Day: June 6, 2012

Sixty resort islands in limbo after political turmoil strikes CSR programme

The government has refuted local media reports that it is considering halting the lease of 60 islands award for resort development by the former administration.

The islands in question were to be leased under a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) tourism programme initiated by the former government. The programme faced heavy criticism from the start, especially from opposition figures now senior officials in the current government.

Critics alleged that the CSR programme was against the law as the islands were awarded in the absence of an open bidding system, and had favored Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) members.

The National Planning Council (NPC) – formed by the previous government and currently “under review” – leased islands for resort development to interested individuals, with the condition they undertook a development project on an inhabited island, such as building water and sewerage systems.

The development project had to be completed to an “acceptable level” on an island of the government’s choice within an allocated time frame, before the resort would be leased for development. In addition, the resort would be owned by a joint-venture company formed between the state and the resort developer,  with the government holding a five percent share of the company.

The NPC had awarded contracts to at least 10 parties to develop 10 different islands. The fate of these contracts are still unclear as the potential resort developers await a decision by the government. The government, in turn, claim to be waiting for the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to make a decision.

“The issue is not in our hands now. There are some legal issues to be addressed. Even the 10 islands with contracts might be cancelled. We will decide on it once the ACC gives its recommendations,” said the Minister of Tourism, Ahmed Adheeb.

Meanwhile,  local newspaper Haveeru on Monday reported a “prominent” tourism ministry official stating that the government had decided not to lease the islands awarded “without bids”, in line with the ACC’s recommendations on the issue. Around 60 of the awarded islands will no longer to be leased, according to Haveeru.

“We have decided to cancel the proposals of the islands without agreements. In addition, a decision pertaining to the islands where agreements have been made will be taken after the ongoing discussions with the ACC,” the official told Haveeru.

President of the ACC, Hassan Luthfy denied reports that the commission had specifically ordered the NPC to discontinue the CSR programme.

“During the former administration, we recommended the NPC award all projects within an open bidding system. It did apply to the CSR programme but we did not specifically ask for the CSR projects to be stopped,” Luthfy told Minivan News.

The ACC began investigating the CSR programme in May 2012 and a decision is yet to be made.

Speaking to Minivan News, member of the NPC and former Economic Minister Mahmoud Razee defended the CSR-programme.

“The  programme did not break the law. The tourism law allows two options by which resort islands can be leased: either through the bidding system or by the government holding a share of the company owning the leased resort,” said Razee.

He further claimed the CSR programme was more egalitarian and would enable more people to be involved in the tourism industry, rather than just those with access to large upfront capital.

“The programme was completely open for anyone to apply. It was conducted in a very transparent manner. It was also more efficient than the bidding system where people would just put down huge amounts of money and then later be unable to develop the resort. Even now there are about 60 islands awarded through bids that are still not developed,” he said.

“The CSR programme cuts down the initial costs for developers and gives more people the opportunity to own resorts,” Razee explained.

‘Sim’ Ibrahim Mohamed, one of the individuals awarded an island and under the CSR programme, agreed.

“According to tourism law there is no need for an open bid if the government has a share in the resort. The whole motivation behind the theme of the CSR programme was very noble. It was a very sound, well thought-out policy by the previous government,” said Ibrahim.

In contrast to the bidding system which “always favored people who already had money”, the CSR programme “made everyone equal in terms of the ability to enter the tourism industry as an owner,” he explained.

The CSR programme also opened a doorway for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) to enter the tourism industry, said Ibrahim.

In addition, he said that leasing islands to resort developers in exchange for providing basic facilities on inhabited islands, such as water and sewerage system,s was “a very good way of doing it”, taking the country’s economic situation into consideration.

Asked  how the current limbo state of the CSR programme would affect investor confidence in the country, Ibrahim noted “well, in this instance, the investors ran away.”

“This government has been in power for over 100 days and still nothing has happened. We don’t know. We are waiting, the investors are waiting. So it is just money lost, it is opportunity lost. It’s not only investors’ confidence but also financial institutions such as banks that lend you money.”

Although the government has not reached a decision yet, it still remains skeptical about the CSR programme.

“I don’t think the people who got the resorts have the financial capacity to conduct the projects in the islands,” said tourism minister Adheeb. “There are no documents with any evidence of their funds.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former Commission of National Inquiry panel releases timeline “for public opinion”

The former three-member panel of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) has released a ‘timeline’ of events it claims took place from the period of January 16 to February 7, for the stated purpose of “finding public opinion”.

The composition of the panel has since been revised to include a representative of former President Mohamed Nasheed and a retired Singaporean judge, as well as international monitors from both the Commonwealth and UN.

The 282-point Dhivehi document does not feature any input from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), who contested the panel’s impartiality prior to the re-composition. The report begins its findings on the day police attempted to summon Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, to the day the controversial transfer of power took place. The panel conducted interviews with assorted non-MDP participants, however the report does not source its findings.

The night of February 6

The timeline suggests the initial ‘turning point’ of the unrest began on the night of February 6, after the supporters of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) arrived at the artificial beach in Male’ where supporters of the coalition of then-opposition parties had already been protesting, calling for the release of Judge Abdulla and for the constitution to be upheld.

The timeline states that the Specialist Operation (SO) officers of the police had stationed themselves in Heniveru Stadium, in preparation to prevent any violence that may have taken place if supporters from both sides clashed.

The report stated that police intervened after they received information that the situation was deteriorating from two police officers who were there to assess the situation.

It states that police intervention calmed the situation and cordoned a security line between the two protesting parties, after forcing them further behind the sides of the area they had been protesting.

The three member panel alleged that Minister of Home Affairs Hassan Afeef ordered Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh to withdraw police officers who had been stationed on the site. The Commissioner sent two officers to assess the situation, who reported back stating that the situation had deteriorated, which the Commissioner relayed to the Minister.

The Minister repeated the order but the Commissioner of Police refused to comply, stating that the situation could get worse if the police withdrew their forces.

According to the report, after the commissioner refused, President Nasheed himself called the commissioner and ordered him to withdraw police from the scene.

Faseeh then reportedly sent the Deputy Commissioner of Police to assess the situation, and he too relayed the situation was worsening.

The report claimed that the president called the commissioner a second time and ordered him to withdraw police from the area, stating that he “could not trust the police”.

After this order, the report said that the commissioner personally took the decision to contact the Male’ Area Commander of the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF), asking that the MNDF intervene as the police were withdrawing.

The statement read that the tactical officer of the SO opposed the idea of withdrawing police from the area, stating that both the protesting parties had weapons that could be used for violence, including wooden sticks and metal rods.

The SO police present in the area refused to withdraw without the MNDF arriving to take over their position, the timeline claimed.

The panel also claimed that a resignation letter was drafted by the police commissioner and was left on his table, as “the commissioner did not believe that the withdrawal of the police was the right decision.”

After the MNDF took over the area, the panel claimed that President Nasheed called the Male’ area commander and ordered him to withdraw MNDF officers from the area, giving him assurances that the MDP supporters would not resort to any kind of violence.

However, the statement read that when MNDF withdrew their officers from the area, violent confrontations began and there “bottles and objects” thrown by both protesting parties, which led the MNDF to intervene again.

February 7

The statement claimed that some of the SO police officers who had been in the Artifical Beach area then went to the MDP protest camp and vandalised the premises, and attacked some of the MDP supporters inside.

An MNDF SWAT team arrived after the SO police officers left premises, “to guard the area”, the panel stated.

The statement read that, as the usual routine of the police is to fall in at the Republican Square after protests ended; the police officers retreated and convened to the area.

The panel said that initially the MNDF attempted to arrest the police officers who by then had begun to gather in Republic Square, adjacent to police and military headquarters. However the MNDF reportedly decided to negotiate with the police officers as the military was outnumbered and police had similar equipment to the MNDF officers.

According to the report, police told the MNDF officers who were sent to negotiate with them that would begin following orders again after they were given assurances that they would not be ordered to carry out any unlawful orders, and that no action be taken against any of the officers regarding their involvement.

“The MNDF officers assured them that the MNDF would not confront police officers in the area,” the panel claimed.

During the negotiations, the panel claimed that police requested to meet the commissioner of police. The MNDF officials proposed officers go into the MNDF headquarters to to meet the commissioner, but police said they wanted to meet the commissioner inside police headquarters.

It was decided that the commissioner would meet meet in Iskandhar Koshi, an MNDF barracks on the other side of Male’, to the police officers initially agreed. However, police rejected the idea after the MNDF insisted the police go without their weapons and riot gear.

President’s arrival to Republic Square and his resignation

The panel claimed that in the early morning of February 7, between 5:00am to 6:00am, President Nasheed informed the commissioner that he wanted to meet the police officers who were at Republican Square.

It further claimed that the President also ordered the commissioner to meet the police officers in Republic Square, however the commissioner left military headquarters and entered police headquarters without meeting police gathered outside the building.

Before meeting the police, Nasheed asked one of the MNDF commanders whether he had any reservations over arresting the protesting police officers, to which the commander reportedly replied that he did.

The President then reportedly told the commander that it would be better if he stayed at home for the time being, however two other commanders also told the President that they had reservations and left.

The panel claimed that Nasheed then told the police officers that they had “done something wrong” and requested they hand themselves over to the MNDF. Police refused the order.

According the panel, Nasheed then returned to military headquarters and ordered the MNDF officers inside the barracks to go outside and arrest the officers who had disobeyed him.

At this point, some of the MNDF officers left the barracks and joined the police officers protesting.

While Nasheed was inside the MNDF base, the panel claimed that the President’s secretariat informed cabinet members that there would be a cabinet meeting, but failed to inform Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan as two key staff of the VP’s secretariat had not reported to work.

The panel also claimed that the then-President of the MDP, Dr Ibrahim Didi, called Nasheed and discussed how to resolve the ongoing unrest. Nasheed reportedly asked for Didi’s help in releasing a joint statement by the president and leaders of the opposition parties.

It said that Didi had then contacted opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) Parliamentary Group Leader, Abdulla Yameen, however both of them declined to help unless Nasheed personally requested they do so.

Dr Didi then informed Nasheed of this response, who told him to make a decision after discussing the matter with MDP Parliamentary Group Leader MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih and former Chairperson of the Party, MP Mariya Ahmed Didi.

The panel alleged that Dr Didi tried contacting MP Mariya Ahmed Didi, who did not respond, and then contacted MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, who said he would get back to Dr Didi after consulting on the issue with Nasheed.

After the reply from MP Solih was delayed, Didi reportedly called Nasheed back, and was told that the High Commissioner of India, Dnyaneshwar M Mulay, would contact him.

According to the panel, Mulay contacted Dr Didi and asked him to come to the High Commission. When Dr Didi arrived to the High Commission, the opposition Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) Parliamentary Group leader Yameen was already there.

According to the panel, as Dr Didi, Mulay and Yameen were discussing how to resolve the crisis, MP Solih called Yameen and informed him that Nasheed was going to resign.

Didi then reportedly contacted Nasheed and asked to him to give the phone to Yameen.

According to the panel, Nasheed informed Yameen that he was going to resign and asked him to ensure the safety of his family, to which Yameen replied that he would do everything to ensure the safety of Nasheed’s family.

The meeting adjourned after the president informed them that he would resign.

New MNDF commander

Meanwhile, according to the panel, two civilians: resigned police officer Abdulla Riyaz (the new Police Commissioner) and dismissed MNDF officer Ahmed Nazim (now the Defence Minister), entered the MNDF headquarters reportedly on the invitation of the Minister of Defence and National Security, Tholath Ibrahim.

After discussions with Nasheed in the MNDF barracks, Nazim came out to the crowd and revealed that he had asked Nasheed to resign unconditionally before 1:30pm that afternoon, along with the commissioner of police and his deputies.

According to the panel, Nazim told the crowd that his demands were “non-negotiable”.

The protesters were then informed that Nasheed would resign, and would announce this in the President’s Office.

According to the panel, Nasheed wrote the resignation letter inside the President’s Office, and then announced it on state television – which by this stage had been stormed by a second group of police and protesters.

CNI statement “lacks legitimacy

The MDP – now in opposition – said it would not formally comment on the statement prior to the release of an official statement.

However, an MDP official told Minivan News that the party did not consider the timeline “substantial”, and said it “lacked legitimacy”.

The party was “not even interested” in the timeline because the investigation would start from scratch under the new composition.

”The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) has asked the government to change the composition of the commission and the government has agreed to it. I think the current co-chair of the commission thinks that his work is over,” the party official said.

The premature release of the timeline “for public comment” was “not a good thing”, he added.

The CNI claimed that if anyone wished to propose amendments to the timeline, they should submit amendments before June 21.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MP Rasheed committed to MDP despite support for Majlis speaker

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ahmed Rasheed said he remains committed to the party even if he is “punished” by its Parliamentary Group for not supporting a no-confidence motion forwarded against Majlis Speaker Abdulla Shahid.

Rasheed told Minivan News today that he expected to remain an elected member of the party, which he continued to support, despite standing by his position to back the parliamentary speaker against a reported three-line whip enforced by the MDP.

During a vote of no confidence taken against Shahid yesterday, 45 out of the 74 parliament members present in the sitting voted in favour of the speaker and 25 voted against him. Two members abstained. MDP MPs Hassan Adil and Ahmed Rasheed were said to have voted against their party line. MDP MPs Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed and MP Ali Riza abstained.

MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said that the MPs who voted against the no confidence motion would now be required to explain themselves to the party’s Parliamentary Group Leader, MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih.

Hamid added that the MDP had not yet decided on what course of action may be taken to deal with the MPs who voted against the whip at a time when the party trails in parliamentary support to a coalition of government-aligned parties.  The MDP currently stands alone as an opposition party against the coalition government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, which it alleges was brought to power in a “coup d’etat”.

“I wouldn’t go as far as to say that we will do anything rash. Under these stressful circumstances we have to be disciplined as a party,” Ghafoor explained in regards to the possible measures that could be taken against MPs who had not supported the vote.

While the exact nature of action to be taken by the party against members who voted against the bill is presently unknown, MP Rasheed said he would not be looking to switch his political allegiance even when potentially facing being reprimanded or expelled.

“I believe in the MDP manifesto. There is no question to me that it is the only party that actually has a manifesto,” he claimed. “In my mind, there is also no one trying to force me out of the party.”

Last month, the MDP’s former President Dr Ibrahim Didi and former Vice President Alhan Fahmy switched allegiances to the Jumhoree Party (JP). The decision was taken after the MDP’s National Congress passed a majority vote to remove both men from their respective leadership posts after they stood accused of making statements contradictory to the party’s official line.

Despite pledging his allegiance to the party today, Rasheed maintained his support for Shahid in the no confidence motion, claiming that the present speaker, out of 77 parliamentary members, was the “only person right now” who should have the Majlis chair.

Despite Shahid representing the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Rasheed contend that the speaker – due to a perceived lack of power in the position of his party – would not directly support former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and his Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).  The PPM was formed last year after an increasingly bitter war of words between current DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and Gayoom, who had originally founded the party. The war of words saw the party split between supporters loyal to Gayoom and those in favour of Thasmeen’s tenure.

“Discipline”

Questioned as to whether the MDP, through its Parliamentary Group, would be looking to discipline the MPs who failed to back the party line, Ghafoor would not be drawn into the possible repercussions until an internal review was complete.

“The issue is that these MPs went against the whipline. This has been noted by the Parliamentary group Leader.  He now wants to find out why,” he said. “If they go against the party line they must have a good explanation for doing so.”

Ghafoor claimed that as a party, the MDP had generally been “disciplined” in ensuring solidarity among its members during parliamentary voting – a decision he said had afforded it the best record among fellow parties.

“There have of course been mishaps from time to time where people have gone against the party line,” he said.

Ghafoor took the example of former Party President Dr Ibrahim Didi and Vice President Alhan Fahmy as a notable example of where its members had been reprimanded.

“At this delicate time, [voting against the party line] does serve to reduce confidence in the party,” he said.

“Major principles” were at stake in yesterday’s high-profile no-confidence motion, Ghafoor said, adding that there was particular pressure from grassroots supporters to ensure the no-confidence vote succeeded.

“This is nothing personal, but the party supporters are in no mood to tolerate such actions from their MPs,” he said.

Ghafoor claimed that whatever action the party may decide to take against MPs voting against the official MDP line, it would not act in a “rash” manner.

The MDP Parliamentary Group has maintained that it has held “serious reservations” for some time about the Parliamentary Speaker’s ability to pass policies into legislation – despite his capabilities and understanding of national politics.

Speaker support

Speaking during yesterday’s debate, DRP Leader Thasmeen stated that the no-confidence motion had been forwarded amid baseless accusations.  He defended his fellow party member, saying that he had been executing the responsibilities of the speaker in accordance with the parliament rules and procedures.

Thasmeen further claimed that the motion was an attempt by MDP to “break” the coalition after the party leadership’s recent “political failures.”

“Such a motion will not impact the ‘unity’ between the parties in the coalition supporting the government of President Waheed. So therefore I must say, yet again this is another wrong step taken by the MDP leadership,” Thasmeen added.

PPM spokesperson MP Ahmed Mahloof stated that despite his being an outspoken critic of Shahid who made several statements in the media and the parliament floor, he would stand by the speaker’s side today.

“Yesterday, the PPM Parliamentary Group (PG) came to a conclusion that this motion is a ‘trap’ set up by the MDP to ‘finish off’ the people and the ruling coalition,” he said.

“Today at a time where Abdulha Shahid is facing a grave matter at hand, I will stand by him. Abdulla Shahid will get all the votes from PPM. What we ask is that he act justly and equally,” he added.

MDP MP Ali Waheed during the debate alleged that the motion would reveal those MPs who spoke “in two mouths”, referring to the PPM MPs allegations of that Shahid and Thasmeen had cut deals with GMR and the government of former President Mohamed Nasheed to support the privatisation of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Family of stabbing victim Muheeth to hold 10 minutes of silence

The family of 21 year-old Abdul Muheeth ‘Bobby’ who was stabbed to death outside the Finance Ministry of February 19, has organised 10 minutes of silence in memory of his death.

The 10 minutes of silence is to be held on Thursday at Ameenee Magu from 12:30pm to 12:40pm in front of the Finance Ministry, the area where he was killed.

Muheeth’s family said the event was open for the public to take part, and appealed for as many as possible to take part.

According to the ‘Justice for Bobby’ Facebook page created by his family, after the 10 minutes of silence attendees will be invited to pray.

Muheeth’s family said the event was the beginning of their work against gang violence, and said they have realised that more innocent lives could be lost as the city of Male’ was no longer safe for anyone.

‘’A moment of silence will be observed in remembrance of our dear brother Bobby, who was brutally killed by some evil gangsters on February 19th 2012,” the family said. “Please join with us to honor and pay respect to our innocent brother. Thank you!’’

The ‘Justice for Bobby’ Facebook page has since been ‘liked’ by 13,000 people, with moving comments posted by many family members.

‘’It’s so hard to even look at your photos, I get flashbacks of the night I held you in my arms when you were covered in blood…. I tried… I lied.. I told him ‘Don’t worry, everything is going to be fine.. Just be strong. It’s just a scratch’,” said his brother.

“I never realised how many stab marks were on his body until I looked at myself… I was covered in Bobby’s blood, from head to toe… words can’t explain how much it hurts to lose you like that.. I will try as hard as I can. One way or another, I will find justice,” he wrote.

Bobby’s girlfriend wrote: ‘’I saw u in my dreams last night… I’m glad I saw u, we were talking about our marriage.. I’m looking forward for that day so much… The day you and I can be one.. But maybe God has another plan for us, something wonderful for us in heaven perhaps. Miss the way u made me feel around u… Miss the sweet conversations we had… and most of all, miss fighting with u… the fact that i miss u so much and there is nothing i can do about it, is killing me inside.. i want to talk to u, hug u, hold ur hand, and be around u all the time…”

A cousin wrote a poem: “I’m glad he feels no pain now – he lives in a perfect land, I can hear the soft voice and the see the sweet smile on his face, I lie in bed and cry at night, and I don’t feel any better in the morning light, And I will love and miss him forever, until the day we are again together, together in that perfect place above, filled with caring, sharing and love, but until that day comes – I will wipe my tears away.”

Meanwhile, police have a statement saying that cases have been forwarded against Muhujath Ahmed Naasih of Abulagee Ge on Gahdhoo in Gaaf Dhaal Atoll, Mohamed Maimoon of Zaithoonige, on Naifaru of Lhaviyani Atoll, and Ali Mushahfau of Sultan Villa on Maradhoo in Seenu Atoll.

The Criminal Court and Juvenile Court have begun the hearings of the case, which continues in court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Reporters Without Borders condemns stabbing of Hilath Rasheed: “All the hallmarks of a targeted murder attempt”

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned the stabbing of well-known Maldivian journalist and blogger Ismail ‘Hilath’ Rasheed.

Rasheed had his throat slashed outside his house in Male’ around 8:15pm on Monday night, and was rushed to ADK Hospital for emergency surgery. Sources at the hospital said that the attack severed his trachea (windpipe), missing a vital artery “by millimetres”, and initially gave him a five percent chance of survival.

Hospital staff stabilised Rasheed’s condition around 2:30am on Tuesday, and as of Wednesday evening his condition was said to be improving. An informed source told Minivan News that Rasheed was unable to speak due to his injuries, but had communicated with his parents in writing.

“This knife attack has all the hallmarks of a targeted murder attempt,” Reporters Without Borders said in a statement.

“Rasheed has made many enemies through his outspoken blogging. The authorities in charge of the investigation should not rule out the possibility that this was linked to his journalistic activity. He is a well-known journalist who has repeatedly been censored, arrested and threatened.

“The police must, as a matter of urgency, put a stop to the harassment of Rasheed and take the issue of his safety seriously. Any lack of response on their part will constitute a criminal failure to assist a person in danger,” RSF stated.

The organisation noted that Rasheed had previously been attacked on December 10, 2011, suffering a fractured skull “while attending a peaceful demonstration in support of religious tolerance.”

“The police then arrested him for taking part in the demonstration and held him until 9 January,” RSF added, noting that Rasheed’s blog, www.hilath.com, had also been blocked on the orders of Ministry of Islamic Affairs on 19 November 2011 on the grounds that it contained “anti-Islamic” material.

“If it is confirmed that the attack was prompted by his journalism and blogging, Rasheed would be the first journalist to have been the target of a murder attempt in Maldives,” RSF observed.

The Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) has also condemned the attack on Rasheed.

“The violent attack on Hilath was an attempt to kill him. The association calls on the authorities to find those who had involved in this crime and bring them to justice,” the MJA stated.
“We call on the police and political figures of this country to stop quarrelling for power and make the country – especially the capital Male’ – a place where families and children can live without fear.”

The MJA added that if the trend of violent murders across the country continued, the resulting impact on the country’s tourism-based economy would be “irrevocable”.

Minister for Human Resources and spokesperson for former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, Mohamed ‘Mundhu’ Shareef, told AFP that while the government condemned the attack, “Hilath must have known that he had become a target of a few extremists.”

“We are not a secular country. When you talk about religion there will always be a few people who do not agree,” Shareef said.

Police Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef meanwhile said that while no arrests had been made, police had obtained CCTV footage of the area and were in the process of analysing it.

Police were also investigating the stabbing of a Bangladeshi man at 11pm on the same evening, Haneef said. The victim suffered minor injuries and was discharged from hospital on Tuesday.

The Maldives was ranked 73rd out of 179 countries in the 2011-2012 Reporters Without Borders press freedom index. The country jumped from 148th in 2005 to 51st in 2009, following the introduction of multiparty democracy and freedom of expression.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police conclude investigation into Rf 18 million Sheesha fraud case

Police have completed the investigation into a case involving Rf18 million (US$1.2 million) that went missing from a State Bank of India (SBI) account of three brothers who own local motorcycle retailer, Sheesha.

The incident occurred in November 2011. The Criminal Court issued an Interpol red notice to apprehend three persons suspected to be involved in the case.

The names sent to the Prosecutor General were Ibrahim Shahid, 42 of Thulhadhoo in Baa Atoll, Mohamed Mustafa, 35 of Lhaimagu in Shaviyani Atoll and Mohamed Muthausim, 32 of the same island and Mohamed Rasheed Abdul Gadhir.

Police said the names of four other persons indirectly related to the case were also sent to the Prosecutor General.

Ibrahim Shahid of Baa Atoll Thulaadhoo, accused of stealing Rf18 million (US$1.1 million) from the State Bank of India (SBI) account was apprehended in Sri Lanka in February this year.

On November 24, 2011 the account owners discovered that several unauthorised transfers had been made from their joint personal savings account to an unidentified recipient, the first transaction being made on November 9.

Following the discovery the Sheesha brothers Ahmed Hassan Manik, Hussain Husham and Ibrahim Husham said the transfer had been made to a Bank of Maldives account with a forged document using Manik’s name. The brothers said they would sue SBI and requested the bank take full responsibility for the theft.

In November Hussain Husham told the media that the total amount of Rf 18 million was  in two transactions, with the first transaction made on November 9 with the withdrawal of Rf 8.5 million (US$551,000).

Later on December 20, the culprits withdrew a further Rf 9.5 million (US$616,000) from their account.

Hussain told the press at the time that SBI transferred the money to an account with the Bank of Maldives, using a forged document faxed to SBI.

He said the document had the name and signature of Ahmed Hassan Manik, and that the money transferred to Bank of Maldives account had already been withdrawn when they came to know about it.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Pakistan pledges support to Maldivian cricket development

Pakistan has provided cricket equipment to the Maldives in a bid to further promote the sport across the nation, the Press Trust of India (PTI) has reported.

The equipment was handed over the Maldivian Cricket Board by Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Jalil Abbas Jilani to assist in developing national sport.

Jilani added that Pakistan would also continue to provide academic assistance in the country.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)