Day: June 12, 2013

Attorney General’s Office to decide on Yacht Tours injunction appeal in “days”

The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) will announce in the “next few days” whether it will appeal an injunction preventing the state from taking over several properties operated by J Hotels and Resorts over a rent payment dispute.

Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham told Minivan News today that the AGO was presently reviewing the Civil Court injunction issued earlier this month in order to decide whether to contest the matter.

“We have a time limit of 90 days – excluding public holidays – to file an appeal,” Usham said.

The government has sought to revoke the lease for Alidhoo Resort in Haa Alif Atoll and Kudarah Island Resort in South Alifu Atoll from J Hotels and Resorts’ parent company Yacht Tours Maldives since late last year.  The state had previously provided the operator a seven day period to hand over the properties.

However, Yacht Tours Maldives – formed by opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Abdulla Jabir – has continued to contest the government’s right to reclaim the land.

In the Civil Court injunction issued on June 4 this year, the Ministry of Tourism Arts and Culture was told it could not take over the resorts until a final ruling had been made over the issue of unpaid rent claimed to be owed by Yacht Tours.

Yacht Tours Director Ibrahim Shiham last week accused the government of trying to come on to the Kudarah resort property on June 3 without a court warrant to take over the property, alleging authorities had sought to create a “political drama” out of the case.

The Tourism Ministry told local media at the time that Yacht Tours had continuously failed to pay back the rent and fines in installments as previously agreed following a first termination notice being sent.

Minivan News was awaiting a response from Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government paid Baroness Scotland £50,000 in excess of agreed consultancy fee

The government paid former UK Attorney General and member of the House of Lords, Baroness Patricia Scotland, £50,000 (MVR1.25 million) in excess of an agreed fee for legal advice concerning the Maldives’ suspension from the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the 2012 audit report of the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) has revealed.

The audit report (Dhivehi) made public yesterday (June 11) revealed that a terms of reference (ToR) to hire an unnamed foreign legal expert was signed by the AGO on May 28, 2012, after the Maldives was suspended from CMAG – the Commonwealth’s human rights and democracy arm – and placed on its formal agenda following former President Mohamed Nasheed’s allegation that he resigned “under duress” on February 7, 2012 amid a violent mutiny by sections of the police and military.

Auditors discovered that the legal expert – revealed in the media at the time to be Baroness Scotland – was paid £50,000 without signing a formal agreement in addition to a consultancy fee of £75,000 (MVR 1.81 million) agreed upon in the ToR.

“The Attorney General’s Office informed [auditors] that the fee paid in excess of the agreed upon fee was for further advisory and drafting work that was required,” the audit report stated. “However, we note that this additional legal advice could not be discerned [from any documentation].”

As the additional fee was 66 percent of the consultancy fee included in the ToR, “this office believes that the work could not be done without both parties signing an agreement in accordance with section 8.22 of the public finance regulations.”

Section 8.22 stipulates that consultancy work needs to assigned on the basis of a contract with specific terms mutually agreed upon.

Auditor General Niyaz Ibrahim therefore recommended legal action against the responsible officials as the excess amount was paid in violation of article 47(b) of the Public Finance Act.

The audit report also noted that the AGO spent MVR108,902 (US$7,062) on plane tickets and accommodation for Baroness Scotland and her assistant for a visit to the Maldives, despite the lack of provisions for the expenses in the ToR.

The Auditor General’s Office recommended that such expenses for amenities along with fees for any additional work should be stated in the contract.

The report also revealed that the AGO spent MVR 16.9 million (US$1 million) in excess of the annual budget for the office approved by parliament.

A total of MVR 16.3 million was spent with approval from the finance ministry for consultancy work by foreign legal experts, the report noted.

The Auditor General’s Office contended that the expenditure in excess of the approved budget was in violation of article 96(c) of the constitution, the Public Finance Act, and public finance regulations.

Article 96(c) of the constitution states, “No supplementary expenditures shall be added to an approved budget without further approval by the People’s Majlis. Expenditures included in the budget shall be applied solely for the specified purpose.”

Among the cases for which the AGO sought foreign legal assistance were the termination of a concession agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to develop the international airport, disputes concerning a border control agreement with Malaysian firm Nexbis and payments owed for the “Maldives Asset Tracing, Recovery and Repatriation Engagement” investigation launched in 2010 by the now-dissolved Presidential Commission.

The audit report revealed that a ToR was signed with a Singaporean law firm on March 1, 2012 for legal assistance concerning the contract disputes involving GMR and Nexbis.

Following the cancellation of the concession agreement with GMR, the law firm was retained under a second ToR for the arbitration process currently ongoing in Singapore.

The audit found that neither the fee nor expenses for the lawyers were stipulated in the ToR as required under section 8.22 of the public finance regulations.

Instead, the Singaporean law firm was to bill the AGO for its services at a price of its choosing, the report stated.

The AGO paid the firm a total of MVR 7.1 million (US$460,440) in 2012 for legal assistance and other expenses.

A British lawyer was also hired in November 2012 until the conclusion of the arbitration process involving the GMR contract without signing an agreement stipulating the price as required by the public finance regulations.

The AGO paid the lawyer MVR 1.2 million (US$77,821) in 2012.

The Auditor General recommended legal action against the responsible officials at the AGO in accordance with article 48 of the Public Finance Act.

Among other cases flagged in the audit report as ostensible violations of public finance law, auditors discovered that the AGO spent MVR 76,810 (US$4,981) for purchases and services without approval from senior officials as required by section 8.05 of the public finance regulations.

Moreover, the AGO bought airplane tickets worth MVR 45,994 (US$2,982) without seeking prices from at least three parties as required by section 5.03 of the public finance regulations.

Baroness Scotland

In August 2012, Minivan News obtained the terms of reference document for the contract, which was signed by then-Deputy Attorney General, Aishath Bisham, who succeeded Aishath Azima Shukoor in April 2013.

The leaked document also included a letter in Dhivehi sent from the Attorney General’s office to Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad requesting authorisation for Baroness Scotland’s “unprecedented work/expense” following her visit to the Maldives.

“There was no contract made. With this letter we ask if attached terms of reference are sufficient as a contract,” the AGO wrote.

Following media reports in the UK, then-Attorney General Azima insisted that the expenses for Baroness Scotland were made out of the proper budget code with approval from the finance ministry.

Baroness Scotland came under fire in the UK press after the story emerged in the Daily Mail. The Mail established that the peer and former Attorney General had not listed the payment from the Maldives on the House of Lords’ register of members’ interests.

“Her entry says she has set up a firm to provide ‘private consultancy services’ but says it is ‘not trading at present’,” the Daily Mail reported.

In a statement, Baroness Scotland confirmed she had been “instructed by the Attorney General of the Maldives to give legal advice”, and slammed the leak of the terms of reference and “all communications passing between myself and the Attorney General, whether written or oral, pertaining to the nature and extent of that advice, as confidential and legally privileged.”

She additionally claimed to have been approached by both the government and the opposition, and said she had accepted an invitation to chair a roundtable “at which all parties are to be invited.”

“I am a senior barrister with specific expertise in the area of constitutional law, criminal and civil law reform, and am skilled in mediation,” she explained.

Baroness Scotland was previously scrutinised by the UK press in 2009 after she was found to have been employing an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper in her London home.

As the story emerged, MPs from the UK’s Conservative Party – which has long backed Nasheed and the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) – seized the opportunity to attack the former UK Labour Party Cabinet Minister.

Conservative MP Karen Lumley told the Daily Mail that is was “disgusting that a former British attorney-general should take a well-paid job advising the new regime, which has no democratic mandate. President Nasheed was overthrown in a coup and the Maldives is now very unstable. Many of my friends there have been arrested by the new regime.”

Conservative MP John Glen told the paper that Baroness Scotland should “hang her head in shame”.

“What happened in the Maldives was a military coup,” he said, adding that it was “outrageous” that the former AG should be “advising a regime responsible for ousting a democratically-elected president.”

Former Maldives High Commissioner to the UK, Dr Farahanaz Faizal, described the government’s employment of Baroness Scotland as “absolutely shocking. If the government wanted legal advice to support the AG’s Office, the proper way is to request the UK government bilaterally.”

“To think that someone of her calibre would undertake an assignment to check if Foreign Ministers of Australia, Canada, Bangladesh, Jamaica, and others of CMAG had acted against their mandate is disgraceful,” Dr Faizal said.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed calls for reinstatement of GMR agreement

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has called on the government to reinstate the concession agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to develop and manage Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

In 2010, GMR-Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB) consortium, the government of former President Mohamed Nasheed and Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL) entered into a 25 year concession agreement worth US$511 million (MVR 7.787 billion).

The agreement charged the GMR-MAHB consortium with the management and upgrading of INIA within the 25 year contract period.

However in November 2012, the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed declared the developer’s concession agreement void and ordered it to leave the country within seven days.

A last minute injunction from the Singapore High Court during arbitration proceedings was overturned on December 6, after Singapore’s Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon declared that “the Maldives government has the power to do what it wants, including expropriating the airport.”

GMR is now seeking upwards of US$1 billion in compensation for the sudden termination, while at least one of the project’s lenders has called in loans that were guaranteed by the Finance Ministry at the time the contract was signed.

The Maldivian government is contending in court that it owes nothing as the contract was void ab initio –  invalid from the outset – and therefore clauses relating to termination and compensation did not apply.

Should the argument of void ab initio fail, the government has claimed the second legal grounds on which it would argue in favour of termination of the contract would be that the contract had been ‘frustrated’ – an English contract law doctrine which acts as a device to set aside contracts where an unforeseen event either renders contractual obligations impossible, or radically changes the party’s principle purpose for entering into the contract.

The case is currently in the arbitration and is set to take place in Singapore with using Maldives Airport Co Ltd v GMR Malé International Airport Pte Ltd as a reference point.

The Attorney General’s Office has previously stated that the Maldives will be represented by Singapore National University Professor M Sonaraja, while former Chief Justice of the UK, Lord Nicholas Addison Phillips, will represent GMR.

The arbitrator mutually agreed by both GMR and the government is retired senior UK Judge, Lord Leonard Hubert Hoffman.

Deal was “highly beneficial to the Maldives”: Nasheed

Nasheed in the statement released by his office on Monday said the agreement would have been highly beneficial to the country’s economy and would have boosted investor confidence in the Maldives.

“The agreement was entered into after a transparent international bidding process and under the consultation from the International Finance Corporation (IFC).  The agreement also gave confidence to foreign investors who had been interested in investing in the Maldives,” read the statement.

Nasheed said the concession agreement had been the single largest foreign investment in the country’s history, and noted that it had been terminated for political reasons.

The statement also alleged the current government gave little consideration to the repercussions of terminating such an agreement, which included worsening bilateral ties, hindering development, and lowering investor confidence in the country.

The statement also acknowledged recent remarks by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – whom Nasheed defeated in the 2008 presidential elections.

Gayoom blamed Nasheed for not obtaining parliamentary approval and “consulting all political parties” before signing the deal with the GMR-Malaysian Airports consortium.

“This was a mistake. Had he consulted all political parties, the public would not have formed the impression that corruption had taken place,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Hindu.

“Then we told the next President Mr Waheed that he should hold discussions with the GMR Group and the Indian government to arrive at an acceptable solution, after which the government was free to act on its own. Unfortunately, this was not done and suddenly there was this unhappy ending.”

Nasheed’s office however emphasised that the government was legally able to enter into such an agreement and that this was in line with the section 6 of the Public Finance Act.

Gayoom had told Indian media that former President Mohamed Nasheed – whose government was controversially replaced in February last year – had to take the majority of blame for the GMR contract dispute, despite not being in office at the time of its cancellation.

“The GMR experience was not a very good one for us. It began badly with [Nasheed] not informing parliament,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Indian Express.

Nasheed meanwhile condemned President Waheed’s “negligent” decision to evict GMR for political gain without giving due consideration to bilateral ties with India.

Waheed’s Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed – who was a fierce critic of the GMR deal before its cancellation – in November last year appealed to Prime Minister Singh to terminate the GMR deal, writing that “GMR and India ‘bashing’ is becoming popular politics”.

While in opposition in December 2011, the DQP also released a 24 page pamphlet alleging that allowing GMR to develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) was “paving the way for the enslavement of Maldivians in our beloved land”, and warning that “Indian people are especially devious”.

Former Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, the DQP’s Deputy Leader at the time of the pamphlet’s publication, was recently unveiled as the running mate of Gayoom’s party Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen – Gayoom’s half brother.

Nasheed meanwhile called on parliament to take prompt action and said that it was important for it to seek a quick remedy to the issue.

“The decision [to cancel] was made without consulting the views of major political parties and resulted in incalculable damage to the country and its economy,” Nasheed’s statement read.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Sheikh Fareed files defamation case against President of Islamic Foundation over fraud allegations

Well-known religious scholar Sheikh Ibrahim Fareed, and Vice President of the Islamic Foundation of the Maldives (IFM) Mohamed Fauzee, have filed a defamation case against the religious NGO’s President Ibrahim Fauzee.

The case was submitted after Ibrahim Fauzee alleged to local media that Sheikh Fareed and IFM Vice President Mohamed Fauzee had defrauded the NGO.

A lawyer for the two accused told media today that the case filed sought payment of more than MVR 3 million (US$195,000) and a public apology from Ibrahim Fauzee on local media for three consecutive days.

The lawyer said Mohamed Fauzee ran a Quran class in Male’ and a construction company, and that the remarks by Ibrahim Fauzee had affected his work.

President of IFM Ibrahim Fauzee told Minivan News he has evidence to support allegations including CCTV footage.

‘’They are worried because we can prove criminal charges against them,’’ he said, adding that he would release the footage to the press. “The story in the media is inaccurate.”

Fauzee said Sheikh Fareed had been dismissed from his position as Vice President of the Religious Council of IFM, and Mohamed Fauzee from the position of the NGO’s Vice Presidency following the matter. Fareed was one of the organisation’s founding members.

Sheikh Fareed’s mobile phone was switched off and he was unavailable for a comment at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government defies parliament vote, moves Immigration under Defence Ministry

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan has decided to defy parliament’s decision to not endorse the transfer of the Immigration Department to the Ministry of Defence, and make the change without parliament’s consent.

The government of President Waheed on Tuesday sought parliament’s approval to move Immigration department, National Disaster Management Centre and Aviation Security Command under the Defence Ministry led by Minister of Defense, retired Colonel Mohamed Nazim.

However, the parliament by a majority of 27 to 23 votes decided to disapprove the departmental shuffling.

During the debate on the request by the President’s Office to endorse the changes to the defence ministry’s mandate, MP Mohamed Rasheed of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) proposed a motion against approving the changes.

The motion against approving the changes was passed after four MPs from the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), including its presidential candidate Yameen Abdul Gayoom, backed the MDP’s motion.

Other PPM MPs who voted with the opposition include MP Ahmed Mahloof, MP Mujthaaz Fahmy and MP Ibrahim Riza.

The article 116 of the constitution states that the President – despite having the discretionary power determine the jurisdiction of the ministries – is required to submit all information relating to the ministries and their areas of jurisdiction to the parliament for its approval.

In December 2012, the responsibility for overseeing the Department of Immigration and Emigration was switched to the Ministry of Defence and National Security. The President’s Office claimed the decision to move the department under the mandate of Defence Ministry was made in a bid to make administration of the country’s immigration system more efficient.

President Waheed on Wednesday decided to make the change anyway despite parliament’s objection, with the result that approval will again be sought via parliamentary vote.

Following parliament’s decision, Attorney General Aishath Bisham told local news outlet CNM that despite parliament’s disapproval, the Department of Immigration and Emigration can still operate under the watch of the Defence Minister.

According to Bisham, the president has the power to transfer the department to any ministry under section 35 of the Immigration Act. However, Bisham said the president had sent the matter to parliament to adhere to the requirement stated in article 116 of the constitution which requires parliamentary approval for changes in mandates of cabinet portfolios.

Bisham also said that the government would again resubmit the matter to parliament concerning the transfer of Disaster Management Centre and Aviation Security Command to the Defence Ministry.

Speaking to Minivan News, opposition MDP MP Imthiyaz Fahmy – who is also a member of parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee (EOC) – alleged President Waheed was undermining the constitution and the laws of the country by attempting to militarise state institutions.

“The constitution clearly states that any changes brought to the mandate of a government ministry must be approved by the parliament. If the president can do whatever he wishes to do, why is it in the constitution stated that such decisions require parliamentary approval?” Fahmy questioned.

Fahmy claimed that any decision disapproved by parliament would be deemed invalid and therefore could not be considered to have legal effect.

“The reason to obtain parliamentary approval for such decisions is to have proper accountability. It is the duty of the parliament to hold the government accountable,” Fahmy added.

The Immigration Department has come under heavy fire from the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) – the independent institution responsible for prevention of corruption and corrupt practices – over alleged corrupt activities including the signing of establishing a border control system with Malaysian mobile security provider Nexbis.

The ACC have taken the matter to Parliament’s Finance Committee claiming that the deal with Nexbis will cost the Maldives MVR 2.5 billion (US$162 million) in potential lost revenue over the lifetime of the contract.

The former Controller of Immigration Sheikh Ilyas Hussain – brother-in-law of President Waheed – stands accused of corruption charges over the Nexbis deal. The trial of Illyas Hussain is currently being heard at the Criminal Court, where he has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Ilyas is accused of omitting from the concession agreement clauses that required Nexbis to provide 29 scholarships and 200,000 identity cards free of charge. The clauses were in the original technical proposal submitted by Nexbis to the tender evaluation board.

If convicted, the state minister could face either a jail term of up to three years, banishment or house arrest.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

‘Surfers against sewage’ shame city council over night market littering

Appalled by excessive amounts of garbage littering streets, nearby parks, and sea due to the Male’ night market, local surfers have staged a creative protest using the rubbish to pressure the city council into action.

The night market is held annually before Ramazan to provide people a plethora of affordable goods. Locally referred to as the ‘Ungulhey Bazaar’ – literally meaning the ‘rub up against someone market’ – the 10 day event draws dense crowds, and this year has a record-breaking 765 stalls representing 450 groups, according to local media.

Thousands of people shopping and eating amidst the hundreds of densely packed stalls generates enormous amounts of waste, which is pitched onto the streets or into the adjacent sea since there are no trash cans.

For the past three years the market has been located near ‘raalhugandu’, Male’s surf point, adjacent to the Tsunami Monument in Henviru ward.

Fed up with the pollution the “surfers against sewage” decided to take action.

“There are no dustbins so the rubbish ends up in the ocean and we don’t want that,” local surfer and Maldives Surfing Association (MSA) Spokesperson Ibrahim Riffath told Minivan News yesterday (June 11).

“It’s very bad, like a real slum,” said Riffath. “The Maldives is one of the most beautiful countries, but the sh*ttiest place.”

The wind carries the waste into the water and spreads it through the streets, so the bad storm that wreaked havoc on Male’ and the night market earlier this week exacerbated the problem, Riffath explained.

The surfers were in good spirits walking through the empty market stalls to collect trash – which was strewn over the ground – to reuse for their protest.

An impromptu improvisation about the waste management problem, sung by local surfer Ibrahim Aman to the tune of Pink Floyd’s the Wall, with accompanying lyrics “we don’t need no trash around us”, made the rubbish hunt a lively affair.

As did Aman’s poetry about inserting trash into a bin: “My name is dustbin and I’m always empty. My girlfriend’s name is garbage…”

The random rubbish pieces were arranged along the sea wall, hung from trees in the small park near ‘raalhugandu’, and piled next to protest boards in an artistic fashion.

Witty signs, banners, and graffiti expressed their frustration with the waste management problem: “Is this a pretty picture? Is this heaven on earth? Is this the garbage area? For an independent Dhivehi Raajje (Maldives) we need a clean Dhivehi Raajje.”

The lone trash can located near the park at the night market’s entrance was adorned with graffiti saying “What is this?”, while other ironic messages saying “thank you city council”, “welcome to paradise”, “sunny side” and “carbon neutral 2013”.

While most of the “surfers against sewage” are MSA members, their protest was not conducted as an official MSA initiative, but was rather spontaneous collective effort.

“MSA’s president wrote to the city council this year, but we have not yet received a reply,” said Riffath.

“The city council is saying they will have dustbins, but they have not yet done it and no one is coming to collect the trash,” he continued.

“They told us that this place, [the raalhugandu park], is not the road so it’s not part of their mandate to clean,” claimed Riffath.

“We are doing this for ourselves, the public and the environment,” he added. “People aren’t educated about why littering is so harmful.”

Be green and clean

“It’s not nice or hygienic,” local surfer Hamd Abdul Hadhi told Minivan News yesterday.

“Each stall should be responsible for keeping their area clean, daily,” he suggested. “If we were rich we would have bought the dustbins ourselves.”

“Most of the pollution from the market ends up in the sea,” he explained. “The trash hurts the fishes and corals, plus when we’re surfing and get a plastic bag stuck to our faces then we’re in trouble.”

Raising awareness about the link between human and environmental health is necessary to stop people from haphazardly throwing their garbage everywhere, which is why the surfers are leading by example, Hadhi noted.

“People are damaging mother nature so much with rubbish,” he said. “As surfers, we understand more than others and want to show people that it is good to be clean.”

“We clean the park and surrounding area two or three times a week, but no one else bothers,” Hadhi lamented. “And every night market we put up notices saying ‘do not litter here’.”

“It’s not just for our benefit, waste management is important for the whole country,” he said. “We are one of the smallest countries, so it’s crazy we can’t manage waste properly.”

“No one listens to us, so this [protest] is all we can do,” he declared.

Male’ City Council

“Of course this is a problem at the night market,” Male’ City Council (MCC) Mayor Ali ‘Maizan’ Manik told Minivan News today (June 12).

“I move around every day early morning and my goodness I know how bad it is,” said Manik.

“My secretary general will be arranging a meeting for this afternoon with the [protest] organisers and we will discuss waste management how we can reach a solution and solve this issue,” he added.

Manik explained that the Environment Ministry has been handling the waste management problem, but has not kept the MCC informed of what they are doing.

“Given the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) investigation into the [Tatva] contract we were asked to stop [waste management activities] until the inquiry was completed,” said Manik.

“I spoke with the Environment Minister and they are already approved to sign the [new] Tatva agreement, but before the council signs we have to know the changes they have made to the contract,” he noted.

“The Tatva discussion was already held and the original agreement was signed in November 2010,” he continued.

“Changes were already made to the agreement by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and World Bank, so there shouldn’t be [additional] changes, but the Environment has Ministry altered the contract,” Manik said.

“This is the kind of government we have, doing this to disturb us,” he added. “The waste management agreement should be made to benefit the public.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)