July 17, 2012 – Minivan News

Maldives “needs radical changes”: UN Human Rights Committee

The UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) has recommended “radical changes” to Maldivian law to ensure compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). These changes include the abolition of the death penalty, compensation for “systematic and systemic torture,” withdrawal of reservations to the ICCPR’s Article 18 regarding freedom of religion and belief, and reforming the country’s judiciary.

Following a “Incendiary” session focused on the state of human rights in the Maldives on July 12 and 13, the committee published a preliminary statement calling on the Maldives to “be serious about bringing itself into compliance with all aspects” of the ICCPR as a “critical step” to respect and protect human rights of all the people in the Maldives.

The Human Rights Committee will make a final report at the end of its session on July 27.

The Maldivian delegation to the UNHRC was headed by Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel, a former Justice Minister during the 30 year rule of President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and co-author of a pamphlet entitled ‘President Nasheed’s devious plot to destroy the Islamic faith of Maldivians’, published in January 2012.

Dr Jameel was accompanied by State Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dunya Maumoon – Gayoom’s daughter – as well as the Maldives’ Permanent Representative in Geneva, Iruthisham Adam.

Article 18

The UNHRC raised concern over the state’s reservation to Article 18 regarding freedom of religion and belief, claiming the reservation “implicates a host of intertwining social, political, and cultural issues” which will not be resolved until the state agrees to withdraw this reservation.

During the committee session, Dunya had said the Maldives did not plan to withdraw the reservation to Article 18 as the Maldives Constitution stipulated that rights and freedoms be interpreted according to Islamic Sharia.

However, the statement noted that allowing Islamic tenets of the Constitution to definitively supersede the human rights enshrined in the ICCPR “will mean a continued lack of protection for the human rights of the people of the Maldives.”

The Maldives delegation had stressed that the country was a homogeneous society and spoke one language and followed one religion, adding there was therefore no debate in Maldivian society regarding the removal of the provision relating to freedom of religion.

“This is not dogmatic government policy or preference, but rather a reflection of the deep societal belief that the Maldives always has been and always should be a 100 percent Muslim nation. Laws, like government, should be based on the will of the people,” Dunya said.

“Systematic and systemic torture”

Incidents of torture in the Maldives “appear systematic and systemic,” the UNHRC statement noted, and expressed “grave concern” about the low number of cases that have undergone investigation.

The committee has urged the Maldives to set up an independent Commission of Inquiry to conduct criminal investigations and ensure compensation for all victims of torture.

The panel also drew on a report submitted by anti-torture NGO REDRESS, containing testimonies of 28 victims of torture while in state custody.

“Forms of torture and ill-treatment included the use of suspension, lengthy use of stocks, being beaten with fists and bars, kicked, blindfolded, handcuffed, the dislocation of joints and breaking of bones, being forced to roll and squat on sharp coral, being drowned or forced into the sea, being put in a water tank, being burned, having bright lights shone in eyes, being left outside for days while tied or handcuffed to a tree, being covered in sugar water or leaves to attract ants and goats, and in one case being tied to a crocodile’s cage. Sexual assault and humiliation was also routinely used. Many testimonies suggest the only limit to the torture and ill-treatment imposed was the imagination of those whose control they were under,” a UNHRC panel member read at last week’s session.

“Surely this is something that refers to before 2008,” the panel member stated, “but the [present government] has a responsibility to pursue and investigate and bring to justice if these [allegations] are indeed correct. If there is an atmosphere of impunity regarding torture, I would offer that the present situation would not be treated differently by those who would want to violate the office they have, and abuse those under their care, or those going peacefully about their business.”

In response, Jameel said any citizen could bring their grievances before the judiciary and said any question of compensation could jeopardize the Maldives’ state budget.

Death Penalty

The UNHRC has asked the Maldivian state to enact legislation to officially abolish the death penalty. “The state itself has admitted that capital punishment does not deter crime,” the statement noted.

Jameel himself has previously stated the government was prepared to implement the death penalty following the murder of lawyer Ahmed Najeeb. Attorney General Aishath Azima Shakoor and the Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz have publicly endorsed their support for implementing capital punishment to deter increasing crime rates.

However, Jameel told the UNHRC no official government discussion existed on the matter.

“This year alone we have had seven murders in a country of 350,000. The country is really struggling to address this surge of crime. It is in the light of these occurrences that this debate has occurred. There is no official government discussion, but there are scattered debates across every section of society,” Jameel said.

Judiciary Reform

The committee is “deeply concerned about the state of the judiciary in the Maldives,” the statement noted.

“The state has admitted that this body’s independence is seriously compromised. The Committee has said the judiciary is desperately in need of more serious training, and higher standards of qualification,” the statement read.

The Supreme Court in particular needed “radical readjustment,” the committee said.

“As 6 of 7 Supreme Court judges are experts in Sharia law and nothing more, this court in particular is in need of radical readjustment. This must be done to guarantee just trials, and fair judgments for the people of Maldives.”

A panel member during the UNHRC session also noted the “troubling role of the judiciary at the center” of the controversial transfer of power on February 7.

“The judiciary – which is admittedly in serious need of training and qualifications – is yet seemingly playing a role leading to the falling of governments,” he observed.

Likes

(1)Dislikes

(0)

Allegations in audit report “politically motivated, misleading, ill-informed, and anachronistic”: Dr Shaheed

Former Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed has said allegations based around a 2010 Ministry of Foreign Affairs audit report claiming he illegally abused expenses are “politically motivated, misleading, ill-informed, and anachronistic.”

The audit report released this week alleged that a senior advisor to the Maldives mission to the UN in New York – hired under a two-year contract on August 30, 2010 when Dr Shaheed was Foreign Minister – left to work for Dr Shaheed in July 2011 upon his appointment as UN Special Rapporteur on Iran.

The report noted that such posts were neither part of the civil service nor considered political appointees, adding that the advisor was hired without a public announcement seeking qualified candidates.

Under the contract, the senior advisor was to receive US$2,672 a month as salary and allowances from September to December 2010 and US$3,672 a month from January 2011 onward.

However, on July 20, 2011, the Foreign Ministry sent a letter to the UN mission, the report noted, informing them that the advisor had been dismissed from the post as she would begin working for the Special Rapporteur on Iran “during the 6-month notice period”.

While approximately Rf800,000 (US$51,880) was spent out of the mission’s budget for salaries and benefits for the senior advisor, the report noted that “no information regarding the work could be seen from official documentation”.

“Misleading”

In an email to Minivan News, Dr Shaheed explained that the senior advisor was a foreign national who was an expert on international relations and diplomacy, slamming the audit report as “politically motivated and phrased to mislead the public.”

Shaheed claimed there would be “ample paper trail on the work she did for the Maldives from August 2010 to July 2011.”

“She was hired on the same basis as other expatriate advisors hired by the Maldives in diplomatic missions, and were political appointees,” he said, adding that the senior advisor resigned in July 2011 despite the audit report claiming the contract was terminated.

While the senior advisor began working for Dr Shaheed “pro bono” in August 2011, “this has nothing to do with the Maldives Mission. She or I have not benefited from any government facilities in our work,” Dr Shaheed insisted.

“It would have been normal for the Maldives government, having nominated me for the post of UN Special Rapporteur to assist me with my work, but this was not done,” he continued.

“If a letter was written by Minister Naseem to the Ambassador in New York to say that the Advisor who was sacked would be working for me, it would have been to indicate to the staff of the Mission that she was sacked immediately, rather than at the end of the 6-month notice period she was entitled to.

“Obviously, the Mission of Maldives in New York will have no record of any work done for me because she was not working in the premises of the Maldives mission, nor as its staff member.”

On the allegation that she was hired without a public announcement, Dr Shaheed said that she was “head hunted and had come in initially to run the campaign for the Human Rights Council which we won with flying colours in May 2010.”

“It as on this basis that she was hired in August, effectively in a bid to keep her from competitive offers of another diplomatic mission in New York. Advisors are not civil servants and are therefore political posts. A contract had to signed to meet with legal requirements of the United States,” he added.

On Rf235,001 (US$15,240) spent out of the office budget to pay the Foreign Minister’s mobile phone bill in 2010, despite parliament not having approved such an allowance for ministers, Dr Shaheed noted that the audit report referred to regulations passed by parliament on December 28, 2010, “two weeks after I resigned from office.”

“The old practice was for the government to pay the mobile phones of ministers,” he added.

Dr Shaheed served as foreign minister in former President Mohamed Nasheed’s administration from November 11, 2008 to December 12, 2010, when he resigned after not receiving parliament’s consent for his reappointment following the en masse cabinet resignation in July 2010.

Violations of public finance law

The Foreign Ministry’s 2010 audit report meanwhile highlighted 48 cases of alleged violations of the Public Finance Act and regulations under the law.

Among the issues raised in the report were discrepancies between the ministry’s financial statement and the Finance Ministry ledger; hiring of interns for the ministry and foreign missions without public announcements, including children and relatives of senior government officials; lack of details on Rf85.5 million (US$5.5 million) spent on foreign missions in 2010; incurring a fine of Rf28,862 (US$1,871) for unpaid utility bills; lack of “necessary internal controls” in accordance with public finance regulations on the ministry’s expenditures; and failure to properly maintain income records and stock inventories.

In April 2011, the report revealed, the Maldives embassy in China used approximately Rf600,000 (US$38,910) of free aid granted by the China Machinery Engineering Corporation (CMEC) to purchase a “Hyundai Santa Fe” vehicle with an additional Rf100,000 (US$6,485) from the embassy budget.

Moreover, in June 2011, the embassy in China sold a car registered to it without prior approval and has not deposited the proceeds from the sale to the state’s revenue account as of the report’s publication date.

The audit also discovered that the ministry spent in excess of the approved accommodation, travel and utility allowances for senior staff at foreign missions.

Furthermore, a total of Rf494,293 (US$32,055) was spent on mobile phone bills for senior staff at the ministry although it could not be determined whether all calls made from the 13 post-paid lines were for official purposes.

As some employees used roaming services on overseas trips, the report noted, phone bills reached over Rf30,000 (US$1,945) in some months.

“Therefore, [the Auditor General’s Office] believes that this is an opportunity to misuse state funds without any control,” the report stated.

Addressing the irregularities raised in the audit, Dr Shaheed meanwhile argued that “some of the assumptions and conclusions are clearly false.”

“The report also fails to note or establish lines of financial accountability, unfairly exposing civil servants and politicians to unwarranted and malicious attacks on their reputation and integrity,” he said. “However, the report does identify a number of systemic deficits that need to be addressed too, and which do not result from lack of integrity of the persons involved, and I am happy that a number of those matters have been highlighted.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

MDP detainees on hunger strike in response to alleged “police brutality”

Six Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters arrested for allegedly throwing stones at the motorcade of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom’s motorcade while he was visiting Addu City have declared themselves on hunger strike as of yesterday afternoon.

In a statement, the MDP said that the six supporters, which include elected Addu City Councilor Ahmed Mirzadh, as well as his father and brother, began the strike yesterday at 4:00pm after being detained on suspicion of throwing stones at the former president and present head of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).

An MDP statement claimed that the detained supporters had launched the hunger strike in protest at allegations of police torture whilst in custody.

Abdulla Haseen, Lawyer of Councilor Mirzad said his client was detained for allegedly throwing stones at former President Gayoom’s motorcade, adding that he was very worried about the arrest.

‘’He’s an elected councilor. He is not a violent criminal. He’s a very responsible man,” Haseen said adding that the court has granted an extension of his detention period to ten days.

Police have meanwhile confirmed that the detained MDP supporters were on a hunger strike.

Police Sub-Inspector Hasssan Haneef has said that although the detainees have declared themselves on hunger strike, authorities had been providing them food as scheduled.

Meanwhle, Addu City Council has issued a statement calling for the immediate release of the arrested councillor.

The statement alleged that the motive behind the arrest was to “narrow” the powers of the Addu City Council, which also condemned the brutality of the “coup government” of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan.

Since February’s transfer of power, the MDP and former President Mohamed Nasheed have continued to allege that the previous government was removed from office in a “coup” by mutinous elements of the police and military, along with then opposition politicians.

The council also claimed that the current government was envious of Addu City Council, alleging that all the development projects launched by Mohamed Nasheed’s government have been stopped under the present administration.

Yesterday, Police Superintendent Abdulla Nawaz said that a total of 181 persons have been arrested so far in ongoing protests during the last week. A total of 21 persons are still said to be in police custody after being detained during the protests, which have at times escalated into violent confrontations.

Nawaz alleged that MDP supporters have been conducting criminal activities in the protests, including attacking police officers and vandalizing the property of civilians.

He alleged that protesters have been attacking police officers and using foul language against riot police. Nawaz conversely denied that police have attacked or used foul language against anti-government protesters during more than seven days of consecutive demonstrations.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Turkmenistan delegation meets with President Waheed

Economic development was among the key areas of discussion during a meeting between cabinet minsters from Turkmenistan and the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan in Male’ yesterday.

According to the President’s Office website, a high level delegation including Deputy Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers of Turkmenistan, Hojamuhammet Muhammedov arrived in Male’ as part of a visit to potentially extend relations with the Maldives.

A dinner hosted by the president was held later in the evening at the Kurumba Maldives resort. The event was attended by First Lady Ilham Hussain, and dignitaries including cabinet representatives of both countries, the President’s Office said.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

MNDF Brigadier General, Maldives EU Ambassador resign from government

Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi of the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) submitted his resignation yesterday, a day after the Prosecutor General (PG) announced his intention to press charges against the decorated general over the military’s detention of Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

His resignation was followed today by Maldives Ambassador to the EU, Ali Hussain Didi ‘Alidi’.

Hussain is the fourth senior Maldivian diplomat to resign from the coalition government of President Mohamed Waheed, following in the footsteps of Maldives’ Ambassador to the US and United Nations Abdul Ghafoor Mohamed, High Commissioner to the UK Dr Farhanaz Faizal, and Deputy High Commissioner to the UK Naushad Waheed Hassan – President Waheed’s brother.

Meanwhile a statement by the MNDF yesterday confirmed that Didi, who was serving as the MNDF southern area commander, requested retirement or honourable discharge from the army.

Didi’s resignation after 32 years of service follows in the wake of the Prosecutor General’s Office filing criminal charges against former President Mohamed Nasheed and former Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfan for allegedly ordering the arrest of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed on January 16.

Nasheed and Tholhath were charged with violating Article 81 of the Penal Code, which states that the detention of a government employee who has not been found guilty of a crime is illegal, an offence that carries either a three-year jail term, banishment or a MVR2,000 fine (US$129.70).”

In a statement on Sunday, PG Ahmed Muizz said he intends to press the same charges against former Chief of Defense Forces Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad for their role in detaining the judge.

Local media has reported that the charges were filed at the Hulhumale’ magistrate court today.

Didi, 51, was serving as the Male’ area commander at the time of Judge Abdulla’s arrest and was transferred to the southern area command following the controversial transfer of power on February 7.

Judge Abdulla was accused of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, links with organised crime and “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist” to protect key figures of the former dictatorship from facing justice for alleged human rights abuses and “high-profile corruption cases”.

Brigadier General Didi meanwhile told local daily Haveeru yesterday that he decided to resign out of respect for the military uniform as he did not wish to attend court and face charges in MNDF uniform.

“I’ve always respected the military uniform during my entire 32 years of service in the military. It’s my belief that I must be present in court after removing the uniform. I do not wish to face the court while wearing this uniform,” Didi was quoted as saying.

Didi noted that the highlight of his military career was defending the nation during the failed coup attempt on November 3, 1988. He was subsequently awarded a medal for bravery.

Didi declined to comment on the arrest of Judge Abdulla.

Didi becomes the third senior military official to retire from active service after Chief of Defence Forces Moosa Ali Jaleel and Vice Chief of Defence Force Brigadier General Farhath Shaheer in February.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Supreme Court denies giving advice to PG regarding Nasheed’s case

The Supreme Court of the Maldives has denied local media reports suggesting that it issued advice to the Prosecutor General (PG), following his decision to submit former President Mohamed Nasheed’s Criminal case to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The Supreme Court in an official statement stated it was a responsibility of the Prosecutor General to file criminal charges, but insisted the court did not give any advice regarding Nasheed’s case.

Following investigation by the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM), Prosecutor General Ahmed Muizz has filed charges against Nasheed, former Defense Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, former Chief of Defence Force Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad for their alleged role in detaining Criminal Court Chief Justice Abdulla Mohamed in January.

Brigadier Ibrahim Mohamed Didi, key figure who defended the Maldives in the coup of 1988, has resigned from the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) over the matter.

An official from the Prosecutor General’s office told local newspaper Haveeru that the decision to submit the case to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was because the case involved a Criminal Court Judge, and that there was a conflict of interest were the case were to be held in Criminal Court.

In normal practice, all criminal cases are referred to the Criminal Court of the Maldives, one of five superior courts of the country with High Court and Supreme Court above them in hierarchy.

In an earlier case prior to the arrest of Judge Abdulla in January 2012, concerning harassment the judge, the Prosecutor General stated that the Supreme Court had advised him to submit a criminal case to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Regarding the charges against Nasheed, neither the Prosecutor General nor the Supreme Court have stated that any advice was given by the Supreme Court – contrary to claims in local media.

A Supreme Court official said he did not wish to speak about the issue, and referred Minivan News to the Department Judicial Administrations (DJA).

However, officials from the DJA told Minvan News that their Spokesperson Latheefa Gasim had not reported to work and therefore could not provide any information.

The Case

Sources linked to the case earlier suggested that the charges levied against Nasheed related to violation of article 46 of the Constitution, particularly violation of Article 12 clause (a) of Judges Act (Act no 13/2010).

Article 44 of the Maldives Constitution states: “No person shall be arrested or detained for an offence unless the arresting officer observes the offence being committed, or has reasonable and probable grounds or evidence to believe the person has committed an offence or is about to commit an offence, or under the authority of an arrest warrant issued by the court.”

Article 12 clause (a) of the Judges Act states that a judge can be arrested without a court warrant, but only if he is found indulging in a criminal act. The same article also states that if a judge comes under suspicion of committing a criminal act or being about to commit a criminal act, they can only be taken into custody with a court warrant obtained from a higher court than that of which the judge presently sits on. This warrant has to be approved by the prosecutor general.

However the Prosecutor General is now levying charges of breach of article 81 of the Penal Code: “Arresting an innocent person intentionally and unlawfully by a state employee with the legal authority or power vested to him by his position is an offence. Punishment for a person guilty of this offence is imprisonment or banishment for 3 years or a fine of MVR 2000 (US$129.70).”

If Nasheed is found guilty of the charges, his candidacy for a presidential election could be invalidated, depending on the sentence he may receive as per the article 109(f) of the Constitution, which dictates the qualifications of a president.

Article 109(f) of the Constitution states: “[Candidate should] not have been convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to a term of more than twelve months, unless a period of three years has elapsed since his release, or pardon for the offence for which he was sentenced;”

Detention of Judge Abdulla

The Chief Judge was detained by the military, after he had opened the court outside normal hours to order the immediate release of former Justice Minister and current Home Minister, Deputy leader of the Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) Dr Mohamed Jameel.

Jameel had been arrested on successive occasions for allegedly inciting religious hatred, after he published a pamphlet claiming that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives. The President’s Office called for an investigation into the allegations, and requested Jameel provide evidence to back his claims.

In late 2011 Judge Abdulla was himself under investigation by the judicial watchdog for politically bias comments made to private broadcaster DhiTV.

The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) was due to release a report into Judge Abdulla’s ethical misconduct; however the judge approached the Civil Court and successfully filed an injunction against his further investigation by the judicial watchdog.

Judge Abdulla’s arrest sparked three weeks of anti-government protests starting in January, while the government appealed for assistance from the Commonwealth and UN to reform the judiciary.

As Judge Abdulla continued to be held, Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz later joined the High Court and Supreme Court in condemning the MNDF’s role in the arrest, requesting that the judge be released.

The police are required to go through the PG’s Office to obtain an arrest warrant from the High Court, the PG said at the time, claiming the MNDF and Nasheed’s administration “haven’t followed the procedures, and the authorities are in breach of the law. They could be charged with contempt of court.”

He then ordered the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the matter.

As protests escalated, elements of the police and military mutinied on February 7, alleging that Nasheed had given them “unlawful orders”.

Nasheed publicly resigned the same day, but later said he was forced to do so “under duress” in a coup d’état. Nasheed’s MDP have taken to the streets in the months since, calling for an early election.

Judge Abdulla was released on the evening of Nasheed’s resignation, and the Criminal Court swiftly issued a warrant for Nasheed’s arrest. Police did not act on the warrant, after international concern quickly mounted

Spokesperson of the Department of Judicial Administration, Latheefa Gasim, yesterday told local media that Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has accepted the case and the hearings will be held after the first 10 days of Ramadan.

She also said that the Magistrate Court had space limitations and therefore they have been talking to the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) located in Hulhimale about holding the hearings in the reception hall of the HDC office.

“We have been negotiating with HDC to see if they could give us their reception hall to hold the hearings. After the HDC response, we will decide on a date to hold the hearings,” she said at the time.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

President Waheed will not hold talks with Nasheed “as long as MDP protests continue”

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan will not participate in the All-Party talks while the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) continues to back on going street protests in the capital, the President’s Office has said.

The talks were conceived as one of two internationally-backed mechanisms – alongside the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) – to resolve the political deadlock in the Maldives following the controversial transfer of power on February 7. The Convenor of the All-Party talks, Ahmed Mujuthaba, on July 12 announced that a series of “high-level” discussions will be held between President Waheed and the leaders of the largest political parties after sixteen previous attempts had resulted in “no breakthrough.”

However, President Waheed’s Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza condemned MDP’s ongoing street protests as an “act of terrorism” today, and said “political leaders do not wish to hold talks with the MDP holding a gun to their heads.”

In response, MDP Spokesperson Imthiyaz Fahmy said “Dr Waheed’s participation in the All-Party talks is not important to the MDP.”

“Waheed’s political party does not have the required number of members to qualify as a political party. Further, his party does not have a single seat in the parliament or in the local councils. Therefore he is not significant to the All-party talks,” Fahmy said.

The opposition party has vowed that the protests, which started on July 8, will continue until an early election date is announced, Fahmy said. The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) and other international groups have also backed calls to have electons before the end of 2012. However, President Waheed has insisted that July 2013 is the earliest date elections can be held under the constitution.

Meanwhile, Nasheed yesterday offered to apologise to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom for accusing him of masterminding the change of government, were the leader of 30 years to agree to participate in the the All Party Talks.

Gayoom had accused Nasheed of continuously making baseless comments about him in both the local and the international community, particularly that the former President had masterminded a coup d’état on February 7. “I do not wish to sit down and negotiate with such a person,” Gayoom said.

Nasheed has also pledged to engage in the All-Party talks despite the Prosecutor General filing criminal charges against him for his alleged role in detaining Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January.

“Even if they imprison me, I am willing to take part in the talks even while in prison,” he said in a speech on Sunday night.

“No breakthrough”

The last round of the UN-mediated talks, held at Vice President Waheed Deen’s Bandos Island Resort and Spa in early June, collapsed after parties aligned with the government presented the ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) with a list of 30 demands.

The list included calls that the MDP “stop practicing black magic and sorcery”, “stop the use of sexual and erotic tools”, and “not walk in groups of more than 10”.

Also demanded during the talks were that the MDP “not keep crows and other animals in public areas”, “not participate in protests in an intoxicated condition“, and “not defame the country both domestically and internationally”.

In a statement on July 12, Mujuthaba acknowledged that the 16 hours of talks at Bandos had resulted in “no breakthrough” and required a “fresh approach.”

Mujuthaba subsequently met separately with President Waheed and leaders of the country’s largest political parties to discuss the prospect of continuing the talks. Political leaders had agreed in principle to the need for high-level talks, Mujuthaba said.

“They have expressed a strong and shared belief in dialogue as the best way to address the challenges facing our nation. They agree that there are deep-rooted divisions and problems that must be resolved jointly if the Maldives is to continue on its democratic path,” Mujuthaba stated.

“In the end, the most senior political leaders will need to create an atmosphere conducive to discussions, and come together prepared to work in good faith,” he concluded.

No date has yet been set for the next round of talks. However the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), set up to investigate the transfer of power, is due to release its findings at the end of August, following a one-month delay.

Apology

In an official statement on Sunday, Nasheed offered an apology to Gayoom and invited the former president to participate in the All-Party talks. Nasheed argued his allegations that Gayoom had masterminded the coup were based on public statements made by Gayoom and those closely affiliated with him politically, including his family members – many of whom now hold senior positions in government.

A few days before Nasheed was deposed, “President Gayoom stated that it was time to bring an end to the government entrusted upon me in my capacity as President of Maldives, and that the instigation of the enterprise was already overdue,” the statement said.

Meanwhile, Vice President of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Umar Naseer had on many occasions stated that he had personally staged and directed the coup from “the command centre”.

“Naseer also met with my Vice President, Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik (now President) prior to the coup, along with all parties affiliated with the 23rd December coalition, and implored Dr Waheed to take over the post of the President of the Republic on the sole condition that having usurped the presidency, he would refuse to resign from his post,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed also highlighted that statements from MPs now aligned with the government, including PPM MP Ilham Ahmed and Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed, had expressed gratitude to Gayoom and his family following the toppling of Nasheed’s government. Further, Gayoom’s daughter and family members, being “part and parcel to the current coup government”, had “attained high offices within it,” the statement noted.

Gayoom had never denied that he had committed these actions on behalf of the political party to which he belonged, nor had he condemned any of the “aforementioned actions”.

“Nevertheless, in a predicament such as we are, and whilst the people of Maldives are overtly distressed by what has transpired after the coup, I have come to know that President Gayoom has said that he would sit with me for dialogue in the event I apologise for stating that it was he who instigated this coup,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed said he “firmly believed” that the powers of the Maldivian state were vested with the Maldivian people and should remain as such.

“Given that not for a single moment would I wish for someone unelected by the people of Maldives to entertain himself as leader to them, I believe now is the time for all parties to come forth in support of the best interest of the nation and its citizens, and as such, if President Gayoom indeed was not party to the coup, I have decided to apologise to President Gayyoom for the fact that I said he was behind this coup,” Nasheed concluded.

Nasheed also thanked facilitator of All Party Talks, Ahmed Mujuthaba, for “all the efforts” exerted by him to ensure that the negotiations succeeded.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)