future direction of this government.

SBS: Very simple question – why did Nasheed have to go?

DMW: I’m not the only person who should answer that question, but since you ask me, my understanding is that he has lost support of a large segment of the population, and also the armed forces and law enforcement agencies.

A series of unlawful and unconstitutional things have built up over the years and people are genuinely concerned that we are moving away from the democratic principles we started with in the first place.

SBS: He may have been, but certainly now you are not moving towards an election? You had a police and army mutiny in which you were involved.

DMW: I think Preisdent Nasheed is responsible for creating that situation. He was a very powerful President able to issue orders. He was the head of the armed forces.

SBS: He didn’t keep that close?

DMW: No he didn’t keep it close with me. Even when events transpired on the 7th, I was not part of that. He did not inform me once. When he called other people to tell them he was resigning, he didn’t call me once. If he had asked me to help I would have gone there.

So I think he should take some responsiblity for what happened to him. He had a very good chance to continue, but I think he made some mistakes. History will judge.

SBS: Is there division within the cabinet about calling an election? The rumour is that you are very keen to move to an election, but other members of cabinet aren’t keen to do that.

DMW: Everyone in the cabinet has one interest in mind. Peaceful resolution of this conflict, and moving towards a free and fair election. That is the main interest. People are not convinced at the moment that we could hold an election today. Partly because there are so many deep divisions.

SBS: You have worked in Afghanistan, India and the United Nations. Whatever its faults, you know that the best resolution of political division is an election.

DMW: The conditions are not right for an election just now. If all the parties told me tomorrow that we should have an election, and that they would cease violence, I would have no problem.

Journalist: You met the parties today, what was their response?

DMW: They are all ready to engage with MDP. To work on a roadmap and move forward, including discussions about elections.

Journalist: Are you able to complete your cabinet if the MDP continues on its current stand?

DMW: The sooner we can get the cabinet together the better. The government has to function properly. We want to move forward and we are ready to talk, but we have to have some buy-in. We have been extending my hands all along, but what have we gotten so far? I had discussions with the head of MDP and the next day they came out on the street and we had confrontations in front of the media.

There is no violence in the country – people are going about their normal lives. It is calm. But the political divisions have to be resolved. We can’t live under the threat of violence and conflict. We are ready to engage and move forward.

This country is too small for violence and confrontation.

SBS: All the violence on the streets of the capital has been by police and their supporters – now your allies. They were the violent ones.

DMW: That is a matter of opinion.

SBS: No it’s not. Would you dispute that?

DMW: You know there was one instance where you saw police violence on camera. But there have been demostrations in this country for one month.

SBS: From the opposition.

DMW: There was violence there also. This is not the first time people have been sprayed with pepper spray or charged with batons. It has happened before. If you talk to members of parliament – of all parties – they will tell you personal stories of violent attacks.

So you cannot generalise just from one instance and say it is this party or that party. There is an endemic problem of violence and political rhetoric. We cannot have irresponsible political leaders continuing to do that. There is no alternative to peaceful dialogue. Some give and take is needed to move forward. That is what give and take is about.

JJ – You have maintained that the events of the 7th were not planned. However on the early morning of January 31 you met opposition leaders in this house, who subsequently gave a press conference in which they pledged allegience to you, called on you to take over the government from Mohamed Nasheed, and called on the police and military to follow your orders. Based on that press conference, which was widely reported in local media at the time, do you still maintain that the events of the 7th were spontaneous?

DMW: I said it was a spontaneous change as nobody really expected that events would turn out that way. You’re right, I met them, and they asked me whether in the eventuality that there was a change, would I be ready. Because I have very much been in the background here – not involved in most of the policy making and so on. But it is my constitutional responsibility to step in. All I said was ‘this is purpose I was sworn in for’, and that as Vice President I was ready for such a situation. That was it – nobody expected things to turn out this way. Who expected police to come out and demonstrate? It was totally bizarre.

Journalist: That means certain political parties had anticipated a possible change that might come.

DMW: I don’t know that it was so much anticipation as their wish that there would be a change of government.

LeMonde: You say that since you took over your government has not signed any agreements with other governments. But to put it another way, do you intend to review agreements signed? Particularly the understanding Mr Nasheed had with India. Will you review that?

DMW: We will not. I spoke to the Prime Minister of India. Every dignitary from India that has come here I have assured we will continue to respect all the agreements we have signed with them. I can only be accountable for the time I am in government.

During my tim in government there will be no turning back and we will respect all the agreements, all the commercial agreements we have signed.

LeMonde: One agreement was that China not increase its influence in the Maldives. Will you respect these agreements?

DMW: We have a special relationship with India and special agreements on our security and defence. Those will continue to remain the same. I cannot comment on a particular country.

JJ: Umar Naseer, the Vice President of Gayoom’s political party the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), said at a rally several nights ago in front of at least a thousand people that he had personlly warned Nasheed that there would be bloodshed unless he stepped down. Given comments such as this coming from other former opposition parties do you still maintain that there was no intimidation in the resignation of Mohamed Nasheed?

DMW: Umar Naseer should explain himself. I cannot explain for him. He is not known to be someone who is particularly careful with what he says. You know him better. Whatever he said in the political rally – and I have heard people have said that he said these things – you should really ask him. He is around in Male’.

Journalist: The Maldives has had strong relations with Sri Lanka and currently Nasheed’s wife and children are in Sri Lanka. Will this affect the current government’s relationship with Sri Lanka?

DMW: No, Sri Lanka again is very close to us. We are like brothers and sisters. We share our language, history and culture. This question doesn’t have to be raised at all. President Nasheed’s family are free to be whereever they want to be. I can assure you we have the best relationship with Sri Lanka. I have spoken to President Rajapaksa more than once and I don’t think we have to worry about it. All nationals – from India, Sri Lanka – are free to stay here and we will do our best to protect them.

JJ: What is a the status of the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed, around whom many of these events have centred? Is he back on the bench? Has he been reinstated?

DMW: [Consults with Dr Hassan Saeed] Well, you see my advisor tells me that the guy has already taken leave.

Dr Hassan Saeed (DHS): He has taken one month’s leave for his personal issues.

DMW: It is for the judiciary to decide what to do with him, not for me. I don’t want to interfere in the judiciary. I want our constitution to be respected, and work with everybody to make our constitution work. This is a new constitution, and it is the first time we are trying it out. And so there are difficulties in it. We need to find ways of solving it. It is time for us to work together, and if there are problems with the judicary we need to work together to solve them – they are intelligent good people in the judiciary and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC). We welcome assistance from the Commonwealth and United Nations to develop programs and build the capacity of the judiciary.

This is true also for the executive and the legislature. We need to work togather to build our democracy and consolidate our democracy.

JJ: If I could address this to Dr Hassan Saeed: as I understand it you in 2005 as Attorney General under former President Gayoom were the first person to raise concerns about the conduct of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, in a letter to Gayoom. Your concerns – among others – included that he has instructed underage victims of child sexual assault to reenact their attack in a courtroom in front of the perpetrator. Are you satisfied with the investigation against the judge, and if this something you believe still needs to be looked into?

DHS: As chief legal advisor to the government at that time, I had raised issues with the in-charge of the judiciary at that time. In that constitution the President was the head of the judiciary. So it was my legal and moral obligation to raised that issue with him, which I did.

I did not know if it was followed up. Obviously if there are issues it has to be resolved in accordance with the established laws and institutions.

Journalist: The tourism industry has been particularly affected by this. What measures have been taken to help the economy?

DMW: You are right. The tourism sector is the most important sector of our economy and we cannot afford violence on the streets of Male’. This is why it is so important for us to move forward in an agreed roadmap towards elections. The tourism sector so far has not been severely affected. There have been some cancellations. But lots of people are coming and having a good time in the Maldives, and going back. I hope the situation will stabilise further and tourism increase.

We have had a steady increase in tourism over the last couple of years now. It can [continue] only if we take violence out of the equation. I hope nobody is going to call for street violence or burning down public buildings and damaging private offices.

SBS: You know that when a vote is taken away from people that is a likely resault, and that governments which come to power under hails of tear gas and police, normally exit power under hails of tear gas. Are you waiting for that?

DMW: There is a constitutional mechanism for that. I did not take power by force – I was sworn into office according to the consitution.

SBS: Because your superior was forced out.

DMW: I was already elected, on the same ticket as President Nasheed. I got the same vote as President Nasheed, and we came in together. The reason why I am here is that in any country, if something happens to the President, the Vice President takes over. We have the same mandate.

It is not for you or me to decide if it is a coup. Why didn’t he say it in front of the television when everybody was there? He was not alone, his cabinet members were there, it was not like people were going to crack down on him.

SBS: He had mutinious police in the square, he had the army turning against him, he had former police and army chiefs entering the cabinet room giving orders…

DMW: All this was caused by himself.

SBS: I agree perhaps he was indelicate or lacked political skill, but he was still the elected representative of a country – the first elected representative of this country in 30 years.

DMW: If he was under duress, if he had had the guts to say in front of the camera, “Dear citizens, I am being asked to resign under duress”, we all would have been out on the street. I would have been out on the street. I have been out on the street with him before, and I would have been out on the street with him again. But it was a matter of undermining our constitution.

Let us have an inquiry, and come out with the facts.

Journalist: If there is an election, are you going to contest against Mr Nasheed?

DMW: I don’t know. At the moment my preoccuptation is to work with everybody, be a facilitator. I have said I won’t have any of my prty in the cabinet. I am fully committed to being a facilitator. If everybody agrees and says “Waheed, you shouldn’t stand”, I would accept it.

LeMonde: You say that MDP is planning a violent demonstration [Friday] night?

DWH: These are the reports I have received?.

LeMonde: You have reports convincing you that they plan to be violent?

DMW: This is the information I have received, but I hope it is not the case.

Journalist: In your opinion, how is this going to end?

DMW: I think with a little bit of time. The last time we had violence was on the 8th, and since then it has been calm. I hope people have the time to think a little bit, and reflect. I am optimistic. we will be able to work out a peaceful way of moving forward.

Journalist: There are allegations that police have accepted money and corruption is rampant within the police. Are investigations being conducted into this?

DMW: I am not aware of this, and no cases have come to me since I took over. If there was I’m sure the former President would have done something about it.

Journalist: If the street violence stops, will you have early elections?

DMW: As I said, let us talk. Violence is not the only factor. There is an economic factor here – our financial situation is not great and it hasn’t been for the last couple of years. We need to have guarantees that we are going to respect the rule of law, that we are going to uphold the consitution and our judiciary is going to be independent – that it is going to be in such a way that anyone who fears justice deserves justice. If you don’t have justice, how can you go ahead?

Journalist: Do you have any specific economic strategies?

We will continue the economic policies of the former government, and I have already announced the forming of an economic council. I will appointment distinguished economists in the country who will review the economy to put it on a good footing.

I have appointed an economic development minister who is young and competent, and a tourism minister, and I am looking for a finance minister at the moment.

I can assure you that you will have the best minds in the country working to take the economy forward. I don’t claim to be an expert, and I will not tell people how to run this country. My job – the job of any top executive – is to find the right people and help them do their work well. I have learned this in my many years of international experience.

LeMonde: Mr Nasheed introduced a new fiscal system, in particular income and corporate taxes. Will you change this system?

DMW: So far we have not decided to change anything, but we will ask the economic council. If there is something that does not work we will correct it. But there is no massive overhaul of policies. There is no deadline. It is not hard and fast deadline.

SBS: He was already president – why would Nasheed want to join your national unity government?

DMW: He should join a coalition, because he came to power in a coalition. And he decided to rescind. He couldn’t find somebody to work with him. We only had 25 percent of the vote – we had to go and ask other political parties to join, like Dr Hassan Saeed. and then we won. We had a coalition. We couldn’t work as a coalition – why not? This is a small country. You cannot rule by yourself. It is too small for one particular party to rule everybody.

SBS: So you would have him in your cabinet?

DMW: Absolutely.

SBS: As Vice President?

DMW: I have currently named a Vice President. But there are other people I would work with in the same cabinet.

JJ: The MDP has floated the idea of elections in two months – you’ve said this is too short a time. The rumour flying around today was that Nasheed may have been negotiated up to six months. Is there any truth in that, following the meetings held today?

DMW: No, there is no such timeline. The timeline is to be worked out in open discussion with regard to elections.

Journalist: So you are willing to sit down with Nasheed and decide on a date to hold elections?

DMW: We are ready to discuss.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

India backs early elections

India’s Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai has said the country will back early elections in the Maldives, and pushing for cross-party cooperation and any “necessary constitutional amendments”.

Statements from Mathai were sent to media attached to a document entitled ‘Maldives Elements of a Possible Way Forward’.

“The President [Dr Mohamed Waheed] has come out with a roadmap for an inclusive political process which provides a very good basis for the parties to resolve their differences,” Mathai said.

“Consequent to my discussions, the following formulation was agreed upon by all the parties concerned: ‘In the interests of national reconciliation and to encourage harmony between our citizens, the Government of National Unity will hold discussions with all relevant parties to conduct elections by an early date’,” he said.

“The MDP, on its part, committed itself to encouraging an atmosphere appropriate to the holding of elections. In this context, we understand that their decision to hold a rally tomorrow is being reconsidered,” he added.

“The Government of National Unity will work towards the conditions that will permit such elections to take place including the necessary constitutional amendments. Our understanding is that elections would be held as early as considered feasible by all concerned. This is to be discussed by the parties.”

Mathai said that he had met the leaders of all the main political parties, “including Mohamed Nasheed of the MDP, Abdulla Yameen of the PPM and Thasmeen Ali of the DRP. I also met the Chief Justice and the Speaker of Parliament.

“I reiterated our belief that there is need for a Maldivian-led process for reconciliation and resolving political differences through constitutional means,” he said.

The reaction to the statement from both sides was initially unclear – India’s press conference was to have been held earlier on Thursday afternoon, but was reported delayed due to “new developments”, according to one official. It was later held at 7:00pm.

Meanwhile a press conference due to be held by the MDP this evening was cancelled, while during an earlier meeting with foreign media, Dr Waheed and his newly-appointed political advisor, Dr Hassan Saeed, refrained from committing to early elections and instead reiterated the need for the “right conditions”.

However in a statement on the President’s Office website, linking to the document, Dr Waheed said the roadmap was a “victory” for Maldivians.

“I have an unswerving commitment to the principles of our constitution and a clear vision of how our country can move forward. I am by nature a man who prefers to lead by consensus. This is an opportunity for us to regain the respect of the international community but most importantly continue to build a safe, democratic and prosperous Maldives for all our people,” Dr Waheed said.

“I wish to personally thank the Indian Foreign Secretary for his good offices in facilitating this agreement which has needed all sides to put aside partisan interest for the sake of the country”.

The version of the document on the President’s Office website contained additional paragraphs, including one stating that “the Government of National Unity will ensure the creation of conditions for genuine, free and fair multi-party elections, providing the opportunity for all candidates to compete equally in the elections in 2013. It will strengthen the capacity of the Electoral Commission. It will ensure access of all registered parties and candidates to the media and other means of transmitting positions and platforms and will ensure the political neutrality of the public media. Moreover, it will invite international monitoring of the electoral preparations and the elections.”

Mathai is the second top Indian diplomat dispatched to the Maldives this week, following an earlier visit by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s Special Envoy M Ganapathi.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President refutes three day ultimatum for MDP to participate in National Unity Government

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik had reportedly given a three day ultimatum to the former ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to inform its decision on joining the cabinet as he pushed forward a plan to form a national unity government.

However during a press conference with foreign media at 4:30pm on Thursday afternoon, Dr Waheed adamantly denied giving such an ultimatum, instead saying he would always remain open to MDP’s involvement in his government. However the statement was still available on the President’s Office website as of midnight February 16.

“No we haven’t, I deny that. I am not aware of it. If somebody has, then somebody else is doing this,” he said.

According to the statement – released by the President’s Office on Thursday – Dr Waheed had forwarded a letter to the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s President Dr Ibrahim Didi, requesting he inform the party’s decision on joining the national unity government before February 20.

“The President said that at a time when the country is deeply divided, the way forward in achieving national aspirations was through working together and by a fully inclusive government. He, therefore, urged MDP to join the national unity government that he was striving to form,” the statement read.

“The President also stressed the need to resolve the existing political rifts and to find a way forward. In this regard, he said, he hoped that his proposition would bring an end to the long standing divisions that had existed in the country.”

In the letter, President Waheed also stated that he believed that, despite the political differences, “the MDP President would also view the need to complete the reform process. He also stressed that the reform process would take time to complete.”

Therefore, he said, “he hoped that the MDP President would see that the time left till 2013 elections could be an opportunity for the country to address the political problems, identify issues and to work together to complete the reform process.”

Speaking to Minivan News Dr. Waheed’s spokesperson Masood Imad added that if the MDP did not respond to the letter in the given time, “there are ways to work around it” – although he did not specify those ways.

“By the end of the 20th if they dont give an answer they can do it on the 21st or may be later,” Imad observed. “We will not close our doors. As President Waheed had said before, we will welcome MDP with open arms always.”

Dr Waheed has put forward the ultimatum in the face of  pressure from his predecessor former President Mohamed Nasheed from MDP, who has denounced Dr Waheed’s government as illegitimate, claiming that he was forced to resign in a bloodless coup d’etat  on February 7 at the hands of rogue police and military officers.

Dr Waheed has earlier said that he wanted his cabinet – now compromising of mostly opposition members – to “represent all major political parties”, and said he hoped that MDP would be represented. Dr Waheed also said he would “keep posts vacant for them”. However the MDP has so far rejected any participation in Dr Waheed’s government and has called for early elections in the next two months.

India on Thursday evening amended its position on the Maldives and backed calls for early elections.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)