Day: February 24, 2013

Judicial Services Commission subject to “external influence”: UN Special Rapporteur

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, has raised concerns over the politicisation of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC).

As part of a wider review of the Maldives justice system, Knaul claimed that the JSC – mandated with the appointment, transfer and removal of judges – was unable to perform its constitutional duty adequately in its current form.

Her comment was among a number of preliminary observations on the Maldives’ judiciary and wider legal ecosystem, following an eight day fact-finding mission concluded today.

Knaul is an independent expert appointed to deliver recommendations on potential areas of reform to the Maldives’ legal system, at the 23rd session of the UN Human Rights Council in May, 2013.

As well as recommendations to address what she said were minimal levels of public “trust” in the nation’s judicial system, Knaul also addressed matters such as the trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Nasheed is currently facing trial for his detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court last year, charges he claims are politically motivated to prevent him from contesting presidential elections later this year.

Knaul maintained that the former president, like every other Maldivian citizen, should be guaranteed a free and independent trial.

The three branches of the state should be equal in their importance, with no branch exercising power over any other, Knaul said.

A “power struggle” ensuing from a “lack of understanding in the delimitation of the respective competences” of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the state had “serious implications on the effective realisation of the rule of law in the Maldives.”

Politics in the JSC

Knaul’s key concerns included the politicisation of the JSC.

The JSC created the Hulhumale Magistrate Court in which former President Mohamed Nasheed is currently being tried, and appointed the three-member panel of judges overseeing the case. JSC head Adam Mohamed – also a Supreme Court judge – cast the deciding vote in a Supreme Court ruling on the court’s legitimacy.

“I have heard from numerous sources that the current composition of the JSC is inadequate and politicised. Because of this politicisation, the Commission has been subjected to all sorts of external influence and consequently has been unable to function properly,” Knaul stated.

Knaul said she believed it best for such a body to be composed of retired or sitting judges. She added that it may be advisable for some representation of the legal profession or academics to be included.

However, she maintained that no political representation at all should be allowed in a commission such as the JSC.

“I believe that an appointment body acting independently from both the executive and legislative branches of government should be established with the view to countering any politicization in the appointment of judges and their potential improper allegiance to interests other than those of fair and impartial justice,” Knaul added.

The JSC is currently comprised of Supreme Court Judge Adam Mohamed, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid, High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed, Lower Court Judge Abdulla Didi and MP and government-aligned Jumhooree Party (JP) Leader and presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim.

Also on the commission is the member appointed from the public, Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman, President’s Appointee Mohamed Saleem, lawyer Ahmed Rasheed and Attorney General Aishath Azima Shukoor.

Judicial independence

Knaul stated that upon conclusion of her mission meetings, she had found that the concept of independence of the judiciary has been “misconstrued and misinterpreted” by all actors, including the judiciary itself, in the Maldives.

“The requirement of independence and impartiality does not aim at benefiting the judges themselves, but rather the court users, as part of their inalienable right to a fair trial,” Knaul stated, while emphasising the important role of integrity and accountability in judicial independence, and hence its role in the implementation of the rule of law.

Stating that it is vital to establish mechanisms of accountability for judges, prosecutors and court staff, Knaul said: “Such mechanisms must guarantee that the investigation of any actor in the judicial system safeguards the person’s right to a fair hearing. Investigations should be based on objective criteria, the process should respect the basic principles of a fair trial and an independent review of all decisions should be available.”

Transparency and accountability

“When selection criteria [of judges] used by such a body [as the JSC] are objective, clear, based on merit, transparent and well publicised, public understanding of the process and the basis for the appointment of judges increases, and the perception of unfair selection of appointments can be avoided,” Knaul said.

Knaul also spoke of the lack of transparency in the assignment of cases, the constitution of benches in all courts, including the Supreme Court.

“When cases are assigned in a subjective manner, the system becomes much more vulnerable to manipulation, corruption, and external pressure. Information on the assignment of cases should be clearly available to the public in order to counter suspicions of malpractice and corruption,” she observed.

Knaul stated that while transparency is public administration is an obligatory requirement in a democracy, transparency remains a challenge for the Maldivian judiciary.

Furthermore, Knaul highlighted the absence of some fundamental legislation – including the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act – in the Maldives, adding that this posed huge challenges to upholding the rule of law.

Empowerment of the law community

Knaul spoke of the importance of establishing an independent self-regulating bar association, and of ensuring lawyers remain free from external pressures and influence.

The special rapporteur commented on the practice in the Maldives of the attorney general having the powers of issuing legal practice licenses and of taking disciplinary action against practicing lawyers, terming it “contrary to the basic principles of the independence of lawyers,” and adding that such powers should not rest with the executive branch of the state.

“I further deem that the enforcement of compulsory registration of lawyers to appear before the courts by the courts themselves is unacceptable,” Knaul continued.

“The regulation of disciplinary action against lawyers fall outside the prerogative of the judiciary and contradicts the principle of independence of the legal profession.”

The rapporteur also commented on recent cases of lawyers being charged with ‘contempt of court’ for voicing criticisms, terming this “threats to muzzle the freedom of expression of lawyers.”

“Lawyers, like other citizens, are entitled to freedom of expression, and in particular they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the protection and promotion of human rights, without suffering professional restrictions.”

Other issues that Knaul highlighted included the relatively low number of sitting female judges, the lack of education and training possibilities for persons in the judicial sector, and the lack of trust the general public has in the country’s judiciary.

“I was struck to hear how little trust the public has in the justice system in the Maldives. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done, and judges must not only be actually impartial they have to appear impartial to the public. The mind-sets of the public and the authorities, including judicial authorities, have not evolved as quickly as the changes were made to the Constitution and the laws of the Maldives. This created a disconnection between the promises of the 2008 Constitution and people’s expectations, and the reality of how justice is delivered and the separation of powers implemented,” she stated.

Knaul is an independent expert who is appointed by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) whose position is pro bono. She reports to, and advises, the UNHRC and the UN General Assembly.

Knaul’s statement in full:

“Members of the press, ladies and gentlemen,

I am very happy to be here with you today and share my preliminary observations at the end of my 8-day official mission to the Republic of Maldives.

I should underline from the outset that today I will confine myself to a few remarks. These issues, along with others, will be explored in a more detailed manner in the written report that I will prepare and in which I will also formulate recommendations. I will present this report at the 23rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council at the end of May in Geneva.

I wish to stress that I am an independent expert who reports to, and advises, the UN Human Rights Council and the UN General Assembly. Although appointed by the Human Rights Council, I am not employed by the United Nations and the position I hold is pro bono. As an independent expert, I exercise my professional assessment and expertise and report directly to the Member States of the United Nations.

Let me begin by warmly thanking the Government of the Maldives for inviting me to conduct this official mission and for facilitating a rich and interesting programme of meetings and visits in Malé and Addu city while respecting the independence of my mandate. I also wish to note that the previous administration and President had also extended an invitation for me to conduct an official visit in 2012, which could not be realized for a combination of factors, including my own availability.

The purpose of this mission was to understand, in the spirit of co-operation and constructive dialogue, the situation regarding different aspects related to my mandate, and in particular how the Maldives endeavours to ensure the independence of the judiciary, prosecutors and lawyers, their protection, as well as their accountability, and the obstacles encountered which may impede actors of the judicial system to discharge their functions effectively, adequately and appropriately and deliver justice.

During my visit, I had the privilege to meet the President, His Excellency Dr Mohamed Waheed, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, His Excellency Dr Abdul Samad Abdullah, as well as other Government officials, including the attorney general. I also held meetings with the chief justice, the Supreme Court, a number of judges from superior and magistrates’ courts, the prosecutor general, members of the legal profession, members of the People’s Majlis, as well as representatives from various political parties, non-governmental organizations and United Nations agencies. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who have dedicated some of their time to present their informed opinions and perspectives to me.

I would like to commend the Maldives’ efforts in establishing a democracy based on the rule of law and the principle of separation of powers. The principle of separation of powers, which is enshrined in the Constitution of 2008, is the bedrock upon which the requirements of judicial independence and impartiality are founded and represents an essential requirement of the proper administration of justice. Understanding of, and respect for, this principle is a sine qua non for a democratic State.

I have heard of positive changes carried out in the last years, which have improved the independence of the judiciary. Transitions, however, always come with challenges, and very often more challenges are encountered along the way. There is always room for improvement. In the Maldives, many challenges to the independence of judges, prosecutors, court officials and lawyers remain, and these directly affect the delivery of justice. Those challenges should be assessed and addressed as a matter of urgency within the parameters laid down by the Constitution and international human rights standards. In the longer-term, the Maldivian people should consider reforms to the Constitution, with the view to improving the tools and measures at the disposal of the State to ensure the independence of the judiciary and the delivery of fair and impartial justice.

Measures to address challenges will only be effective and bring consolidated changes if de-politicized dialogue is prioritized in the Maldives. Measures will have to be inclusive of different views and opinions and be generated through broad consensus. Otherwise, implementation will not be possible. Both short-term and long-term measures have to be combined in order to consolidate the democratic transition and strengthen all the institutions of the State. The Maldives have to continue in its efforts to move forward.

All branches of the State are equally important and none should be above the other. All institutions have a role to play and responsibilities regarding the consolidation of democracy. I am under the impression that the Parliament, the Government and the judiciary, created in the Constitution of 2008, have been testing the limits of their competences, sometimes encroaching on principles established in the Constitution. The lack of understanding in the delimitation of the respective competences and the ensuing power struggle that I have witnessed during my mission have serious implications on the effective realization of the rule of law in the Maldives.

Positive as well as negative recent developments should be recognized and everyone should take its responsibilities and avoid blaming the other branch, the other institution or the other political party for the difficulties faced by the Maldives. Dialogue, respect for the Constitution, transparency and access to information, and accountability are key to a better and more coherent functioning of the institutions of the State, which will serve the people of the Maldives.

I further believe that the concept of independence of the judiciary has been misconstrued and misinterpreted in the Maldives, including among judicial actors. The requirement of independence and impartiality does not aim at benefitting the judges themselves, but rather the court users, as part of their inalienable right to a fair trial. Integrity and accountability are therefore essential elements of judicial independence and are intrinsically linked to the implementation of the rule of law.

In this context the establishment of mechanisms of accountability for judges, prosecutors and court staff is imperative. Such mechanisms must guarantee that the investigation of any actor in the judicial system safeguards the person’s right to a fair hearing. Investigations should be based on objective criteria, the process should respect the basic principles of a fair trial and an independent review of all decisions should be available.

Serious concerns were expressed to me regarding the system of appointment of judges. I believe that an appointment body acting independently from both the executive and legislative branches of Government should be established with the view to countering any politicization in the appointment of judges and their potential improper allegiance to interests other than those of fair and impartial justice. When selection criteria used by such a body are objective, clear, based on merit, transparent and well-publicized, public understanding of the process and the basis for the appointment of judges increases, and the perception of unfair selection or appointments can be avoided.

I have heard from numerous sources that the current composition of the Judicial Services Commission, the body in charge of the appointment, transfer, and removal of judges, is inadequate and politicized. Because of this politicization the Commission has been subjected to all sorts of external influence and consequently has been unable to function properly. While I believe that usually such a body should preferably be composed entirely of judges, retired or sitting, some representation of the legal profession or academics could be advisable. No political representation should be permitted.

I have heard concerns about the apparent lack of transparency in the assignment of cases, as well as in the constitution of benches, within all courts, including the Supreme Court. When cases are assigned in a subjective manner, the system becomes much more vulnerable to manipulation, corruption and external pressure. Information on the assignment of cases should be clearly available to the public in order to counter suspicions of malpractice and corruption.

I further believe that transparency in public administration is not an option, but a statutory and obligatory requirement that is fundamental to a democracy. Yet, transparency remains a challenge for the judiciary in the Maldives, like in many other parts of the world.

One major challenge for the fair, impartial and consistent delivery of justice is the lack of some basic pieces of legislation, such as the Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Civil Procedure Code, or the Evidence Act. As a result, judges have had to rely on laws and acts that were passed before the Constitution of 2008 and may contradict it, as well as on principles of Islamic Shari’ah, which is not codified and may be subject to different interpretations. This lack of legislation creates ambiguity and represents a real challenge for enforcing the rule of law and respecting the principle of legality.

I believe that a uniform legal system respecting the principles enshrined in the Constitution is necessary to create consistency in the administration of justice, avoiding difficulties for litigators to seek justice and judges to render decisions that are impartial and fair. When essential legislation is lacking it is also almost impossible to monitor the quality and consistency of justice delivery. Passing laws is imperative to implement the Constitution and the People’s Majlis should bear in mind how their actions or inaction affects the establishment of the rule of law. The Government too should show strong leadership to move the development and adoption of essential legislation forward and ensure that their contents are in line with the promotion and protection of human rights.

Coming to the legal profession, I would like to note that while lawyers are not expected to be impartial in the same way as judges, they must be as free from external pressures and interferences as judges are. When guarantees are not in place to enable lawyers to discharge their duties in an independent manner, the door is open to all sorts of pressure and interference, whether from public or private actors, including judges, who seek to have an impact on or control judicial proceedings.

I have serious concerns about the absence of an independent self-regulating Bar association or council that oversees the process of admitting candidates to the legal profession, provides for a uniform code of ethics and conduct, and enforces disciplinary measures, including disbarment. Such an organization would not only provide an umbrella of protection for its members against undue interference in their legal work, but also monitor and report on their members’ conduct and apply disciplinary measures in a fair and consistent manner.

It is contrary to the basic principles of the independence of lawyers that licences to practice law, as well as disciplinary measures, lay in the hands of the executive, in the case of the Maldives, the Attorney General. I further deem that the enforcement of compulsory registration of lawyers to appear before the courts by the courts themselves is unacceptable. Further, the regulation of disciplinary measures against lawyers falls outside of the prerogative of the judiciary and contradicts the principle of independence of the legal profession. I am also concerned about reports regarding threats of contempt of court used to muzzle the freedom of expression of lawyers. Lawyers like other citizens are entitled to freedom of expression, and in particular they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matter concerning the law, the administration of justice and the protection and promotion of human rights, without suffering professional restrictions.

I always pay particular attention to the integration of a gender perspective and women’s rights in the justice system, and I have done so during my mission in the Maldives. I am concerned that there are currently no women sitting on the Supreme Court and only eight women sitting in the High Court, the Superior Courts and the Magistrate Courts. It seems to me that these women reached their positions through sheer determination and dedication since there is no policy or strategy to increase women’s representation on the bench.

In addition, all members of the justice system should be sensitized to gender equality and women’s rights to make access to justice a reality for women in the Maldives. Similarly, access to justice for other members of society who are particularly vulnerable to discrimination, such as children, migrant workers, or persons with disabilities, should be enhanced, and the judiciary should take into account the specific challenges and obstacles they face.

I was struck to hear how little trust the public has in the justice system in the Maldives. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done and judges must not only be actually impartial they have to appear impartial to the public. The mind-sets of the public and the authorities, including judicial authorities, have not evolved as quickly as the changes were made to the Constitution and the laws of the Maldives. This created a disconnection between the promises of the 2008 Constitution and people’s expectations, and the reality of how justice is delivered and the separation of powers implemented.

Finally, I am seriously concerned about the lack or inadequacy of education and training possibilities for all actors of the justice system in the Maldives, especially lack of training on international principles, the nature of judicial independence, responsibility and integrity, international human rights law, the Constitution and new legislation passed. Professional trainings also seem to be lacking. Judges, prosecutors and lawyers should have access to a wide-range of legal literature in the official language, Dhivehi, and quality continuing education, including specialized training on gender equality and women’s rights, international human rights law, and the human rights mechanism. Such trainings must be accessible to all judicial actors, regardless of the level at which they operate.

In addition, all actors in the justice system, in particular judges, prosecutors and lawyers must be properly educated and trained with regard to their respective codes of ethics and standards of conduct. Available, accessible, appropriate and quality education and training can over the longer-term significantly change attitudes that would otherwise be susceptible to corrupt conduct, unfair trial and the improper application of the law, and pave the way for strengthening both the integrity of the justice system and its independence.

Let me conclude by calling upon the international community, including foreign partners, United Nations agencies and other international and non-governmental organizations, to strengthen their engagement in the Maldives and continue contributing to the consolidation of the justice sector and the independence of the judiciary and the legal profession with concrete and sustainable programmes, whose implementation can be monitored and assessed.

Thank you for your attention.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government denies deal over Nasheed’s exit from Indian High Commission

The Maldives government has denied it conceded to a deal with the Indian government which resulted in former President Mohamed Nasheed leaving the Indian High Commission on Saturday afternoon, after 11 days in protected diplomatic territory.

A statement released by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs today (February 24), stressed that Nasheed’s exit was not negotiated with the Indian government, adding that it cannot and will not negotiate regarding the charges put against the former president.

“Mr Nasheed went into the High Commission on 13 February 2013 seeking India’s ‘assistance’, and his continued stay and his decision to leave the High Commission was an issue between himself and the Indian High Commission,” the statement reads.

“The government of Maldives’ only involvement in the issue was in the implementation of the court order on the police to produce Nasheed to the court. The said court order expired on Wednesday, 20 February 2013.”

“The government of Maldives also wishes to reiterate its clear and firm position that it cannot, and will not, negotiate the charges laid against Mr Nasheed for unlawfully arresting a judge during his presidential tenure, in January 2012,” the statement continues.

The statement notes that upholding the rule of law and respecting the independence of the three arms of government were a “fundamental pillar” of President Mohamed Waheed administration.

“The charges are laid by the prosecutor general which is an independent institution under the constitution of Maldives. The government has made this position clear to all of its external friends, including India.”

Last night however, UK-based newspaper Daily Mail reported that Nasheed left the high commission following a “deal brokered by New Delhi with the Maldives government”.

The paper claimed that while New Delhi had been accused of shielding a “fugitive” by senior officials in the Maldives, it sent a high-level team to “sort out” the diplomatic crisis.

“Nasheed was assured that that he would be allowed the political and social space that he wants till the elections, but he was made to accept that he would follow the legal process,” a source was quoted as telling the Daily Mail.

The article stated the high-level team sent from India met with various Maldivian officials, including the defence minister and attorney general, to negotiate Nasheed’s “exit conditions”.

According to the Daily Mail, Nasheed was told that his political career would be destroyed “forever” should he stay inside the Indian High Commission, and that his opponents would use it against him in the run up to the September elections.

The Maldivian government was meanwhile told its “rigidity” would impact the country economically and prompt the international community to consider sanctions over possible human rights violations, the source told the publication.

Nasheed’s trial

Nasheed sought refuge inside the Indian High Commission after the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court issued an arrest warrant for police to produce the former president at the court for his trial hearing on February 13.

Nasheed has maintained that the charges against him – of detaining the Chief Criminal Court Judge during his final days in office – are a politically-motivated effort to prevent him contesting the 2013 elections.

A second arrest warrant was issued by the court on February 18 whilst Nasheed was still inside the Indian High Commission and required police to bring Nasheed to Hulhumale’ court on February 20.

The warrant expired after the hearing was cancelled following Nasheed’s refusal to leave the commission building for his scheduled trial.

After 11 consecutive days inside the High Commission, Nasheed emerged on Saturday (February 24) and subsequently held a press conference in the Dharubaaruge exhibition hall, across the street from the party’s former protest site at Usfasgandu.

Nasheed emphasised his desire for stability to be restored, following eight days of continuous protests by the MDP, dozens of police arrests, and a violent attack on a Maldivian journalist.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Certain parliamentary committees trying to discredit police: Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz has claimed “certain” parliamentary select committees are purposefully attempting to discredit the police institution and tarnish its public image.

Riyaz made the remarks during a ceremony today to open a police station on Fenfushi in Alifu Atoll.

The commissioner said that some parliament members were attempting to harass specific police officers of different ranks in the name of “holding the police accountable”. He further said that such practices are not accepted in modern democratic states.

“Some parliamentary committees are very clearly trying to discredit the [police] institution. That is not something I will accept,” he said.

Riyaz said it was the parliament’s ‘241 Committee’ to which the police should be accountable.

“The constitution clearly states that the police should be accountable to parliament’s ‘241 committee’.  I have discussed this with several legal practitioners. They also say that police should be accountable to the said committee. Last week, we have requested advice from the attorney general on this issue,” he said.

Riyaz’s comments come at a time where Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee (EOC) – which has an opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) majority – has again sent a notice requesting the commissioner appear before the committee.

Previously, he was summoned before the EOC over a leaked video showing the death of a bystander after police attempted to stop a speeding motorcycle suspected of being driven by thieves to flee a crime scene.

Commissioner Riyaz also contended that the police were working independently and “without any political influence” stating that he had never seen a police institution as independent as his in the last two governments.

“I have been in this field for almost 24 years. During my time, I have never seen a more independent police institution than the current one, where police are allowed to carry out their operations independently and free from political influence,” he said.

Speaking to Minivan News, EOC member MP Ahmed Easa dismissed Riyaz’s claims, stating that police had already lost the public’s respect and the confidence once held in the institution, and that there was “no point Riyaz talking about it now.”

“The police lost credibility among the public the day they came out on the streets, toppled an elected democratic government and brutalised the people they were supposed to defend and uphold,” Easa said.

According to the Kendhikulhudhoo MP, the police, especially Special Operations (SO) officers, had become a “mob gang” instead of a respectable police force.

“The SO police now come out on the streets with the sole intention to torture people. They possess dangerous objects which could seriously harm a civilian. We have got video footage to support this claim,” he said.

Easa suggested that parliament’s Privileges Committee look into Riyaz’s “defamatory” comments against parliament and take prompt action on the matter.

He also contended that the EOC had the mandate to summon any individual from the executive branch for questioning, and that this was very clearly mentioned in the parliament’s regulations and the constitution.

“If he does not believe what has been clearly set out in the laws of this country, that means he is no longer fit to be the commissioner of police. He should be listening to the attorney general, not just a bunch of lawyers who tells him things the way he wishes to hear,” Easa said.

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz, Parliament’s Counsel General Fathimath Filza and Parliamentary Speaker Abdulla Shahid were not responding to calls at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court overturns Civil Court ruling against Male’ City Council over MDP protest site

The High Court has invalidated a Civil Court ruling ordering Male’ City Council (MCC) to hand over the MDP’s protest site to the government.  The area was previously leased to the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

Earlier this month, the Civil Court ordered Male’ City Council to clear the land plot and hand it over to the Housing Ministry. The MCC appealed the Civil Court ruling, claiming that the court had not given the council an opportunity to defend itself, making the ruling unlawful.

The High Court today ruled that the Civil Court had failed to follow legal procedures in its hearing of the case, concluding that its ruling at the time was unlawful.

Presiding judges Justice Azmiralda Zahir, Justice Yousuf Hussain and Justice Abbas Shareef all backed the verdict today. Following the High Court ruling, police removed the barricades on Boduthakurufaanu Magu behind the STELCO and reopened the Usfasgandu area.

The area was cordoned off by police late last month after the High Court issued a warrant requesting the area be kept under police custody until it reached on verdict on the case.

MDP protesters clashed with the police several times after they cordoned off the site.

Lease dispute

Male’ City Council (MCC) leased the Usfasgandu area to the ousted ruling party in March 2012, prompting repeated attempts by the government to reclaim the area on the grounds it was being used for criminal activity, including the practice of black magic.

The MDP had moved to the area after a previous protest camp at the tsunami monument was dismantled and completely repainted by police and military on March 19, 2012.

On May 29, police raided the Usfasgandu site after obtaining a search warrant from the Criminal Court, ordering the MDP to vacate the area. The Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) then began dismantling the protest camp.

The Housing Ministry filed a case with the Civil Court after MCC refused to hand the land plot to the ministry.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM reclaim spot as second largest political party in Maldives

Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) has taken back its place as the second largest political party in the Maldives, local media reports.

Earlier this month, the PPM was overtaken by the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) by just 64 members.

Latest figures from the political party registry of the Elections Commission (EC) show that PPM now has a 583-member lead over DRP, which has 22,182 members, local media reported.

Despite PPM, with 22,765 members, overtaking DRP, the party has less than half the number of members of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) which currently stands at 46,533 – the largest political party in the Maldives.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM deny rumours that party called for MDP members to be killed

The Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has denied reports it made threats to kill Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) members at a party rally last week.

Local media reported that a statement issued by PPM insisted that the party had not incited or called for violence, claiming that the rumours were due to the party’s “increasing popularity”.

According to local media, rumours had spread on social media claiming that PPM MP Shifag Mufeed had called for MDP members to be killed.

In response, PPM noted that Shifag or any other member had not made the comments, adding that the rumour had sparked death threats to Shifaq.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Journalists need to act more professionally to prevent further confrontation: MJA, MBC

National media body figureheads have called on journalists to act more professionally to prevent future confrontations between themselves and the public.

Their comments follow a brutal attack on a senior reporter from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)-aligned Raajje TV station, who was left in a critical condition.

The reporter, Ibrahim ‘Aswad’ Waheed, was attacked with an iron bar while riding on a motorcycle near the artificial beach area in the capital Male’.

Two Television Maldives (TVM) journalists were also attacked on the same night with an irritant – reported to be paint thinner in local media – while covering protests on Sosun Magu in Male’.

While no arrests have been reported by police, Maldives Police Service Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News today that “progress” had been made in regard to the investigation.

Senior figures from both Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) and Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) have since said that journalists need to act in a more professional manner in order to help prevent future confrontations between the public and reporters.

MBC Vice President Mohamed Shahyb told Minivan News that journalists have been targeted because “hatred has been building” towards them over a long period of time.

“Some journalists are not doing their work professionally in the Maldives. The biggest problem is that they do not have much education or training [in journalism] and because of that they write anything.

“If the professional standard can be maintained, similar incidents can be contained and controlled,” Shahyb told Minivan News.

The MBC Vice President claimed that there are “too many opinions” leaking into news reports and that politicians need to start “pointing their fingers” at journalists who are not working in the correct manner.

“Social networking is also a big problem. Even if they work professionally, they then go onto social media sites and start expressing their own personal feelings, this is an issue,” Shahyb said.

MJA President, Ahmed ‘Hiriga’ Zahir, expressed similar concern, adding that journalists need to be more impartial with their reporting.

“We need to encourage media to be more objective. When we listen to the TV or radio we can’t tell the difference between an opinion piece or the actual news itself.”

On Saturday, Zahir requested the media to act more professionally and stop “spreading hatred”, while calling for police to give greater protection to journalists.

Meanwhile, President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik called on the media to “encourage stability, unity and harmony” in the country, adding that those responsible for the attacks will be brought to justice.

Police protection kits

Assistant Commissioner of Police Ahmed Saudhee told local media on Saturday that police will now provide safety equipment for journalists when covering protests, and that special efforts will be made to investigate and prosecute the attacks on persons of the media.

“Right now, we can do two things towards extending protection for journalists. As such, we will give special attention to investigate and prosecute the attacks made on the police, and we’ll work hastily to towards this end.

“Next, in order to cover the protests as closely as possible, we will provide the kits used by the police to a selected journalists, for their safety and protection,” Saudhee was quoted as saying in Sun Online.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Haneef told Minivan News today that the kits will be made available to journalists should they make a request for the equipment.

Violence condemned

Maldivian journalists took to the streets of Male’ yesterday to protests against the recent attacks, joining international organisations who have also condemned the violence.

The United States Embassy in Colombo released a statement on Saturday expressing concern over the attacks on the journalists.

“Freedom of expression is a fundamental democratic right, and we strongly condemn these attacks on Maldives media personnel. We urge all Maldivians to refrain from violence, urge protesters and police to respect the right of all media outlets to cover demonstrations,” the statement read.

Meanwhile, the United Nations in the Maldives said the violence amounted to an attack on freedom of expression and merited “prompt investigations”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Man dies during MNDF military training programme

A man has died while taking part in a military training program in Addu City yesterday (February 23), local media reports.

Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) Media Officer Abdulla Ali told local media that the man, 24 year-old Ismail Habeeb of Seenu Feydhoo Dhunnikage, died whilst taking part in swimming training.

Local media reported that Habeeb had just completed his 200 metre swimming test before suddenly drowning as he touched the finish mark.

Ali said instructors had jumped in and taken him out of the water within five seconds, and took him to Hithadhoo Regional Hospital immediately.

The MNDF media officer said the hospital had confirmed Habeeb’s death, but said the official cause of death can only be confirmed after a review of the doctor’s reports.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Translation: Former Police Commissioner’s statement to CoNI

This translation first appeared on Dhivehisitee. Republished with permission

This is a translation of an extract from the former Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh’s testimony to the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) on the events of 7 February 2012. Despite being a national inquiry, none of the evidence has been shared with the public. Faseeh’s testimony was leaked on the Internet recently.

It was the evening of 6 February 2012. Like all other nights, there would be protests. Aware of this, we pushed protesters back from near MTCC to the market area. Displeased, they moved to the Artificial Beach. The protest kicked off around 9:00.

On one side was the so-called Coalition – PPM, Qaumee Party, Jumhooree Party, these parties. There were about 200-300 of them. On the other side was MDP—actually, it was pro-MDP supporters—with 200 or so people.

I was in and out of the Ops Room. The phone rang.

“Withdraw the police, Faseeh.” It was our Minister.

“Why?” I asked.

“Faseeh, withdraw the police. Every night, things end the same way now. They are the ones making things worse.”

A superior or not, I respond only when I am clear on what I am being asked to do, and when I know whether it can be done or not. I quickly assessed the situation. There were violent people on one side, some of them carried stones. People on both sides had planks of wood. Our troops were in the middle. We were concentrating on keeping them apart.

Around 9:30-10:00 [pm] the phone rang. It was the President.

“Faseeh, we cannot trust the police now. Every night this is allowed to drag on until about 3:00. Withdraw them.”

I dispatched Farhad Fikry, head of directorate, to take stock.

“The situation is very bad. If we withdraw, things will get worse,” Fikry reported back five minutes later.

It was around this time that I realised the President did not trust us either.

The only option was for the military to take over. Back when the protests began we made a collective request for military assistance through the Home Ministry. The law allows us to do that.

I rang Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim.

“Sir, here is what is happening”, I updated him. “I will not withdraw until you come.”

“No problem,” Tholhath said, “I’ll get a team ready.”

I think they took about twenty-five minutes. They are slow, not very practised on the streets. I doubted their ability to tackle the situation.

Our boys came to the Republic Square once the military took over. I think there were about three platoons. There are 30 in each platoon; and there were about 90 people.

Around 10:30, I was in my office with Assistant Commissioner Sadiq, and an older colleague, discussing the situation.

“Hear that?” Sadiq interrupted.

We went to the balcony. They were running up and down, screaming filth. I rushed downstairs from my fourth floor office. Deputy Commissioner Atheef and were running down too.

‘Ganja Bo!’ [Pothead!], the boys shouted. A lot else too.

I knew then these boys were no longer following orders.

They were leaving in lorries. Atheef managed to grab the key off one of the vehicles. Two platoons left, one couldn’t. Some may have left on other vehicles, I am not sure. I did not see that. This was Marine Drive, in front of Boduthakurufaanu Magu police [building]. I used the western exit.

I was in shock. And why wouldn’t I be? This was definitely not acceptable police behaviour.

My phone rang.

“They are going past our house towards MDP Haruge”, a close friend reported. He lives on Ameenee Magu, near Dharubaaruge.

“Police are headed West, shouting filth. We’ll destroy it, they are saying. This is about MDP Haruge. I think they are going to the Haruge. Check what’s going on!”

Soon I received information they went to the area under military control, beat up MDP people there. As if that wasn’t enough, the next platoon headed to MDP Haruge, beat more people up, vandalised the place. They did a whole lot of other things.

I felt dejected, drained, seeing such indiscipline from the police.

After doing whatever it was they did, they returned to the Republic Square. I think there were about 90 on the helipad. Some more police stood on the sides. A few Blues on standby, too. Roughly, there were about 100, 150 boys milling about.

I rang my Deputy, Muneer.

“Talk to them. Ask them about what they just did. Ask them what. Why.” I instructed him.

It was around 10:30, from what I recall. Muneer attempted to talk to a deputy commissioner.

“La ilaha ilallah!” he reported back. “Those people are beyond talking. They are barbaric; they are not following orders.”

I saw Deputy Commissioner Atheef. I was standing outside the police [building], behind the flag, on the pavement. I intended to talk to them but I saw their behaviour and changed my mind. I saw Atheef going into the crowd. No sooner did he go in, he came back out. The place was in complete chaos, I knew then. There was no discipline, no order.

Around 11:00, I called Tholhath and went to the military headquarters. The current Chief of Defence Force General Shiyam, former Chief of Defence Force Moosa Ali Jaleel, Colonel Ziyad, Tolhath, and former Brigadier General Ibrahim Didi were there.

“The police have mutinied,” I said to Tholhath. “They are not following my orders. I don’t have a force to control them. I cannot do anything until you have them isolated. I have only the Blues, who can’t control them. I am helpless.

It’s impossible to talk to them. If approached, they shout filth. That’s the level they have sunk to. They broke into MDP Haruge, vandalised it. They are acting on their own. They are not ‘right’ any more.”

“Don’t worry, Faseeh. I will do that now,” Tholhath reassured me.

Order after order was given. Jaleel also. Orders were recorded at 1:30, 2:30, 3:30, 4:30. Nothing happened.

Outside, a rumour had taken hold: the military were coming out to beat the police.

“The military are about to come out, we must confront them,” this is what was being said. Of course, it affected the Blues and all other police. The Blues moved closer, began mingling with them. Now they numbered about 300 altogether.

Around 3:30 [a.m.] Ibrahim Didi came in.

“We don’t have the capacity to control them without causing great casualties. The police will be very strong if they come with batons and gas,” he said to Tolhath.

The same thing happened many times. It dragged on.

Meanwhile, outside, they kept calling for the President to resign. They jumped up and down. They screamed. “Ganja Boa Resign!”, reverberated across the air.

Until then, I thought this was perhaps about the arrest of Abdulla Ghaazee, or about being taken into military custody. Or maybe they were exhausted and angry, forced to control protests every night.

But, listening to the “Ganja Boa Resign!” screams, I realised. It was political.

Once again, I felt dejected.

Suddenly, the President arrived. It was 4:30, 5:00.

“Do it before sunrise, or it can’t be done. This is a small thing, is it not? Even I can do it. Shall I do it?” The President was speaking to Jaleel.

“No, no,” was the reply. The military came out then.

There were three platoons, from what I can remember. They formed a line outside the entrance of the police building. Those police were on the helipad. They were shouting loudly. The place was about to erupt. A confrontation between the military and the police seemed imminent. Any announcement we made, they responded with loud screams. It was, really, specifically, impossible to continue.

The military advanced. It retreated. Advanced, retreated. Those gentlemen just couldn’t do anything. They went out, they came back in. The military failed.

Dawn had broken, the first prayer call had been sounded. I remember it as being around 5:45. Between 5:45-6:00. Or maybe it was past 6:00. Between 5:45 and 6:15 anyway. The President called me to a meeting.

Home Minister, Defence Minister, Chief of Defence Force Jaleel, current Chief Shiyam, General Didi, General Nilam were also present.

“What’s your view?” the President asked me.

“Same as before. I don’t have any power right now. The only way is through the military. And that still has not been done,” I replied.

“Why don’t you talk to them?”

“Yes, I can do that,” I said, and left immediately.

I did my morning prayer. I had been unable to till then.

“I want to meet with them,” I told my secretary. “Assess the situation.”

“There are members of public, there are others. They don’t seem right, Sir.”

I thought it better to ask four or five senior boys among them to come and meet with me instead.

Earlier the President had given me a message to relay to the boys.

“We pardon you for all the things that we can pardon you for. Of course, if you have hit somebody, it cannot be done.”

It was a good message he came with, is it not?

“There are no seniors. We are all equal, and we speak with one voice,” was their response to my request for a meeting.

“But there would be people senior in rank!” They ignored me.

I asked Head of Intelligence to find out what the mood was like among them. To negotiate.

“They would like to come and talk,” he reported back.

I waited for a long time, then went up for breakfast. It was past 7:00. The din from outside suddenly grew incredibly loud. I went up on the terrace to look. Enmass, police on the helipad were running towards Najah Art Palace. Towards the Chandhani Magu and Orchid Magu intersection. They ran hard, they were screaming.

A group of MDP people had arrived when police were chanting their pledge. The police were running to beat them up.

I don’t know…I did not bother with breakfast, I went straight to my room. Afterwards, I slipped quietly out to my office, that is, the Commissioner’s administrative office.

Outside the police gates! Outside the police gates there was chaos. The police—screaming, throwing stones…more.

“They have started damaging the police [building] now,” some female office staff reported.

I think I called Tholhath. I vaguely remember doing that. But I am not sure. I think I said to him, “They are now attacking police. Find a way to stop them.”

Some of the military, about 60 or 90, came out. In full riot gear. But they could not control the police.

The military and the police confronted each other. They damaged a military truck, threw things at the main gate of the military headquarters. If one threw a canister, the other did the same. If one side threw a stone, the other threw three back. Back and forth they went. Time passed. Some military personnel joined them.

“Superintendent Ibrahim Manik is being brought out, people kicking and beating him!” a female officer suddenly cried. It was true. They were kicking him like he was a football. I saw, but I could not look for long.

“Sir, you shouldn’t come out to investigate. They might see you and come for you. They may beat you too,” someone said.

“Jinah is also being taken out,” I heard next.

I saw people being beaten. I heard destruction, the sound of glass shattering, then falling.

“They are looking for you too. A Shahil and a Khithram were here asking for you,” my secretary said. Those two had been in the SO.

“We pretended you were not here,” she said.

There were about six boys standing guard at the door leading to my section. I was in there with the door to the Commissioner’s administrative office closed. There were two bodyguards with me, and my administrative staff. Some boys who wish me well were outside. I was protected.

They brought back news of places damaged.

“The mess room has been destroyed,” they told me.

“Who did it?”

“They did it. The police.”

When police started destroying police property, when they started beating people up, it really upset me. They were beyond control, beyond reason.

Around 10:30-11:00, Colonel Nazim, F.A [Mohamed Fayaz] and Abdulla Riyaz [current CP] arrived. If you are in the police, you know who these three gentlemen are. Two of them are ex-police. The third, Nazim, is ex-military.

“We are going into the military HQ to talk,” they announced.

“What are these people doing here? What is going on?” I wondered.

It was Nazim on the megaphone. I know his voice, he is a classmate of mine. Three years.

“We have met with the military leaders. I have ordered the president to resign. He will be resigning in the next one and a half to two hours. I have also ordered the Police Commissioner and his two Deputies to write their resignation letters without condition,” Nazim was saying.

All control was lost. I must save my life, I thought. I told my secretary to write a letter seeking an honorary retirement. I put the letter on my desk and sat there. I was afraid, I was a captive in the room. Time passed.

I think it was around 13:30 when I heard of the President’s resignation.

Around 2:00, I heard Superintendent Fairoosh was looking for me. They are based on the floor above me.

I had heard of outsiders entering the building — Hassan Saeed, Gasim Ibrahim, Sheikh Imran, these people. There had been a takeover, I knew.

I went up to meet Fairoosh.

“Sir, you have to meet all the officers,” he said. There were several in the room. There was destruction in the room, too. And in the Minister’s office. I walked across the shattered glass on the floor and sat down at the end of the table.

“This is not the worst day. It sets a dangerous precedent. It is sad,” I started.

“Are you not resigning?” Fairoosh asked.

“I have resigned. I have written the letter. But I do not know who to give it to,” I said.

Fairoosh was the automatic leader. Remember I said I ran downstairs, suddenly, at the start of all this? He is one of the boys who met me then.

“What is going on, Sir? This has to be corrected!” he said to me then. He was abrupt, brisk. Disrespectful. He had been a part of it from the beginning. Now he was asking me about my retirement.

“I intend to retire, but I do not know who to hand the notice in to,” I replied.

Shortly after, I heard Fairoosh was now the Acting Commissioner. I was shocked. My retirement was yet to be accepted. They took it upon themselves. Apparently, they even took a vote. Sadiq’s name was proposed, he withdrew it. Anyway, it was Fairoosh that was selected.

This is how things happened.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)