Month: March 2013

President Waheed claims 10,000 members for GIP by March 10

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik has claimed that his Gaumee Ithihaad Party (GIP) will reach 10,000 members by Sunday (March 10).

Speaking to local media, the president claimed that 9,000 members had signed for the party and that extensive campaigning was being carried out in Male’ to increase GIP’s membership.

Despite the president’s claims, the Elections Commission political registry presently shows that his party has only 4,012 registered members, local media reported.

President Waheed told local media that the push to reach 10,000 members was due to the recently passed political party bill, which states that any party with less than 10,000 members could face dissolution.

“I still don’t believe that this is something they [Parliament] should have done. I believe forming clubs, organisations and political parties is a right enshrined in the constitution. That is a fundamental right,” Waheed was told local newspaper Haveeru.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Liberian player signed to Maldivian football club “trapped” in Male’ after salary dispute

A Liberian striker brought in to play for a Maldivian football club has spoken of his desperation as he remains trapped in the Maldives with no money and no ticket home.

Wright Charles Gaye, a former striker for Maldivian football club Club Valencia, has spent the last six months living in poverty after the club failed to provide him with two month’s owed salary and a promised one-way ticket home.

Speaking to Minivan News on Thursday (March 7), the 27-year-old Liberian national revealed how he had been forced to live in accommodation with no water or electricity, having to survive on handouts from club officials and other players.

“It has been terrible. I am owed US$2,600 and a one-way-ticket home to Liberia, but for six months I have received nothing.

“It’s hard because I have family back in Africa. They are looking to me because I have to send money back. My son is no longer is school because I don’t have the money to send home,” Charles said.

The issue has now attracted the attention of Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), after Charles lodged a formal complaint to the international organisation.

A letter from FIFA calls for the Football Association of Maldives (FAM) to provide Club Valencia’s position on the claim lodged by Charles no later than March 25.

FAM was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Charles, who has played for multiple clubs in Maldives, Sri Lanka and Liberia, claimed that Valencia’s Chairman Ibrahim Raai Rasheed had told him not to put anything in the news regarding his situation.

“He [Rasheed] is going around telling people that everything is okay for me. But if you want to believe that you can come and see my apartment.

“A former official from the club is giving me MVR 500 (US$32) a week because he feels sorry for me. It’s hard to survive on, but I feel ashamed to be calling for help,” he added.

The Liberian striker said that he had been recently moved into a guest house by his former club after he complained about the lack of electricity and water at his apartment.

Charles claimed that Rasheed had made multiple “promises” to the striker, assuring him that he would be given his wages and a flight home, but each time the chairman did not deliver.

“Sometimes the chairman would call me and say ‘Charles pack your things, you are leaving tomorrow, get your money together and get ready’, so when I pack and call him back, he doesn’t pick up. This has happened two or three times,” Charles said.

“In December I was told I would be leaving on December 23 and would arrive on December 25 on Christmas morning. It meant I would see my son and would get to spend Christmas with him. But over the next few days he was not taking my calls. When he did eventually pick up, he would just say ‘I’m busy, I’ll call you back,” he added.

Club Valencia responds

Responding to the footballer’s claims, Club Valencia Management – when contacted by Minivan News – said that Charles will be paid his full wages and will be given a ticket home to Liberia in Africa.

“There has been a lot of miscommunication recently. Charles has communicated with me on only a few things, but I feel bad for him,” a club official claimed. “His salary and ticket home is now all sorted had he will be returning home.”

The club’s management denied that Charles’ apartment was without running water and electricity, adding that they had written proof of utility bills for the months he had stayed there.

The reason behind the delay in Charles’ payments – according to Club Valencia Management – was that there had been delays in financial assistance from the sports ministry and from the club’s sponsorship.

Despite Valencia’s claims of financial hardship, the Liberian striker claimed that the club had recently brought in three foreign new players and a new coach for the team.

“[Valencia] must have the money. If they don’t, how can they bring in these new players, put them in a big hotel and let them eat in good restaurants? How can they do all that and not pay me?” Charles said.

Club Valencia Management confirmed that three new players and a coach had been taken on by the club.

Life as a foreign footballer in the Maldives

Wright Charles Gaye came to the Maldives four years ago after being signed by New Radiant SC, where he experienced similar pay disputes with the club before transferring to VB Addu FC – known as VB Sport Club until January 2012.

Following a complaint to the Football Association of Maldives over a lack of pay for six months, Charles was eventually paid by New Radiant SC in November 2012.

The striker joined Valencia in the June 2012 transfer period, and started playing in July until the clubs last game on September 28.

Having allegedly only received one month’s pay for July, Charles then left the club and has been waiting for a promised ‘one-way-ticket’ home and his remaining two month salary.

“When you first come to the Maldives as a player, they talk to you nicely and treat you well, but as soon as you sign the papers, it all finishes.

“Some Maldivian players have the same issue, I know two or three players from different clubs who have had payment problems, but for the foreign players it is worse,” Charles said.

The Liberian national also revealed how certain clubs retain foreign player’s passports over concern that the players will buy their own tickets and fly home.

“I have a friend who played here from Cameroon and the club hid his passport, and would not return it when he asked for it back.

“Whenever you ask for your passport they would give you a story, maybe say that is being kept in immigration. They have asked for mine before, but I know what would happen if I gave it them,” Charles alleged.

Addendum: Wright Charles Gaye subsequently contacted Minivan News to say Valencia had paid the US$2,600, an additional one month’s salary and had booked him a one-way flight to Liberia.

Photograph: Maldivesoccer.com

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Calls for Chinese tourism boycott over allegations of ‘cup noodle’ discrimination

Additional reporting by Neil Merrett.

Calls for a tourism boycott of the Maldives have exploded across Chinese social media networks, after allegations of discrimination against guests from China at one resort became widely circulated.

On March 1, dismissed Chinese employees of the Beach House Iruveli resort – formerly Waldorf Astoria – posted allegations on the Chinese forum Tianya that guests from the country were receiving inferior treatment to Europeans, despite paying the same prices.

The staff alleged that this discrimination extended to removing kettles from the rooms of Chinese guests, to prevent them making instant noodles in their rooms and thereby forcing them into the resort’s restaurants.

Despite claiming that 90 percent of the resorts guests were Chinese, the resort assumed Chinese guests should be able to speak English and was unwilling to hire Mandarin speakers who were able to communicate with the guests, the dismissed staff alleged.

“We watched our compatriots suffer unfair treatment but could do nothing,” wrote the employees, in Mandarin.

Chinese staff at the resort who voiced concern were dismissed and sent back to China, the staff alleged, and in some cases were made to pay their own airfare out of their owing wages.

One of the staff members began a “revolt”, according to the post, and refused to agree to the terms of his dismissal from the “Human Resources Ministry”, labelling it “unfair treatment”.

The Chinese staff members said they are ultimately forced to resign “after the Ministry of Personnel and Security began 24-hour surveillance, confiscating our phones, blocking our internet and controlling our [communications] with the outside world.

“We were treated like criminals to be monitored, and felt our safety was threatened. We simply could not imagine things would develop to the point where our heart is filled with panic, we tried every way to appeal to the outside world for help.

“Later, with a friend’s help, we called the Chinese Embassy in Sri Lanka, and Ambassador Hu was able to guarantee our safety,” the staff wrote.

The staff said they were too exhausted by that stage to argue with the deductions on their wages imposed by the Human Resources department, as the just wanted to the experience to “end as soon as possible” and return home.

“We do not want this kind of discrimination, not this unfair treatment. Our Chinese tourists spend money here not to be frowned upon, to be discriminated against as second-class guests. We want fair treatment and truly five-star service.

“For those who discriminate against Chinese guests, I hope you will sincerely apologise to the Chinese people,” the post concluded.

Resort responds

In response to the allegations of the dismissed staff, Beach House Iruveli issued a statement confirming that a group of five Chinese staff members “resigned on their own accord on February 18, 2013.”

“We continue to operate a dedicated staff of Chinese Villa Hosts at the resort who are solely responsible for looking after the specific needs of our Chinese guests. Our resident Chinese staff are happy and fulfilling their duties as per the high standards of the resort and guest expectations,” the statement read.

“The Beach House Iruveli did remove some damaged kettles from rooms as part of routine maintenance due to the fact that these kettles were damaged by guests by cooking food. However, nespresso machines are always available in all rooms as part of full amenities and also dispense hot water to all guests,” stated Haydee Cruz, the resort’s Director of Sales and Marketing.

“The Beach House Iruveli has a policy to allocate a Villa Host to the respective language spoken by the guests. In this regard, we have Chinese Villa Hosts for Chinese speaking guests. We have not received any guest complaints regarding the alleged discrimination from a specific group of former employees relating to a difference of treatment and continue to only receive positive comments and appreciation from our Chinese guests,” Cruz said.

“The Chinese market is very important for us and are always warmly welcomed to the Beach House Iruveli. As a result of the defamatory accusations against The Beach House Iruveli our legal representatives have been engaged,” Cruz added.

Impact

By Sunday, the employees’ post had been forward over 91,000 times across the Chinese blogosphere, according to one report from the International Herald Tribune, and sparked calls for a Chinese tourism boycott of the Maldives in Chinese media.

One Bejing-based travel agent specialising in the Maldives told the South China Morning Post that many Chinese tourists had started cancelling their plans to visit the country.

Discriminatory treatment was “very rare” at resorts in the Maldives, the agent explained, however “after the incident, my clients now all make a new request when booking resorts: no discrimination.”

Chinese tourists now dominate tourism statistics in terms of arrivals, accounting for almost a quarter of all visitors to the Maldives in 2012.

Despite the high numbers – more than double the Maldives’ traditional UK market – many resorts regard Chinese guests as relatively ‘low-yield’ due to lower spending on extras such as food and drink, and instead use their numbers to boost occupancy rates during the off season.

A Chinese boycott now would hit the tourism sector in the Maldives just as the industry goes into its off-peak period.

Meanwhile, the sector’s once explosive double-figure growth fell to just 0.7 percent last year, falling from 15.8 percent in 2010 and 9.1 percent in 2011.

The market has also proved very sensitive to political upheaval, and was the first targeted for a ‘reassurance’ mission by the Maldives Marketing and PR Corporation (MMPRC) following the events of February 2012 and the cancellation of several charter flights.

A few Maldivian travel agencies who work closely with the Chinese market told Minivan News at the time that “quite a lot of Chinese customers are very concerned of this situation. Some of them are hesitant to make reservations now,” said Emy Zheng, a Chinese national working at Villuxa Holidays. She noted that only a few bookings were been cancelled, while others have tried to postpone their holiday.

Government responds to boycott claims

Minister of Tourism Ahmed Adheeb said no formal complaints had been received by Maldivian authorities over alleged discrimination at the country’s resorts.

However, Adheeb asked that in future, any tourists who had such complaints about their treatment file such concerns with the tourism ministry and other relevant authorities rather than through the press and social media.

“We have not received any complaints of discrimination like this, but we do take such incidents seriously,” he said, claiming that the Iruveli allegations appeared to have been raised by disgruntled former resort staff.

“What seems to have happened is that a staff member has been dismissed from this resort and has a lot of hate for the company,” Adheeb said.

“China presents a new market that has seen rapid growth I think since 2009. We are working to try and adapt at the best level possible and we have seen Chinese staff now working at resorts and even Chinese restaurants are being set up to cater for guests,” he added.

Since the inception of the Maldives tourism industry 40 years ago, Adheeb claimed that there traditionally had been teething problems for the resort industry in adapting to new markets, but that these had always been overcome with time.

“In the early days [of tourism], there were some tensions between German and Italian tourists at resorts, but we always have figured out how to adapt to this,” he said.

“Looking at some of the letters the ministry has received, we used to get complaints from resorts about noise created by Russian tourists. However they are now often the most preferred guests in the country. Travel trends are always changing.”

While expressing sadness at allegations raised in Chinese media, Adheeb said expressed his belief that particularly with China being the largest tourism market for the Maldives, the tourism industry was not biased or discriminatory.

“We [Maldivians] are not biased or discriminatory by nature. There is perhaps a little bias with Asians in the region similar to us, but not to the Chinese,” he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament could force journalists to reveal sources under new Privileges Act, warn police, MJA

The Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) and Maldives Police Service have both expressed concern over the recently passed Parliamentary Privileges Act.

The bill was forced into law last week after parliamentarians voted by a majority of 41 to overrule a previous presidential veto. The Majlis had originally approved the bill and sent it for ratification on December 27, 2012.

The bill was later returned by President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik.

In a statement released on Sunday (March 10), the MJA claimed the legislation posed serious challenges for free and independent journalism.  The association therefore urged parliament to “immediately” change the extra-constitutional clauses that it said compromised the rights and freedom given to journalists by the constitution.

MJA contended that stipulations stated in Section 17(a) of the act – which concerns the summoning of parties to give witness to parliament or its committees – meant that journalists could be forced by the parliament to reveal their sources. The association contended that such a clause to provide sources would undermine Article 28 of the Maldives Constitution.

Section 17(a) of the Parliamentary Privileges Act states: “[Parliament or a Parliamentary Committee has the power to] summon anyone to parliament or one of its committees to give witness or to hand over any information which the parliament wish to seek.”

However, Article 28 of the constitution states – “Everyone has the right to freedom of the press, and other means of communication, including the right to espouse, disseminate and publish news, information, views and ideas. No person shall be compelled to disclose the source of any information that is espoused, disseminated or published by that person.”

The MJA, in its statement, claimed that such contradictions gave “reason for doubt” on the legality of the stated article of the Parliamentary Privileges Act.

It also claimed that certain clauses of the act were too vague and ambiguous, and could leave questions as to how a person can violate the privilege of the parliament open to interpretation.

The association claimed former President Mohamed Nasheed’s administration had previously tried to limit instances where journalists faced criminal prosecutions.

However, in its most recent statement, the MJA said it questioned whether Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) had now changed its stand towards the issue.

The Parliamentary Privileges Act was passed with bipartisan support including that of the opposition MDP, which presently holds the largest number of elected officials in parliament.

Police concerns

Meanwhile, Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz in an interview given to local media also expressed concern over the act, claiming the MPs are now “technically immune from the law”.

The commissioner of police stated that the act meant police would not be allowed to arrest a parliamentarian even if he was involved in severe corruption and bribery.

Section 3(b) of the Privileges Act states: “A member of parliament should not be arrested while he is on his way to execute his parliamentary duties or while he is inside the premises of the parliament or while he is on his way from the parliament. However, the section does not obstruct arresting a member of parliament who is found committing a crime and the due legal process involving the arrest.”

In the event that an MP has to be arrested under different circumstances, police must provide a court order obtained through an application by the Prosecutor General, according to the act.

Commissioner Riyaz claimed that the act gives enormous privileges to parliamentarians – privileges that are not even given to former presidents, which he said was “very concerning” and meant there would be no equality before the law.

“The [act] says that no person should indulge in an act that obstructs the work of the parliament. I really don’t comprehend what it is trying to say. I don’t think anybody would know beforehand what the parliament may decide to do. I don’t believe that is possible,” he said.

Riyaz further stated that he had requested Attorney General Azima Shukoor find a solution through the Supreme Court concerning the sections which obstructed the execution of police duty.

“The law even does not bar judges from being taken in for questioning. But according to this act, it seems to claim that MPs cannot be arrested at all,” he said.

He further criticised the bill for including the punishment of imprisonment for the offence of violating parliamentary privilege, stating that such criminalisation did not fit with modern democratic practices and standards.

According to the act, a person found guilty of committing offences deemed disrespectful towards parliament, or that interferes with the Majlis work, would face a fine or a jail sentence of between three to six months.

It further stipulates that members of the public found guilty of disruption while attending the People’s Majlis to view proceedings would either be fined between MVR 500 (US$32) or MVR 1000 (US$65) or sentenced to jail for three to six months.

Moreover, persons found guilty of providing false information to the parliament or any of its committees would be fined an amount between MVR 3,000 (US$195) and MVR 10,000 (US$650) or sentenced to three to six months in jail.

Parliament Counsel General Fathimath Filza was not responding at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Religious obligation” to bar Nasheed from upcoming election: Home Minister Dr Jameel

Additional Reporting by Mohamed Naahii

Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has claimed it is a religious obligation to bar former President Mohamed Nasheed from contesting the upcoming presidential elections, scheduled to take place on September 7.

Speaking at a rally held by Progressive Party of Maldives’ (PPM) presidential primary candidate Abdulla Yameen on Saturday (March 9), Jameel accused Nasheed of being a “coward” who ran away after resigning from power, adding that he no longer had the courage to lead the country.

Highlighting Nasheed’s recent stay in the Indian High Commission, Jameel stated that “it was a shame that Nasheed fled when he was supposed to face justice,” before claiming that he would not give the opportunity for someone like Nasheed to come to power.

“Nasheed of Canaryge does not have any chance to come to power. We would not give that chance [to him]. That is something we ought to do. It is both a national and a religious Farḍ (obligation),” he said.

According to local media, the Home Minister stated that “if we complete that task,” God would grant success to those leaders in the upcoming presidential election.

Jameel claimed the country had fallen into a “deep mess” in almost all areas, adding that the country is desperate for a determined leader who can revive the economy.

He contended that Nasheed did not have the qualities the country was expecting from its future leader.

“Unlike Nasheed, President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom whom Nasheed is saying that he would beat easily, had the courage to appear before police for questioning when he was called in,” Jameel said.

He argued that anyone other than Nasheed possesses courage to face law and justice.

Jameel – a former Justice Minister under President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s 30 year autocracy – has previously expressed urgency in concluding Nasheed’s trial before the upcoming elections.

In January, Jameel told local media that it was “crucial to conclude the case against Nasheed before the approaching presidential elections, in the interests of the nation and to maintain peace in it.”

“Every single day that goes by without the case being concluded contributes to creating doubt in the Maldivian people’s minds about the judiciary,” the home minister said at the time.

In January 2012, Jameel – who served as vice president of Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) – was questioned by police after Nasheed’s government accused DQP of attempting to incite religious hatred.

A pamphlet released by the DQP called on the public to “rise up and defend Islam”, whilst accusing Nasheed’s government of “operating under the influence of Jews and Christian priests”.

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Maldives must curb external interference in its internal affairs

Also speaking at the rally on Saturday (March 9), half-brother to former President Gayoom, Abdulla Yameen, claimed that there was no need to allow “outside influence” in the internal affairs of the country.

The PPM presidential primary candidate said that should he be elected, he would protect the independence and sovereignty of the Maldives against the most powerful of nations.

Yameen’s comments come after Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission in Male’ last month.

For 11 days the former President stayed inside the high commission building, subsequently avoiding a trial hearing at Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The international community has since called for free, fair and inclusive presidential elections in the Maldives.

Earlier this month Nasheed, who exited the Indian High Commission on February 23, was detained by police and produced at Hulhumale’ court, despite an alleged “understanding” between India and Maldives that he would be able to compete in the upcoming elections.

Nasheed is facing criminal charges over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed during the last days of his presidency.

Speaking at the campaign rally, Yameen criticised the Prosecutor General’s (PG) statement made on March 7, which stated that the PG did not object to delaying the trial until presidential elections scheduled for later this year are over.

“The PG is not entirely an independent individual. The PG becomes independent when he executes his responsibilities in accordance with these procedures. The PG cannot say that he has no reservations in delaying Nasheed’s trial for four weeks.

“The PG cannot say for instance that it is alright to put off the trial after the elections. This is something that the PG cannot say,” Yameen was quoted as saying in local media.

Yameen stated that an impartial trial against Nasheed must be held for his actions, and that any other presidential candidate should be held liable for their actions at any given time.

“Why can’t the foreign ambassadors accept the fact that anyone [competing for the Presidential elections] who violates the law must be disqualified.

“We also might fail to meet the criteria. In such a society it is possible for us to violate an individual’s right. If so even I must spend the day in court. How can Nasheed be an exception,” local newspaper Haveeru quoted Yameen as saying.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

US citizen arrested for funding Maldivian terrorist in Lahore bombing

A US citizen has been charged in the States with conspiracy to provide material support to a Maldivian terrorist who helped carry out a deadly attack in Pakistan in 2009.

48-year-old Reaz Qadir Khan, a waste water treatment plant operator for the city of Portland, US, was arrested on Tuesday (March 5) on a charge of providing advice and funds to Maldivian national Ali Jaleel.

On May 27, 2009, Jaleel – along with two other men – stormed Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) headquarters in Lahore and detonated a car bomb that left around 23 people dead and a further 300 injured.

Prior to the attack, US media reported that in 2006 Khan had received an email from Jaleel “goading” him about his past devotion to seek martyrdom for Allah.

“Where are the words you said with tears in your eyes that ‘we shall strive until Allah’s word is superior or until we perish’???” the email stated, according to US publication The Oregonian.

Following the message, Khan had then allegedly communicated and provided financial backing through email to Jaleel and his family, making it possible for the Maldivian to attend a training camp in Pakistan ahead of the 2009 bomb attack.

The emails cited in the indictment against Khan – sent in October and November 2008 – were said to have included a coded note from Jaleel telling Khan that he needed US$2,500 to pay for admission into a terrorist training camp.

The Oregonian reported that Khan had replied to Jaleel instructing him to pick up the training camp money from one of his associates.

Jaleel, who later responded saying he only needed US$1000 of the US$2,450 that had been sent, was then advised by Khan to send the remaining money to his two wives in the Maldives, The Oregonian reported.

The indictment does not cite that there had been any other emails between November 2009 and the May 27, 2009 ISI attack.

However, US media reported that less than a week after the bombing, US$750 was wired from Khan to one of Jaleel’s wives from an Oregon store.

Khan, who has pleaded not guilty during a court appearance on Tuesday, could face life imprisonment if he is convicted at trial, US media reported.

According to The Oregonian, Khan must now remain in his Portland home until his trial on the terrorism-related charge begins.

Local media reported that Jaleel, who lived at H.Moscowge in Male, featured in a video on the internet showcasing his terrorist training and subsequent attack.

A member of Jaleel’s family told local newspaper Haveeru back in November 2009 that he had left “around a year ago” and that there had been “no further communication with him”.

Jaleel had been caught once before whilst on jihad and was sent back to Maldives. On 26 December 2006, he was also sentenced to two years’ house arrest for giving religious sermons and preaching without a licence, local media reported.

“Martyrdom was certain”

In a video released by Al Qaeda’s media outlet, 30-year-old Jaleel, referred to as Mus’ab Sayyid, can be seen speaking in front of the camera surrounded by an assortment of weaponry.

Jaleel calls for his teachers and those he knew who had taken the status of scholars to visit the Mujahideen and make “decisions” based on what they saw.

“I want my blood to be the bit of the carpet which the Mujahideen have painted from their blood. The red carpet which would take the Umar to its glory,” Jaleel says in the video.

The footage shows Jaleel going through various stages of training, including throwing what appears to be a hand grenade and firing various weapons. The video then cuts to footage of the attack.

A white van carrying armed men pulls up to what appears to be a police check point, before two men disembark and open fire on various individuals manning the post.

The van continues through the checkpoint before briefly stopping beside two men who had hidden behind a barricade, at which point the armed men appear to shoot them from inside the vehicle.

The video then shows the same white van pulling up to a large gate, before detonating the explosives.

The Pakistani government said at the time that the car bomb attack was carried out in apparent revenge for an army offensive against Taliban militants in that nation’s north-western Swat region.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC member Sheikh Rahman criticises JSC decisions on Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court in parliament committee

Parliament’s Independent Commission’s Oversight Committee on Thursday separately questioned two members of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) about the legality of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the appointment of the panel of magistrates to the case against Nasheed, for his detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Of the nine members currently serving in the judicial watchdog, Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman – the member appointed from among the public – attended the first committee session on Thursday.

Arbitrary appointment of magistrates

In response to questions posed by committee members, Sheikh Rahman stated that the JSC had arbitrarily appointed three magistrates from courts across the Maldives to Nasheed’s case, after dismissing the three names first submitted to the commission by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

“Moosa Naseem (from the Hulhumale’ Court) initially submitted names of three magistrates, including himself. This means that he had taken responsibility for overseeing this case. Now once a judge assumes responsibility for a case, the JSC does not have the power to remove him from the case,” Sheikh Rahman explained. “However, the JSC did remove him from the case, and appointed three other magistrates of their choice.”

Sheikh Rahman stated that the commission had referred to Articles 48 to 51 of the Judge’s Act as justification.

“But then I note here that the JSC breached Article 48 itself. They did not gather any information as per this article. They stated that it is due to the large number of paperwork that needs to be researched that they are appointing a panel. However, this is not reason enough to appoint a bench,” he said.

“Later, when Mazeed assumed responsibility for the Hulhumale’ Court, I remember seeing a letter he sent saying that the Hulhumale’ Court had a huge number of cases and that they needed additional magistrates to oversee the cases. However, this was after the panel was already appointed,” Sheikh Rahman stated.

“The surprising thing here is that this court has been functioning with two magistrates serving there. There have never been workload complaints. It was only after the appointment of the panel, and Mazeed going there, that this problem has arisen. This itself is a questionable matter,” Sheikh Rahman alleged.

Responding to a question posed by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed, Sheikh Rahman spoke of the “questionable moves” within JSC which led to the removal of Moosa Naseem from the case.

“Two members of the JSC, if I remember correctly it was Abdulla Didi and Saleem, asked for Naseem to be removed from the panel, stating as a justification that he was ‘disturbing’ the panel. Somebody even submitted a letter to the commission saying so. The majority of the committee however dismissed this as it was believed to be not enough of a reason,” Sheikh Rahman said.

“If a Head Magistrate goes on leave, or is unable to attend work, then the JSC can appoint someone in his stead. This used to be my responsibility. Then suddenly, this responsibility was taken away from me and handed over to Saleem and Abdulla Didi. The next thing I heard was that they had replaced Naseem with Mazeed,” Sheikh Rahman alleged.

“This is in direct breach of the law. They cannot appoint someone else to the post unless it becomes vacant.”

Hearing this response, Ali Waheed then alleged conflict of interest inside the commission.

“I think it is all becoming very clear now. The MDP’s competitor, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) prospective presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen’s close friend, and Deputy Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Nazim’s former lawyer Ahmed Saleem is on the JSC as [President] Waheed’s appointee. They are working from inside the JSC to eliminate the candidacy of Mohamed Nasheed,” MP Waheed alleged.

Vice Chair of the parliamentary committee MDP MP Ahmed Sameer stated that according to the Judicature Act, only the Supreme Court and the High Court preside over cases with panels of judges as a norm.

He explained that it is only under rare and special circumstances that magistrate courts are allowed to form panels, and that even in such cases it is the Head Magistrate of the particular court that is mandated to make a decision on the matter.

Sameer then proceeded to ask Sheikh Rahman if, in light of these laws, he believed it was legitimate for the JSC to exclude Kaafu Atoll Huraa Head Magistrate Moosa Naseem, who was in charge of the Hulhumale’ Court, from the bench for Nasheed’s trial. He further inquired if the member believed it was a politically motivated move on the side of the JSC.

“In case a court requests more magistrates, the JSC can appoint additional judges to a court. However, I am not aware that the commission is under any circumstances allowed to assign judges to particular cases,” Sheikh Rahman responded.

“As for politicisation, I wasn’t at the meeting where this particular decision was made, so it is difficult to comment on the motivation behind it. However, I did notice from the recording that once one member proposed this idea, there was immediate approval and no amount of discussion was further carried out.”

JSC role in running “illegitimate court”

Referring to the provisions in the Judicature Act, Sameer further asked Sheikh Rahman if he believed that the JSC had acted in breach of the constitution and laws to maintain the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, which must be automatically liquidated following the ratification of the said act.

“At the time, I too was lacking the necessary information and voted in favour of running the Hulhumale’ Court. The documents provided by the JSC did say that there was a magistrate court in Hulhumale’ even in 2007. On later review, this too turned out to be untrue,” Sheikh Rahman stated. “I cannot say what their objective was, but there certainly was a lot of misinformation.”

“It is the JSC who decided to run the Hulhumale’ Court despite the Judicature Act. The decision was made with four votes, including that of Ahmed Rasheed. This member’s wife serves as a magistrate in the Hulhumale’ Court. This matter was then submitted to a lower court for review. However, Adam Mohamed redirected the case to the Supreme Court. He then cast the deciding vote in the Supreme Court. Do you believe this proceeded in a fair and just manner?” Sameer asked of Sheikh Rahman.

“Adam Mohamed should not have been there. I have raised the matter even in the JSC. I have also spoken with the Chief Justice about this,” the member responded.

“He said there is nothing he can do about this, and said that it had been a decision of the Supreme Court bench. I insisted that regardless of who had made the decision, there is no way a wrong can be considered otherwise,” he continued.

“The Chief Justice then said that Adam Mohamed may perhaps recuse himself from the case. However, Adam did not do so either.”

JSC Chair Adam Mohamed has responded to the committee’s summons through an official letter, refusing to be answerable to the committee as the matter in hand referred to an “ongoing case”.

However, JSC Vice Chair Abdulla Didi and Speaker Shahid spoke against the Chair’s decision, stating the commission must be answerable to its oversight body at all times, adding that Adam Mohamed had made a unilateral decision without consulting the majority members of JSC.

Shahid left on a trip abroad despite having agreed to attend Thursday’s parliamentary committee meeting.

At the committee meeting, Sheikh Rahman also stated that he did not find Adam Mohamed’s justification acceptable.

“It is the JSC which has the powers to look into complaints about this bench in question. It is also the JSC that holds the powers to dismantle the bench should need be. Hence it makes no sense to say we cannot discuss the matter at any point in time,” he stated.

Sheikh Rahman also criticised Adam Mohamed’s decisionto not attend the committee summons without consulting other members of the commission.

He further said that he did not believe the serving members of the JSC were able fulfil their duties as per the pledges they had taken, alleging that the commission had become subject to political influences.

Sheikh Rahman made similar remarks in a live television appearance last week. He is the second JSC member to blow the whistle. The first, Aishath Velezinee, challenged the JSC’s “unconstitutional” reappointment of poorly educated and ethically dubious judges in August 2010. She was subsequently stabbed three times in the back in broad daylight on Chandeenee Magu, Male’s main tourist strip.

The JSC is currently comprised of Chair Supreme Court Judge Adam Mohamed, Vice Chair Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid, High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed, MP and government aligned Jumhooree Party (JP) Leader, MP and Presidential Candidate Gasim Ibrahim, lawyer Ahmed Rasheed, Attorney General Azima Shakoor, Presidential Appointee Mohamed Saleem and Member appointed from the public Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Past and current presidents call for national rethink on gender rights

Former and current presidents of the Maldives have highlighted the importance of gender equality to national development on the occasion of International World Women’s Day on March 8.

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, as well as former Presidents Mohamed Nasheed and Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, have all spoken during the last two days on the importance of addressing gender related issues in the Maldives in areas such as domestic abuse and education.

The comments have been made as local independent institutions and civil society groups have alleged that the country has seen a regression in the rights of women and minors in recent years.

Local NGO Voice of Women, which claims to work as an umbrella group supporting other female-focused organisations in the Maldives, said that despite increased participation of women in political activities, there had been a perceived regression in the rights of females and children during the last year.

“The institutions in place to protect them have instead targeted them directly or let them down passively due to inaction,” read a statement by the NGO.

“Experience shows that countries cannot build a true democracy without the full and unhindered participation of fifty percent of our population; today we take the opportunity to recognize the courage and valiantness of the Maldivian women who are fighting against all odds and often times against the most harsh discrimination without taking a single step back, pressing for political reform and to establish a fair democracy in the country.”

The NGO’s statement was particularly critical of the treatment of women under the administration of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, which in recent months has pledged to review laws that it claims have previously victimised women and minors who are victims of sexual abuse.

“The government is unable to destroy the unwavering spirit and determination of the Maldivian women who are confronted with batons, kicked with boots, handcuffed, stomped with shields, pepper sprayed directly into the eyes, and water cannoned while peacefully protesting on the streets or jailed without charges, sexually abused and humiliated while in custody; these heroic women continue to fight for their rights, rights of their children, rights of their children’s children,” the Voice for Women statement claimed.

“They continue to fight for the freedom of their country, for justice, for peace and for democracy.”

Back in April last year, parliament passed the Domestic Violence Bill with broad cross party support as part of efforts to provide a legal framework to protect victims from domestic abuse through protective orders and improved monitoring mechanisms.

In a statement released yesterday addressing the rights of females, President Waheed delivered his best wishes to all women in the Maldives.

“The International Women’s Day is being marked to reflect on the status of women, assess their empowerment, advocate for greater opportunities for women to progress, and seek the support for all for those ends,” read a President’s Office statement.

“It is a high priority of the Maldivian government to support efforts in attaining gender equality in the society. The President highlighted women’s increasing contribution to national development. The increase in women’s contributions to and participation in the development of the country showed the change in the outlook of the people on gender related issues.”

Former presidents speak

Speaking Thursday (March 7) ahead of International Women’s Day, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom said that under Islam, men and women were considered equal. He therefore requested an end to the practice of gender discrimination, particularly in obtaining education.

Local newspaper Haveeru quoted Gayoom, who is currently the president of the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), as saying that some Maldivian females continued to be denied the opportunity to undertake higher education by their families.

He claimed that “misguided religious beliefs” were often behind such gender discrimination.

Meanwhile, former President Mohamed Nasheed was quoted in local media yesterday as calling for a change in how Maldivian men perceived women in general.

According to the Sun Online news agency, Nasheed told Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters gathered at the Dharubaaruge convention centre in Male’ that greater efforts needed to be made in empowering women “in all areas”.

“Not just because of efforts made by a gender ministry, but through transport ministry as well as health ministry as well as education ministry. We need to incorporate women into our main policies,” he was reported to have said.

Nasheed also called for new methods of protecting women against abuse during his address.

“Conservative” attitudes

Despite the calls of some of the nation’s most senior political figures, a recent national study found support for women’s equality was found to have experienced a “significant drop” despite overall progress in improving the human rights situation nationally.

The conclusions were made in the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM’s) second baseline survey on behaviours and attitudes regarding human rights in the Maldives, which was published December 10, 2012.

Male attitudes have become “more conservative” regarding women’s rights issues, whereas female views have become more supportive of rights in some areas, was one of the conclusions raised in the The ‘Rights’ Side of Life” [report].

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Luxury eco-resort embroiled in “green-washing” dispute with “extortionist” NGO

Exclusive luxury resort Soneva Fushi is embroiled in an increasingly hostile dispute with Biosphere Expeditions, an international environmental conservation non-governmental organisation (NGO), over allegations of grant contract breaching and “green-washing”.

Soneva awarded Biosphere Expeditions a three year, US$79,000 Social & Environmental Responsibility Fund (SERF) grant to conduct coral reef research, give scholarships enabling research placements for Maldivian nationals, and provide educational materials to local school children, beginning in 2011.

Soneva maintains they have no legal obligation to continue the funding.

Biosphere Expeditions alleges Soneva was delinquent in making payments for the first two years of the contract and now refuses to pay the final grant installment, which has dramatically limited the scope of the project, the NGO’s founder and executive director Dr Matthias Hammer told Minivan News.

“Unfortunately, Soneva displayed a lack of co-operative spirit paired with a good dose of corporate arrogance and incompetence right from the start.

“Biosphere Expeditions tried to be sympathetic, realising that Soneva/Six Senses were in financial trouble and offering various deferred payment options,” Hammer said in a press release issued March 6, 2013.

“However, Soneva is now ‘flat out’ refusing to pay the remaining US$24,000 owed, claiming Maldivian laws don’t obligate them to pay, only that they make ‘optional donations’. This is nonsense. They are legally obligated to fulfill the contract we’ve signed.

“Soneva cannot argue the contract hasn’t been enforced, because they eventually paid the agreed upon amount for the two years,” Hammer told Minivan News.

Hammer further explained that Biosphere Expeditions was “perplexed” by Soneva’s behavior given the company’s eco-friendly claims. The NGO claimed to have filed a case with the Civil Court last week.

“We were initially happy to receive the SERF grant. They were the last sponsor we’d expect to behave like this given their reputation. Their actions don’t match up.

“They have tried every trick in the book: saying the payment has been made but is late, there are internal issues within the company, the Six Senses company is being split, and they don’t have the money,” Hammer said.

“Payments were always late and a drain on our resources.

“I have never come across anything like this in the last 15 years of my career in this field. Given Soneva’s green claims, I am astounded by this apparent case of green-washing and how Soneva is treating its partners in conservation,” the NGO stated in a press release.

Soneva hits back

Soneva’s founder, president, and chief executive officer (CEO) Sonu Shivdasani also spoke to Minivan News about the dispute.

“Our public relations manager Sophie Williams proposed funding the Biosphere Expeditions project, but ultimately this project had more public relations benefit than real substance in terms of community development,” he said.

“We do not have a charter together [for evaluating proposals], but we have the different environmentalists on staff, such as our marine biologist, our management team, and representatives from the host committee to discuss the project proposals.

“Soneva didn’t do exhaustive diligence, but our team had discussed the project and went ahead [with approving it],” Shivdasani stated.

He cited three primary reasons Soneva will not continue to fund the Biosphere Expeditions project: the company has limited funds to donate, the project did not meet Soneva’s standards, and the agreement with Biosphere Expeditions is not legally binding.

“In essence, Soneva/Six Senses donates .5 percent of total revenues for charitable projects, which comes to about US$300,000 from US$20 million annually,” said Shivdasani.

Shivdasani explained that given the recent sale of Six Senses and Soneva Gili, the amount of charitable donations dropped. Thus, the company had to review and reevaluate the charitable projects they were funding.

“In 2011, Eva sold Six Senses, because we wanted to focus on the one brand Soneva, with one owner, management company, and philosophy,” Shivdasani stated.

“[Downsizing] to one resort and the subsequent reduction in SERF allocations from US$300,000 down to US$120,000, meant we had to carefully review how to use this money to create maximum impact on the environment.

“Invariably we needed to cut US$180,000 from our annual donations. US$24,000 is quite insignificant in context. There are so many more worthy causes, we’d rather spend money on other things,” added Shivdasani.

Shivdasani also spoke about the timing of the first two grant installments.

“The Biosphere Expeditions program has been very piecemeal and due to the specific nature of payments, any delays should not have caused payment hardships with the world in deep recession in 2009 and 2010.

“This was the worst recession since World War Two. 2009 was a slow year. Revenues were down and cash flow was tight. I can’t see how Biosphere Expeditions was inconvenienced. We were careful about the timing of charitable payments,” explained Shivdasani.

Soneva also decided the Biosphere Expeditions project did not “pass muster”.

“Unfortunately, Biosphere Expeditions did not meet up with our strict standards and we felt there were more worthy initiatives to support,” Shivdasani said.

“The feedback from hosts (staff) trained on the [liveaboard] expedition was negative, they didn’t enjoy the experience. Furthermore, we felt the education campaign did not have much of an impact, while the scholarship program only benefited two Maldivians.”

Regarding Biosphere Expedition’s allegation that Soneva had breached the grant agreement contract, Soneva maintained they did not have a legally binding contract.

“Rather than a contract with the Biosphere Expeditions, we had a charitable ‘Letter of Grant’ dating back to 2010. This involved a schedule of donations from Soneva Gili, Six Senses Laamu and Soneva Fushi.

“We could stop grant donations by giving notice, which Soneva did in the form of a formal letter in October 2012.

“We consulted our lawyers in Malé and they confirmed that three months was an adequate period of time to give notice to Biosphere Expeditions,” said Shivdasani.

He maintained that Soneva had no legal obligation to continue funding Biosphere Expeditions and that no case has been filed against the resort.

“Hammer is lying; no legal case has been launched against us. Our lawyers have not been notified of any case being filed in Male’. We are within our rights to stop funding.

“As of today’s date, we cannot contest any court case because Biosphere Expeditions have not put any case before us. No lawyer would want to represent someone who sends out press releases before lodging a case with the courts.

“If it was a legal contract, then we would have honoured it, but it’s within our rights not to continue.

“Soneva happily funded US$50,000-60,000 [of Biosphere Expeditions’ project], now it’s time to stop,” Shivdasani stated.

Soneva prides itself for being “an innovator in the field of responsible tourism, taking environmental and social responsibilities very seriously”.

Soneva states that its ‘SLOW LIFE’ philosophy “applies to everything” they do, with SLOW standing for Sustainable-Local-Organic-Wellness Learning-Inspiring-Fun-Experiences.

Thus, the Soneva SLOW LIFE Trust handles the Social & Environmental Responsibility Fund (SERF), which was created to “provide funding for a wide variety of humanitarian and environmental projects”.

Hostile exchanges

Communications between Biosphere Expeditions and Soneva have become increasingly hostile since the partnership agreement began, with numerous emails exchanged between Hammer and Shivdasani.

Following repeated correspondence requesting the agreed upon grant installments be paid, “Sonu said I was on a ‘high horse’ and ‘chasing the money’, all of which was in really bad taste,” Hammer explained.

“Soneva’s condescending top-down communication is a problem that comes from the very top [levels of management] and percolates throughout the company systemically.

“They think are a big powerful corporation and we’re just a small NGO.

“We shouldn’t be treated like this. Having jumped through all the hoops [to receive the grant] we bloody well expect the other side to pay what’s agreed,” exclaimed Hammer.

Hammer said that Biosphere Expeditions was surprised a luxury resort was “quibbling” over US$24,000.

“This is peanuts for them and we are not prepared to be treated like serfs or go away. By a funny coincidence that is what their grant 
is called: ‘Social & Environmental Responsibility Fund (SERF)’. I am only now beginning to understand its true meaning,” said Hammer.

Ultimately, Biosphere Expeditions has taken the stance that Soneva is not only violating the terms of their grant contract, but also guilty of “green-washing”.

“I can only conclude that Sonu Shivdasani and Soneva’s priorities are to maximise profits. They surely do not appear to be serious about conservation and the environment.

“It seems the company’s claims of ethical behaviour and environmental awareness are, sadly, simply marketing-driven lip service,” read the press release from the NGO.

Shivdasani maintains he has been misquoted by Hammer.

“The press release from Dr Hammer involves various threats of a slanderous nature. It is a sham. Hammer is not pursuing a legal case. If he does, Soneva has a very strong case,” said Shivdasani.

“Hammer is an extortionist. Someone needs to look into his operation. Is Biosphere Expeditions really a non-profit?” Shivdasani questioned.

The project

Originally, both Biosphere Expeditions and Soneva were partnered with the Maldives Marine Research Centre (MRC) of the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture, Reef Check and the Marine Conservation Society “to study and safeguard the spectacular coral reefs and the resident whale shark population”.

The funding dispute between Shivdasani and Hammer has curtailed the project’s activities.

According to Hammer, scholarships for and hiring of Maldivians has been halted, educational leaflets will not be distributed, and research studies cannot continue, with coral reef studies being “slashed to one week”.

Earlier in 2012, the Soneva Group faced controversy when allegations that Shivdasani had engaged a PR firm to “spruce up” the image of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik’s government were published in UK media.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)