Day: April 24, 2013

MPs Rozaina, Ali Azim elected DRP deputy leaders at fourth congress

MPs Rozaina Adam and Ali Azim were elected deputy leaders of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) today at the ongoing fourth national congress of the party.

Out of the five contenders for the three vacant posts, Rozaina came first with 382 votes followed by Azim with 258 votes.

A runoff is due to take place tomorrow (April 26) after MP Ahmed Ramiz and Economic Development Minister Ahmed Mohamed each garnered 243 votes for the third deputy leader post.

The fifth and last placed candidate was Fisheries State Minister Ali Solih.

Six members were also elected to the party’s council from 11 candidates. They were Education Minister Dr Ahmed Asim, Dr Hamid Rasheed, Ahmed Shareef, Mohamed Saleem, Assad Shareef and Ahmed ‘Kelaa’ Nizam.

At yesterday’s session of the DRP congress, delegates voted to abolish the post of ‘Zaeem’ or ‘Honorary Leader’ previously reserved for the party’s founder, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

An amendment was also approved to the party’s charter to offer the party’s ticket to sitting MPs and councillors without contesting in a primary.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Leaked draft agreement opens possibility for US base in Maldives

The United States has confirmed it is in discussion with the Maldivian government over the signing of a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), an unauthenticated draft version of which outlines conditions for the potential establishment of a US military base in the country.

The draft agreement, obtained by Maldivian current affairs blog DhivehiSitee, “incorporates the principal provisions and necessary authorisations for the temporary presence and activities of United States forces in the Republic of Maldives and, in the specific situations indicated herein, the presence and activities of United States contractors in the Republic of Maldives.”

A spokesperson for the US Embassy in Colombo was unable to verify the authenticity of the leaked draft, “as the agreement has not been finalised.”

“There are no plans for a permanent US military presence in Maldives,” the spokesperson stated.

“SOFAs are normal practice wherever the Unites States cooperates closely with a country’s national security forces. SOFAs generally establish the framework under which US personnel operate in a country when supporting security-related activities and the United States is currently party to more than 100 agreements that may be considered a SOFA,” the spokesperson added.

Senior Maldivian government officials were meanwhile recently invited aboard a United States aircraft carrier (March 27) as it passed by the Maldives.

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb, Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim, Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz and Vice President Mohamed Waheed Deen were flown to the USS John C Stennis aircraft carrier as part of an arrangement between the US embassy and Maldives Defence Ministry.

The visit was followed by the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Maldives and the US government to install a free border control system.

President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad said today that he had texted President Dr Mohamed Waheed who had no knowledge of any agreement. The Defence Ministry also had no information on the matter, he said.

Imad would not comment on whether the government would be open to such a proposal.

Spokesperson for the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, said the party had heard of the proposal – supposedly concerning Laamu Atoll and the site of the former British airbase on Seenu Gan in the south of the country.

“We are wondering what our other international partners – India, Australia, etc – think of this idea,” Ghafoor said.

The party’s parliamentary group leader, MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, said he had heard about the proposal “a few days ago”, and believed the matter would eventually be taken to parliament’s national security committee.

Draft proposal

Under the proposed 10 year agreement outlined in the draft, the Maldives would “furnish, without charge” to the United States unspecified “Agreed Facilities and Areas”, and “such other facilities and areas in the territory and territorial seas of the Republic of Maldives as may be provided by the Republic of Maldives in the future.”

“The Republic of the Maldives authorizes United States forces to exercise all rights and authorities with Agreed Facilities and Areas that are necessary for their use, operation, defense or control, including the right to undertake new construction works and make alterations and improvements,” the document states.

The US would be authorised to “control entry” to areas provided for its “exclusive use”, and would be permitted to operate its own telecommunications system and use the radio spectrum “free of cost to the United States”.

The US would also be granted access to and use of “aerial ports, sea ports and agreed facilities for transit, support and related activities; bunkering of ships, refueling of aircraft, maintenance of vessels, aircraft, vehicles and equipment, accommodation of personnel, communications, ship visits, training, exercises, humanitarian activities.”

US personnel would be be authorised to wear uniforms while performing official duties “and to carry arms while on duty if authorised to do so by their orders.”

US personnel (and civilian staff) would furthermore “be accorded the privileges, exemptions and immunities equivalent to those accorded to the administrative and technical staff of a diplomatic mission under the Vienna Convention”, and be subject to the criminal jurisdiction of the United States.

US personnel and contractors would moreover be permitted to import and export personal property, equipment, supplies and technology without license, restriction or inspection, or the payment of any taxes, charges or customs duties.

Vessels and vehicles operated by, and for, US forces would be permitted to enter and move freely within the territorial seas of the Maldives, free from boarding, inspection or the payment of landing, parking, port or harbour fees.

Disputes would be resolved without recourse to “any national or international court, tribunal or similar body, or to a third party for settlement, unless otherwise mutually agreed.”

At the conclusion of the lease, “the parties shall consult regarding the terms of return of any Agreed Facility and Area, including possible compensation for improvements or construction.”

Each party would furthermore waive claims (other than contractual) concerning “damage to, loss of, or destruction of its property or injury or death to personnel of either party’s armed forces or their civilian personnel arising out he performance of their official duties in connection with activities under this agreement.”

The proposed agreement would supersede an earlier agreement between the US and Maldives regarding “Military and Department of Defense Civilian Personnel”, effected on December 31, 2004.

Diego Garcia and the 2016 lease extension

The US Navy currently operates one of its largest bases outside the US at Diego Garcia, approximately 740 kilometres south of Addu Atoll, the lease for which is due to expire in 2016.

The site includes multiple landing strips for heavy bombers, pier and port facilities for the largest vessels in both the US and UK fleets, and accommodation for thousands of navy personnel.

Part of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), the site was leased to the US by the UK following its forcible eviction of the local inhabitants – the Chagos – after its purchase from Mauritius for UK£3 million at the time in 1965. Then-Mauritian Prime Minister, Seewoosagur Ramgoolam, received a knighthood from the Queen the same year.

In 1966, the UK granted the US a 50-year lease of the archipelago in exchange for favours including a US$14 million discount on submarine-launched Polaris missiles.

The lease is due to expire in 2016 with both parties required to end, modify or extend it by December 2014. However, the feasibility of an extension is uncertain as the UK has been engaged in a series of long-running and politically embarrassing court battles with Chagos islanders seeking to return to the archipelago.

The Chagos won a high court victory in the UK in 2000 enabling them to return, but the decision was extraordinarily overruled by the Queen’s royal prerogative. In 2008, the House of Lords overturned the high court verdict, forcing the Chagos to appeal in the European court of human rights.

In April 2010, the UK declared the Chagos Archipelago a marine reserve – theoretically making it the world’s largest marine protected area (MPA). Funds to manage the MPA for the next five years were provided by Swiss-Italian billionaire Ernesto Bertarelli.

A leaked US embassy cable dated May 5, 2009 and marked ‘NOFORN’, or ‘No foreigners’, subsequently suggested the marine park was a calculated attempt by the UK Foreign Office to scuttle the resettlement claims of the 3,000 Chagos islanders.

In the leaked US cable, Colin Roberts, the then UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s (FCO) Director of Overseas Territories, is quoted as saying that the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) has “served its role very well”.

“‘We do not regret the removal of the population,’ since removal was necessary for the BIOT to fulfill its strategic purpose,’ he said. Removal of the population is the reason that the BIOT’s uninhabited islands and the surrounding waters are in ‘pristine’ condition,” the cable read.

“Establishing a marine reserve might, indeed, as the FCO’s Roberts stated, be the most effective long-term way to prevent any of the Chagos Islands’ former inhabitants or their descendants from resettling in the BIOT,” it adds.

In the cable, Roberts emphasised that the establishment of the marine park would ensure it was reserved for military use and “would have no impact on how Diego Garcia is administered as a base.”

“[Roberts] noted that the establishment of a marine reserve would require permitting scientists to visit BIOT, but that creating a park would help restrict access for non-scientific purposes. For example, he continued, the rules governing the park could strictly limit access to BIOT by yachts, which Roberts referred to as ‘sea gypsies’.”

As a result of the British government’s “current thinking” on the reserve, there would be “no human footprints” or “Man Fridays” on the uninhabited islands of the archipelago, Roberts stated in the cable.

In response to concerns from US Political Counsellor Richard Mills that advocates of Chagossian resettlement might continue “to vigorously press their case”, Roberts replied that the UK’s “environmental lobby is far more powerful than the Chagossians’ advocates.”

However, the escalating Chagos case in the UK suffered a setback as recently as last week – April 18, 2013 – after a UK court ruled that the leaked cable was inadmissible as evidence.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Man charged with “sexual misdemeanour” for alleged rape of Thai woman

A man accused of raping a Thai beauty salon staff member at knife point has been charged with a ‘sexual misdemeanour’, reports local media.

Mohamed Shamaan Ibrahim Khalid was charged with causing bodily harm to an individual, sexual misdemeanour, and mugging.

Khalid allegedly raped a Thai employee from Asparagus Beauty Care after threatening her at knifepoint in June 2012.

A man present at the salon was also allegedly threatened at knifepoint and ordered to surrender his phone and wallet.

Khalid then stabbed the victim in the leg when he refused to obey, according to local media.

Khalid is also accused of taking two cell phones, a laptop, MVR 5000 (US$324.25) and US$200.

Criminal Court Media Official Ahmed Mohamed Manik told local media that Khalid has denied all charges and the court granted his request for a lawyer to be appointed.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil society groups slam government for “failure to ensure conducive environment for elections”

Prominent NGOs have released a joint human rights brief accusing the Maldivian government of failing to create conditions conducive to free and fair elections, ahead of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) meeting to be held in London this Friday.

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN) reported that with less than six months before the presidential elections “there are clear signs indicating that the coalition government in power since February 2012 has so far failed to set the conditions for free and fair elections in which ‘all parties and leaders are able freely to conduct election campaigns’.”

“The most critical matter in this regard is the continued interference of the executive on other branches of power, as manifested by the trial of several opposition members to prevent the opposition from running in the upcoming elections,” the brief reads.

Authorities have both failed to ensure a ‘free and fair’ atmosphere with respect to freedom of information or freedom to assembly, as well as made no efforts to inform and educate voters on electoral rights and responsibilities, the report claims.

FIDH and MDN highlight that promoting and protecting human rights has suffered from a “substantial lack of progress” and that a “culture of impunity for perpetrators of past human rights violations” has been institutionalised.

While “human rights abuses reduced drastically” following former President Mohamed Nasheed’s election in 2008, past and present police brutality, torture and impunity have gone unaddressed, states the brief.

Institutions such as the Police Integrity Commission (PIC), the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM), and a Presidential Commission – created in 2009 and disbanded in 2012 – failed to investigate and address human rights abuses, including torture committed by the police services, given their limited mandates.

“The coalition government established in February 2012 has been accused of a wide range of human rights violations, from violent repression of street protests, arbitrary arrests, sexual harassment of female protesters, torture, harassment of pro-opposition media, to legal and physical harassment of members of the opposition,” states the brief.

“Since the HRCM made public its reports on these allegations in August 2012, no action has been taken for investigation or redress,” the brief continues.

Systematic omissions have been identified in the the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) “serious enough to raise fundamental questions about the accuracy of the report’s conclusions.” Furthermore, recommendations made by the CoNI on August 30, 2012 regarding human rights abuses, torture, and impunity “were immediately dismissed by senior government officials; this could only encourage the security forces to disregard the rule of law and commit further human rights abuses in impunity,” the brief reads.

“Uncertainties” have caused a “new phase of slowdown” in the country’s legal reform process as well.

“Women have suffered and still suffer from the absence of a strong legal framework… and women’s rights remain at risk of being curbed by religious parties influencing the governing coalition and pushing for the full implementation of Sharia,” the report states.

Rising tensions regarding interpretations of Islam is “particularly an area of concern” given the “fundamental views being introduced by the Adalath party and some religious groups, mainly those that are being linked with Shari’a and harsh punishments,” claims the brief.

“Bearing in mind that there is absolutely no public trust in the judiciary to have the capacity to deliver justice under these circumstances, those critical of these [religious] interpretations have faced violent consequences,” reads the brief. “To date, there are no reports of an investigation or any on-going effort to find the perpetrators of these crimes [of murder and attempted murder].”

Following Nasheed’s claim he was deposed in a coup d’état, the Commonwealth suspended the Maldives from the CMAG, and said it had decided to place the Maldives on its formal agenda in February 2012 because of “questions that remain about the precise circumstances of the change of government, as well as the fragility of the situation in the Maldives.”

In September 2012, CMAG decided the Maldives would remain on the agenda under the item “Matters of Interest to CMAG”, however its suspension from the international body’s democracy and human rights arm has now been revoked.

CMAG recommendations

FIDH and MDN emphasised that the newly reformed CMAG mandate includes “situations that might be regarded as constituting a serious or persistent violation of Commonwealth values”, and the “systematic denial of political space, such as through detention of political leaders or restriction of freedom of association, assembly or expression.”

“These situations have continuously characterised the political environment of the Maldives especially since the change of power of 7 February 2012.”

FIDH and MDN provided CMAG with five key recommendations in regard to the deteriorating human rights situation in the Maldives.

They compelled CMAG to raise concerns regarding human rights violations in the Maldives, especially allegations of police brutality and torture, and request government authorities take all necessary measures to prevent violence, respect the due process of law and prevent arbitrary arrests.

A review of CMAG’s position on CoNI report should be conducted, especially in reference to “later developments”.

CMAG should also advocate for the preservation and consolidation of democratic achievements and take all necessary steps to guarantee the conditions for free, fair and inclusive elections in September 2013.

Providing technical assistance to the Maldives’ government is recommended. This is necessary to strengthen the rule of law and support the development of public institutions, in particular the judiciary, as well as independent commissions such as the HRCM, the PIC, and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

Finally, provide support to civil society organizations to raise public awareness about the role of public institutions and the importance of separation of powers, develop human rights education programs, and play a key role monitoring democratic and independent institution building.

Maldivian government recommendations

FIDH and MDN also provided the Maldivian government with a list of 11 recommendations to improve the country’s human rights failures.

This includes strengthening independent commissions, such as the PIC, JSC, and HRCM, in accordance with CoNI report recommendations. Reforming the judiciary should also be prioritized.

The physical and psychological integrity of human rights defenders, journalists and members of the opposition must be also guaranteed in all circumstances.

Initiating a national campaign to address past human rights violations (1978-2008), including “accountability for perpetrators, acknowledgement, truth-telling mechanisms, reparations, and legal and institutional reforms to prevent occurrence of new violations” is recommended.

“Such mechanisms would also act as a deterrent to prevent any future form of harassment, intimidation, arbitrary arrest or ill-treatment by State security personnel,” the brief states.

Additionally, the Majlis (parliament) should “urgently enact” pending legislation, ensure civil society is consulted, and that the bills “fully conform with international human rights commitments and obligations of the Maldives.” Furthermore, the death penalty should not be enshrined in those texts.

FIDH and MDN also recommend the government fulfill its various international commitments. This includes investigating allegations of torture, adopting implementing legislation for the International Criminal Court statute, as well as guaranteeing the human rights and protections enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Additionally, the scope of the Maldives’ reservation to Article 16 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) – which aims to eliminate discrimination in all matters relating to marriage and family relations, and ensures gender equality – should be significantly reduced.

Adhering to the recommendations of various UN Special Rapporteur’s, which have addressed some of the systemic problems within the judicial system and various human rights issues, is also recommended. As is arranging future Rapporteur’s missions regarding transitional justice and additional human rights challenges.

Government reaction

Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dhunya Maumoon told local media yesterday (April 23) that Foreign Affairs Minister Dr Abdul Samad Abdullah had left for London April 22 to participate in the CMAG meeting.

Maumoon highlighted that this marks the first occasion the Maldives has been invited to a CMAG meeting since its removal from the agenda.

“The opportunity for the Maldivian Foreign Minister to participate in a CMAG meeting was a great achievement, and one which resulted from the efforts by President Waheed’s government in cooperation with the Commonwealth,” said Maumoon.

“Now Maldives will have the opportunity to partake in discussions at CMAG. But the Maldives delegation will not be present when the group discusses the Maldives,” she added.

Maumoon also reiterated the government’s position that the Maldives should not have been on CMAG’s agenda and that “the move was prompted by a lack of understanding of the true events that transpired in the Maldives.”

“Some countries” had realized this error and accused Nasheed of influencing CMAG members, Maumoon claimed.

While Maumoon admitted “there was always a fear of instability in Maldives due to the rather infant democracy in the country,” she also highlighted that “international partners have acknowledged the positive strides the country has made brought about in a relatively peaceful manner.”

In April 2012, Maldives’ permanent representative to the EU Ali Hussein Didi criticised the Commonwealth’s involvement in the Maldives, telling the European Parliament that the Commonwealth’s Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) lacked a clear mandate to place the Maldives on its agenda.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police conclude special operation to seize sorcery books on Maarandhoo Island

Police have conducted a special operation named ‘Operation Maaridhu’ on the island of Maarandhoo in Haa Alifu Atoll to seize books related to sorcery.

In a statement police said the operation was conducted on April 21 from 2:00pm to 4:30pm following intelligence reports that the practice of black magic was increasing on the island of Maarandhoo.

Police said officers obtained a court warrant and searched two houses on the island where they discovered a number of books related to black magic.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Teen seriously injured in boat propeller accident

An 18 year-old was serious injured trying to disentangle a fishing line from a dhoni propeller and is being transferred to Sri Lanka for further medical treatment, reports local media.

Nauf Ibrahim suffered serious injuries from the ‘Mashhooru’ boat propeller while trying to remove an ensnared fishing line. His family members told local media that he dove into the sea to disentangle the line and was hit in the head by the propeller, which resulted in a skull fracture and internal bleeding.

The accident occurred yesterday (April 23) while the dhoni was fishing near Laamu Atoll.

Ibrahim first received medical treatment Laamu Atoll regional hospital, however he was transferred to the intensive care unit of Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) in Male’ via the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) ‘Kurangi’ helicopter.

Ibrahim’s family claims he is not receiving sufficient medical treatment at IGMH and will be transferred to Sri Lanka today, courtesy of Meedhoo MP Ahmed Siyam Mohamed.

Ibrahim is from Meedhoo Island in Dhaalu Atoll.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Fictitious labour demand fuelling “systematic” migrant abuse in Maldives

Registered companies across the Maldives are freely abusing visa regulations by wildly exaggerating or even fabricating construction or business projects to traffic foreign workers into the country, an immigration source has alleged this week.

The source told Minivan News that almost no human verification was being undertaken by authorities to ensure workers were genuinely employed once a business or construction project was approved.

This lack of verification was allowing paper companies in the Maldives to submit fictitious contracts or structural designs to the immigration department to obtain a disproportionately high quota of foreign workers.

In theory, a Maldivian company could submit design plans for an existing structure such as Manchester United’s 75,811 seat Old Trafford Stadium – and then be assigned a computer-generated quota of foreign workers, the source claimed.

“Companies are recruiting people [abroad] for their own financial benefit,” the immigration source said. “They are producing the image that they are in need of labour.”

Fictitious applications could be made with little fear of a company or individual facing legal action,  due to the lack of any formal verification process for new building or work sites once authorised by a staff member at the immigration department, the source alleged.

“A company can simply produce a document or structural drawing from the internet, which they can submit online to obtain a work quota,” the source claimed. “If you tried using a design for a building like Velenagee, that is obviously known, but out on the islands [in the country’s outer atolls], verification is much harder,” he said.

The Maldives has appeared on the US State Department’s Tier Two Watch List for Human Trafficking for three consecutive years. Should the Maldives drop to tier three – the worst category – then the country is expected to face significant reductions in aid and potential travel restrictions on its citizens.

Minivan News was told that even with the implementation of an online visa registration system, the immigration department was failing to cross reference companies registered with the Maldives’ trade ministry to ensure that their stated businesses and labour requirements were genuine.

In one case detected this year, the source said that immigration officials had discovered that one ten-storey construction project in the capital had been given a quota of 120 foreign workers despite already being fully built and furnished.

“If someone is not going to check projects in person, this system is completely open to abuse,” the immigration source added.

Foreign workers were paying as much as US$4,000 to labour brokers to come and work in the Maldives, explained the immigration source, creating an incentive for the creation of false jobs on the Maldivian side. This fee is then divided between traffickers operating in the source country and the Maldives.

The Maldives does not presently have legislation allowing authorities to press charges against individuals directly for the offence of human trafficking – with legislation presently under review in parliament.

However, the immigration source said that it was still possible to penalise any Maldivian suspected of trafficking foreigners into the country on the grounds of contravening the Maldives Immigration Act, ratified in 2007.

“If a Maldivian tries to go against this law they should be penalised with very heavy fines. The law has been in place since 2007,” the source claimed. “Yet has anyone been fined for illegal immigration activity? The answer is no. The legal authority to do this is there.”

Immigration Controller Dr Mohamed Ali told Minvian News earlier this week that while almost all foreign workers coming to the Maldives arrived under registered companies, some were finding themselves “illegally used” by employers due to “systematic abuse” of the visa system.

Legislative challenges

Another source who has held senior positions in the Maldives criminal justice system, under both the current administration of President Dr Mohamed Waheed and the government of former President Mohamed Nasheed, said the country faces several challenges in prosecuting human traffickers.

Speaking to Minivan News on condition of anonymity, the source claimed that prosecutors were using outdated legislation set out in the country’s 1967 penal code that had not anticipated a crime such as human trafficking when it was first ratified.

In recent years, the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) worked with foreign organisations such as the Australian government to help draft legislation against human trafficking and people smuggling, according to the source. The bill has also been viewed by their US government to ensure “conformity” with its own requirements.

As a result, the source said that in recent years the PG’s Office had dealt with several cases of alleged human trafficking, which notably included a group of foreigners  found with a large number of forged passports.

However rather than prosecuting the suspects of charges of human trafficking as alleged by the police, they were instead prosecuted on charges of forgery.

“In that case, forgery carried a heavier punishment than any other possible provisions that could be used to prosecute on ‘human trafficking’ charge (i.e Section 88(a) of the penal code). In the Maldives, we don’t have to charge someone for multiple offences if it was committed at the same time,” the source claimed. “Prosecutors have to choose the most dangerous crime and proceed.”

The legal source suggested that in other suspected human trafficking cases raised by police, alleged victims were still provided the opportunity to contact authorities or transfer money abroad, requiring much more scrutiny to identify if those involved may have been smuggled illegally into the country.

“Additionally, because there are no laws defining what human trafficking is, the risk was that if we prosecuted someone for human trafficking and tried to set a precedent, the judges were not exposed (or forward thinking) enough to convict someone of the crime,” the source claimed.

“It was too risky to try something new and risk putting someone so dangerous on the loose. So the general idea was to be cautious.”

With human trafficking legislation remaining under review in parliament, the legal source claimed that “smooth implementation” of any new laws was required to make sure all Maldivian authorities, as well as criminal justice systems across the region, understood their obligations towards prosecuting human trafficking.

Corruption was identified as another major concern by the source concerning the value of illegal labour to the Maldives economy. One former Bangladesh High Commissioner in the Maldives alleged back in 2010 that the exploitation of foreign workers in the country rivaled fishing as the most profitable sector in the national economy after tourism.

The government has in recent months launched a special campaign intended to raising awareness of the rights of foreign workers.

Addressing the current scope of unregistered foreign labour, Maldives Association of Construction Industry (MACI) former President Mohamed Ali Janah said earlier this year that an estimated 40 percent of the foreign employees in the sector were thought not to be legally registered.

Considering these numbers, Janah said he could not rule out the involvement of organised crime in certain employment agencies, which supply a large amount of foreign labour to building sites in the Maldives.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament accepts bill seeking to abolish Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court

Parliament today accepted amendments to the Judicature Act submitted by Independent MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed to abolish the magistrate court in Hulhumale’.

The legislation (Dhivehi) was narrowly accepted for consideration with 32 votes in favour, 31 against as well as one abstention and sent to the Independent Institutions Committee for review.

The Independent MP for Kulhudhufushi South proposed the amendments in December 2012, following a controversial 4-3 Supreme Court ruling declaring the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court legitimate.

The judgment cleared the way for the magistrate court to proceed with the trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed on charges of illegally detaining Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Nasheed’s formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) disputes the legitimacy of the magistrate court, contending that it was created by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) in violation of the Judicature Act.

Writing in his personal blog after submitting the amendments, MP Nasheed explained that he would have accepted the apex court’s decision as final and incontrovertible if Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla – chair of the JSC – had recused himself.

“The [Hulhumale’] court was formed by the commission. The vote on forming the court was called at a meeting of the commission chaired by [Justice Adam Mohamed]. The case requesting the Supreme Court to declare the court legitimate was submitted by the commission chaired by the justice,” Nasheed wrote.

Justice Adam Mohamed “created the court, filed the case, and decided the case in his favour,” Nasheed wrote.

Echoing the criticism, former Attorney General Husnu Suood, who argued the case at the Supreme Court, described the decision at the time as “a case of actual bias because JSC would [have] lost the case without the vote of JSC president: 3 for 3 against, [tie-breaking] vote by JSC [president].”

Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain, Justice Abdulla Areef and Justice Muthasim Adnan had delivered the dissenting opinion ruling that the magistrate court was not established in accordance with the Judicature Act.

MP Nasheed’s amendments would meanwhile see the magistrate court abolished and its cases transferred to the superior courts (Criminal Court, Civil Court, Family Court, Juvenile Court and Drug Court) in Male’.

Moreover, an article would be added to the Judicature Act explicitly stating that the islands of Hulhumale’ and Vilimale’ should be considered part of Male’ City.

Vili-Maafanu and Hulhu-Henveiru are both electoral districts or constituencies in the capital with elected MPs and city councillors.

Legitimacy

In a blogpost in October 2012, Nasheed observed that the Judicature Act stipulates that magistrate courts should be set up in inhabited islands aside from Male’ without a division of the trial courts (Criminal Court, Civil Court, Family Court, Drug Court and Juvenile Court).

According to appendix two of the constitution, Hulhumale’ is a district or ward of Male’ and not a separate inhabited island.

The former magistrate court at Hulhumale’ – controversially set up by the JSC before the enactment of the Judicature Act in October 2010 – should therefore have been dissolved when the Judicature Act was ratified, Nasheed contended.

In the latter blogpost on amending the law governing courts, Nasheed explained that the purpose of amending the Judicature Act was to “clarify the Majlis’ intent as the [Supreme Court] has made a decision that conflicts with the intent of the Majlis in passing the law.”

If a Supreme Court interpretation of an article or provision in an act of parliament was “not the outcome intended by lawmakers,” Nasheed suggested that the remedy was amending the law to ensure the desired effect.

If the amendments are passed and signed into law, Nasheed wrote, a magistrate court could not be set up in the capital Male’ on the pretext of “two or three articles in the Judicature Act”.

Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court

During the first hearing of former President Nasheed’s trial at the magistrate court, the ex-president’s lawyers raised procedural points challenging the legitimacy of the court, which were summarily dismissed by the three magistrates on the bench.

Nasheed’s legal team then appealed the magistrate court’s ruling on the procedural points at the High Court.

On November 4, 2012, the High Court granted a stay or an injunction temporarily suspending the trial pending a ruling on procedural points.

The injunction prompted the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court to announce that it had suspended all ongoing cases as they could be affected by the questions raised over the court’s legal status.

However, before the High Court could issue a ruling on the appeal, the JSC filed a case in Supreme Court requesting a decision to declare the magistrate court legitimate.

On November 8, 2012, the Supreme Court instructed the High Court to halt its hearings on the former President’s appeal.

The Supreme Court also ordered the Civil Court to send over all files and documents on a case submitted over a year ago by lawyer Ismail Visham, which challenged the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The Supreme Court issued a writ of mandamus ordering the lower court to suspend its hearings and took over the case.

Meanwhile, a week before the Supreme Court delivered its 4-3 judgment declaring the magistrate court legitimate, parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee voted not to recognise the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ court.

The oversight committee, chaired by MP Nasheed, decided that there were no “legal and constitutional grounds” to support the court’s legal status.

However, in an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court issued an order (No. 2012/SC-SJ/05) invalidating the committee’s decision.

The Supreme Court declared that no institution should meddle with the business of the courts, claiming that it held parental authority over “constitutional and legal affairs” and would not allow such “interference” to take place.

“Any action or a decision taken by an institution of the state that may impact the outcome of a matter that is being heard in a court of law, and prior to a decision by the courts on that matter, shall be deemed invalid, and [the Supreme Court] hereby orders that these acts must not be carried out,” the order read.

Meanwhile, earlier this month, the High Court granted a second injunction or stay halting former President Nasheed’s trial at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The trial was suspended pending a ruling by the High Court on the legitimacy of the three-magistrate bench appointed by the JSC to preside over Nasheed’s trial.

The injunction followed testimony by members of the JSC to the Independent Institutions Committee claiming that the three magistrates chosen by JSC were appointed arbitrarily.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

‘National Movement’ to protest on behalf of murder victims

The self-titled “Maldives National Movement”, comprised of several NGOs and the religious conservative Adhalaath Party, is organising a special protest for May 3, 2013, on behalf of “the rights of murder victims.”

Speaking to local media at Nalahiya Hotel in Male’ today, Adhaalath Party President Sheikh Imran Abdulla said the main purpose of the gathering was to call for justice for murder victims and encourage the authorities to ensure that “such inhumane acts” were not repeated in the future.

The ‘National Movement’ said its member would deliver five demands, which be revealed on the day of the protest.

Imran also suggested that the number of murders were being ignored, criticising media for seemingly forgetting cases after covering them for ten days or even a month.

He also referred to the brutal murder of MP Dr Afrasheem Ali in October 2012, noting that neither the ongoing trial nor the investigation of his murder had been concluded.

State Home Minister Abdulla Mohamed, spokesperson of the ‘National Movement’, said that 13 Maldivians were reported murdered last year.  He added that compensation for these deaths was also not being received by relatives of the victims.

Mohamed said the protest would be held to show that families and friends of murder victims were being deprived of their rights.

He therefore called on everyone against murder to participate in the event.

Statistics provided on the Maldives Police Service website do not include individual figures on murder rates.

However, the official figures did show a decline in cases of assault over the last three years. Reported assaults fell to 1,416 incidents during 2012, down from 2,001 cases in 2009.

Sheikh Imran and State Finance Minister Abbas Adil Riza, members of the National Movement’s Steering Committee, were not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Campaigning

The ‘National Movement’ has held a series of poorly-attended gatherings in recent weeks targeted at parliament.

The group previously accused MPs of violating the constitution late last year and said they would consider a plan to “break up” parliament if its members’ constitutional concerns were not addressed.

The movement was born out of the unofficial December 23 coalition of eight political parties – now part of the coalition government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed –  and an alliance of NGOs that rallied at a mass gathering to “defend Islam” in late 2011.

The rally was held to oppose the allegedly liberal policies and “securalisation agenda” of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Following the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7, the “civil alliance” led a campaign dubbed “Maldivians’ Airport to Maldivians” calling on the government to terminate the concession agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to manage and modernise Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)