Category: Politics

EC dismissals: Fuwad and Fayaz remain EC members, says Majlis committee

The parliament’s independent institutions oversight committee yesterday declared that the Elections Commission (EC) President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz still remain in their posts despite the Supreme Court’s verdict to the contrary.

Yesterday (March 10), parliament also sent a letter to Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain and Attorney General Mohamed Anil stating that the dismissals were contrary to the constitutional procedures governing their appointment and dismissal, as well as the Elections Commission Act.

The letter stated that the contents were based on the legal advice of parliament’s Counsel General Fathimath Filza after her analysis of the Supreme Court’s verdict.

Senior leaders within the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) have today criticised the letter, noting it did not represent a parliamentary decision and also that such statements were beyond the Majlis’ remit.

EC President Thowfeek, Vice President Fayaz and the remaining members – Ali Mohamed Manik and Mohamed Farooq – were also been summoned to attend a committee meeting at 1:30pm today (March 11).

The EC members have been summoned for the purpose of discussing how procedural matters were carried out during the case proceedings, as well as to discuss ‘suo moto’ proceedings as applied through the constitution.

The committee held discussions with the EC members as well as Thowfeek and Fayaz at a closed-door session today.

In addition to the members of the EC, the committee also decided to summon members of the Judicial Services Commission at 2pm today to debate ‘suo moto’ and the means of taking action against the Supreme Court.

Deputy Chair of the committee, MDP MP Rozaina Adam – who chaired Monday’s meeting – alleged that while the Supreme Court has the constitutional mandate of having final say in matters of justice, what is currently being observed is a tendency to abuse those powers.

MDP MP Imthiyaz Fahmy stated that “it is an obligation to criticise a court on which’s bench sits ‘naked’ judges” – referring to the leaked sex video of Supreme Court judge Ali Hameed. He added that there is no law which outlaws the criticism of courts outside of court hearings.

“What we are seeing today is judicial shamelessness,” Fahmy said, asserting that the Supreme Court’s verdict against the EC was unconstitutional.

“It’s a parliamentary statement, not a decision”: PPM PG Leader

PPM Parliamentary Group Leader Moosa Zameer has responded to the letter sent yesterday, stating he did not believe it was a parliamentary decision.

“I don’t believe it is a decision. On the other hand, the parliament can release a statement or send a letter to someone based on the advice of the Counsel General. However, that is not a parliamentary decision,” said Zameer.

“We don’t accept that the letter signed by the speaker and his deputy is a parliamentary decision. Parliamentary decisions are ones which are taken on the parliament floor,” Zameer is quoted as saying to local media.

He added that it was obligatory for all to obey the orders of the Supreme Court, and that the PPM’s stand echoed this principle.

When contacted by Minivan News for further comment, neither Zameer’s nor PPM MP Ahmed Nihan were responding to calls at the time of press.

President Abdulla Yameen has also criticised the letter, claiming that it is outside the parliament’s mandate to release such a statement.

Speaking at the launching of PPM’s Villimalé parliamentary candidate Ahmed Nihan’s campaign, Yameen stated that it was the norm in a modern civilisation to obey the rulings of the Supreme Court.

He reiterated that the government would follow the orders of the Supreme Court and that it would proceed to elect new members to the EC.

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

Airport staff strike over bad food and bad bonuses

Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) employees working at Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) went on strike today over the low quality of food served at the staff cafeteria as well as cuts to the annual company bonus.

The protest began early this morning and continued until around noon. At around 10:30am, the managing director of the company arranged a meeting with a five member group representing staff, as well as with the CEO Ibrahim ‘Bandhu’ Saleem.

While the protesters estimated that approximately 250 – 300 employs were ready to go on full strike, the situation was resolved following the meeting after employees were assured that solutions would soon be found for all their concerns.

Speaking to Minivan News, one of the five staff negotiators said that the main two demands of the protesters were the improvement of the conditions of the staff restaurant ‘Beach Rest Cafe’, and the resumption of the annual company bonus for employees – which has been “discontinued for the past two years”.

When disbursed by India’s GMR – the previous company that managed the airport – some would receive a bonus of MVR1500 while others would receive as much as MVR30,000, said the staff negotiator.

“It started with the Beach Rest issue. Even today they served rotten curry. This has been going on for a while now. We cant eat the food they prepare,” he explained.

MACL Corporate Communications Manager Hassan Areef said that the situation was resolved shortly after negotiating with protesters.

“Beach Rest is not run by the company, but we will talk to them and address the issue immediately,” he said.

When asked about the company bonus, he said that information would be revealed on that as progress is made, but assured that the company would this issue also.

“When the situation was resolved the staff were happy, they went back to work immediately,” Areef said.

Ibrahim Rasheed, a protester who took part in the dialogue, said that staff were promised the cafeteria issue would be addressed immediately and that another cafeteria would be established within two or three months.

Another protester said that the CEO had assured them the annual bonus would also be arranged shortly.

“He said it will be arranged very soon – as soon as the ongoing audit is completed. We were told that the bonus will be even better than before,” he said.

According to MACL staff concerned about the bonus, the issue has been taken to senior management several times within the past two years without any response.

In 2010, the GMR Male International Airport Pvt Ltd (GMIAL) – a consortium of the Indian GMR Group (77%) and the Malaysia Airports Holding Berhad (23%) — was awarded a concession contract to manage the airport for a period of 25 years.

However, President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s government prematurely terminated the agreement and the airport was handed over to the 100% government owned MACL in December 2012.

GMR later filed a compensation claim of US$1.4 billion for “wrongful termination”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court rules Jabir cannot be released

The High Court has decided that the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) member Abdulla Jabir cannot be released from jail as his legal team had requested.

Jabir’s legal representatives submitted their appeal earlier this month on March 3. At the hearing yesterday (March 10) Jabir’s lawyers asked the court to release the MP until it had reached a conclusion on whether or not to uphold the Criminal Court’s decision to imprison him for 12 months.

On February 20 Jabir was sentenced to 12 months in prison after being found guilty of failing to provide a urine sample to the police to run a drug test.

The Kaashidhoo MP’s representatives have argued that his trial and sentencing “was in violation of several procedural and factual formalities accorded in the Constitution and statutes of the Maldives.”

Local media reported that the High Court informed Jabir’s legal team that their request could not be granted later on the same day.

The incident leading to Jabir’s imprisonment happened on November 16, 2012, when a total of 10 people were taken into police custody after police raided and searched the island Hondaidhoo. Officers alleged they found large amounts of “suspected” drugs and alcohol upon searching the island.

Police Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef said at the time of the arrests that officers requested all suspects taken into custody on Hondaidhoo to provide urine samples for a routine examination. Seven individuals including other senior MPs refused to give a urine sample, leading to prosecution.

Police issued an order for Special Envoy Ibrahim Hussain Zaki – one of those facing charges related to the incident – to be taken into custody presented in court after officials were unable to present him with a summons.

After his conviction, Jabir’s legal team submitted a plea to the High Court arguing that he had the right to campaign for the Majlis elections. Jabir was set to re-contest his Kaashidhoo seat after an internal MDP decision to discipline the MP for repeatedly breaking three-line whips was overturned on appeal.

The constitution stipulates that a anyone sentenced to longer than 12 months in prison will be ineligible for election to the People’s Majlis.

While the MP was recently found not to have been guilty of possessing cannabis during the incident, his trial for alcohol possession is ongoing.

Speaking prior to this announcement by the High Court, Jabir’s wife Dhiyana Saeed stated the legal team would file a case with the Civil Court if the High Court did not accept.

Dhiyana was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: President pledges to abide by court ruling, criticises MDP boycott talk

President Abdulla Yameen has said the government will ensure that rule of law prevails, and that executive will respect and abide by Supreme Court rulings.

“God willing, my government will definitely uphold the rule of law. All entities of my government will abide by the Supreme Court ruling,” Yameen said last night.

Speaking at the campaign launching ceremony of ruling Progressive Party of Maldives’ (PPM) VilliMalé constituency candidate Ahmed Nihan, Yameen stated that it was not acceptable practice in “civilised societies” for other institutions to criticise decisions made by the Supreme Court.

However, when Nihan himself was asked about the courts decision on Sunday evening, the MP expressed his reluctance to make any comment.

“I would have to really think twice before I go ahead and say anything about the Supreme Court,” he said. “The Supreme Court may think that it’s a contempt of law if I said anything.”

Announcing that the President’s Office had called for applications to the vacant posts in the Elections Commission (EC), Yameen reiterated the government’s stand that it would complete all necessary preparations to hold the Majlis elections on March 22 as stipulated by the apex court’s ruling.

“We are working to ensure that we have some names by 3pm on Thursday. God willing, we will complete the work tasked to us by the Supreme Court within the six days they have assigned to us,” he continued.

Yameen stated that his government would not question verdicts released by the Supreme Court and that his administration had complete respect for the judges on the bench.

However, the president did admit that judicial reform must be discussed, adding that “this includes the issue of delays in case completion. Even MDP [opposition Maldivian Democratic Party] members will accept that there are some cases that have been halted midway.”

“Even President Nasheed himself will believe that there are certain cases which do not proceed at all in our judiciary,” said Yameen.

“You can’t achieve results by playing the game off the field”: Yameen

President Yameen further stated that he finds the tendency of first world countries to “interfere” in internal matters of small countries in a manner that contradicts “the lessons in governance that they continue to deliver” to be highly concerning.

“I have even previously stated when I was working in the presidential campaign that in our administration, we will maintain the independence and sovereignty of deciding on our internal affairs in Maldivian hands. God willing, our government will achieve that,” he stated.

Referring to the opposition party’s consideration of boycotting the upcoming parliamentary elections, Yameen argued that “you can’t achieve results by playing the game off the field”.

He called on the MDP members to participate in the elections and join the parliament if they wanted to bring reforms, especially to the judiciary.

“I want to say to all MDP members that the Maldives is a country belonging to every one of us. This is not particularly Adhaalath Party’s Maldives. Nor is it specifically PPM’s Maldives. Nor is it Jumhooree Party’s Maldives. And especially, this is not just the MDP’s Maldives. This country belongs to all of us,” Yameen stated.

He stated that the MDP should not resort to boycotting the elections, and must come out and vote. He added that it is crucial in a modern society to demonstrate via parliament how one should act when power begins from the people.

“Depriving membership for themselves from an institution elected for a five year term – depriving their members from their right to have their feelings expressed – this is not a manner in which a political party would act in a modern environment,” the president said.

Meanwhile, the MDP held a meeting of its National Council yesterday night with the intention of deciding whether or not to boycott the approaching polls.

While the meeting was closed to media, some local news outlets were able to report proceedings.

According to local media, two proposals were made at the meeting – former President Nasheed proposed boycotting the upcoming elections and protest the Supreme Court’s decision, while another unnamed member is said to have proposed that the party protest but that it still participate in the election.

The meeting was brought to a halt by Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik citing differences of opinion, with a follow up meeting to be scheduled in the near future.

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: Majlis says commissioners’ removal was unconstitutional

The People’s Majlis has written to the chief justice and the attorney general, stating that the president and vice president of the Election Commission (EC) were removed contrary to the constitutional procedures governing their appointment and dismissal.

The letter – signed by Speaker Abdulla Shahid and Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim – also noted that the move contravened the Elections Commission Act.

According to Majlis, the content of the letter was based on legal advice of parliament’s counsel general after her analysis of the Supreme Court’s verdict.

The Supreme Court yesterday sentenced EC President Fuwad Thowfeek to six months imprisonment under Article 88(a) of the penal code, and ordered the enforcement of the sentence be delayed for a period of three years.

The verdict also declared that Fuwad and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz had “lost the right and legal status to remain members of the commission and that the pair’s seats on the commission have become vacant”.

The letter stated that it was the People’s Majlis which is tasked with the appointment and removal of EC members, and that for any given reason a member of that commission can only be removed by a simple majority of votes in a parliament sitting as “clearly stated” in Article 177 of the constitution and Article 14 of the Elections Commission Act.

“Referring to the said article of the constitution and the elections commission act, it is clear that the authority to appoint and remove member from that commission is especially reserved for the People’s Majlis without the involvement of any other party.”

The letter also said that the removal of the pair by the Supreme Court contravenes the procedures specified in Article 177 of the constitution and Articles 5, 10, and 14 of the EC Act.

The letter referred to a number of statements from the Supreme Court’s verdict nullifying parliament’s removal of Mohamed Fahmy Hassan from the Civil Service Commission (CSC) in March last year.

The Majlis today noted that the constitutional procedures for removing EC members and CSC members were the same, saying that the court’s previous ruling had said the following:

“It is clear from the letter of the constitution that the constitution does not allow any of the three powers of the state to carry out the constitutional jurisdiction or functions of another, and that it is clearly stated that the system of separation of powers, and check and balance established between three powers by constitution is an principal feature of the constitutional system and the constitution of the Maldives.”

Referring to the same verdict, the letter said that the court had stated that “all powers of the state should fulfil their jurisdictions and functions within the constitutional limits set for that power by the constitution”.

The same ruling also stated that constitutional procedures regarding independent institutions are there to ensure their independence. In this regard, the verdict noted that tasking the executive with appointment, the parliament with removal and accountability, and the chief justice with oath taking are also check and balance procedures established under the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: Translation of Supreme Court verdict

The following is an unofficial translation of the Supreme Court verdict removing Elections Commission (EC) President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz from their posts for contempt of court.

While the verdict delivered in court included an order for the relevant authorities to investigate EC members for contempt of court “through criminal justice procedures,” the copy of the verdict later shared with media did not include such an order.

The Supreme Court has reportedly insisted that there was no difference between the verdict read out at court and the copy shared with media hours later.

Although Minivan News attended the trial, the reporting of the sentencing was based on the consensus of journalists in attendance after confusion concerning the jail sentence.

Local media reported without exception that all four EC members were sentenced to jail. However, the verdict later shared with media stated that only Fuwad Thowfeek was sentenced.

Meanwhile, Thowfeek as well as observers from civil society organisations inside the court room were under the impression that both Thowfeek and Fayaz were sentenced.

“The Supreme Court said they are giving six months jail term to Vice Chair Fayaz and me and that will be executed after a three year period and that we have been removed from out position in the elections commission and we are no longer Elections Commission members,” Thowfeek told Minivan News last night.

Contacted by Minivan News today, a Supreme Court media official declined to confirm or deny any discrepancies. The full judgment (Dhivehi) including the reasoning and dissenting opinions was uploaded to the Supreme Court website today.

Verdict:

Whereas the right to vote in elections and public referendums and to take part in the conduct of public affairs directly or through freely chosen representatives is guaranteed for every citizen of the Maldives 18 years of age or older by Article 26 of the constitution of the Republic of Maldives; and while ensuring that all elections and public referendums are conducted freely and fairly, without intimidation, aggression, undue influence or corruption is stipulated by Article 170 of the constitution; and as the Elections Commission had not complied with both the Supreme Court judgment in case number 2013/SC-C/11 that struck down articles eight and 11 of law number 4/2013 (Political Parties Act), which required a minimum of 10,000 members to register and operate a political party, since it was in conflict with both the constitution of Republic of Maldives as well as practices of developed democratic societies in the world, and the Supreme Court order 2014/SC-SJ/01 – issued after the Elections Commission announced its intention of dissolving political parties with less than 3,000 members in violation of the judgment delivered in the case – ordering the Elections Commission not to dissolve political parties already registered in the Maldives despite not having a minimum of 3,000 members for reasons specified in Supreme Court case number 2013/SC-C/11, stating that dissolving parties already registered on the basis that a political party’s registry should include 3,000 members would be a violation of the constitution and the judgment in the Supreme Court case number 2013/SC-C/11, and that parties registered under the previous political parties regulation will continue to exist without being dissolved; and as the Elections Commission’s senior officials have openly displayed disobedience to articles 141(c) and (d) and 145 (c) of the constitution and articles 20(b) and 77‡‡ of the Judicature Act through the media and challenged the Supreme Court’s rex judicata [a matter already judged] judgment in case number 2013/SC-C/42 as well as the orders related to the 2013 presidential election that were issued to protect the basic rights guaranteed by the constitution for Maldivian citizens, to uphold the rule of law, to protect the constitutional right of Maldivians to vote in elections, and in public referendums, conducted freely and fairly, without intimidation, aggression, undue influence or corruption and to guarantee that elections are held under the conditions specified under Article 170 of the constitution, obstructed justice and brought the court into disrepute, in addition to the commission’s President Fuwad Thowfeek’s statements made during the trial against the Supreme Court’s procedures and jurisdictions, which held the court in contempt, and since these actions of Fuwad Thowfeek are such that it could diminish the dignity of the courts stated in Article 141*(c) and (d) of the constitution, [we] sentence Fuwad Thowfeek of Ma. Thalhamudhige to six months imprisonment under Article 88(a) of the penal code, and order that the enforcement of the sentence be delayed for a period of three years, with reference to Article 88 of the Supreme Court regulations, under the Supreme Court’s powers and responsibilities granted by articles 11††(1)(2)(3), 9(f) and 22‡of the Judicature Act to establish justice, prevent the misuse of the judiciary and uphold the honour and dignity of the judiciary as stated in Article 141 of the constitution; and since after assuming the responsibilities of their posts with an oath to uphold the constitution, the Elections Commission’s President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz, who have to bear the responsibility of running the Elections Commission in accordance with the law, stepped aside from fulfilling their legal responsibilities, challenged and disobeyed judgments and orders issued by the Supreme Court in its capacity as the guardian of the constitution and laws, (we) determine that Elections Commission President Fuwad Thowfeek of Ma. Thalhamudhige, and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz of M. Hazaareevilla, must legally bear responsibility as the two seniormost officials of the commission for disobeying and challenging Supreme Court judgments outlining the legal perspective as well as the court’s orders, and since these actions contravene Article 145 (c)** of the constitution and Article 20 of the Judicature Act and diminishes the dignity granted to the court by Article 141(c) and (d), [we] declare that Elections Commission President Fuwad Thowfeek of Ma. Thalhamudhige, and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz of M. Hazaareevilla, have lost the right and legal status to remain members of the commission and that the pair’s seats on the commission have become vacant, under the powers and responsibilities granted to the Supreme Court by articles 11(1)(2 (3), 9(f)† and 22 of the Judicature Act to establish justice and prevent the misuse of the judiciary and to uphold the honour and dignity of the judiciary as stated in Article 141 of the constitution and with reference to Article 88 of the Supreme Court regulations ; and [we] order the executive, parliament and the Elections Commission to complete all the necessary arrangements for conducting the People’s Majlis elections which are to be held in 2014 on the date for which it has been scheduled within the next six days (including holidays), and order the Elections Commission and all relevant state institutions to hold the election as planned.

—

*Article 141 of the constitution states, “(a) The judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court, the High Court, and such Trial Courts as established by law (b) The Supreme Court shall be the highest authority for the administration of justice in the Maldives. The Chief Justice shall be the highest authority on the Supreme Court. All matters adjudicated before the Supreme Court shall be decided upon by a majority of the judges sitting together in session (c) No officials performing public functions, or any other persons, shall interfere with and influence the functions of the courts (d) Persons or bodies performing public functions, through legislative and other measures, must assist and protect the courts to ensure the independence, eminence, dignity, impartiality, accessibility and effectiveness of the courts.

**Article 145 (c) states, “The Supreme Court shall be the final authority on the interpretation of the Constitution, the law, or any other matter dealt with by a court of law.”

†Article 9(f) of the Judicature Act states that the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction extends to “all matters adjudicated by the Supreme Court under the powers bestowed upon the court as the highest authority for the administration of justice.”

††Article 11(a) states, “The Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on constitutional issues with the following characteristics as matters within the inherent jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: 1. An issue with legal reasons which may send the country into a constitutional void or remove it from the constitutional framework; or 2. A dispute between two powers or institutions of the state regarding the interpretation of the Constitution; or 3. A constitutional issue concerning public interest of the nation.”

‡Article 22 states, “In addition to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court in its own right by the constitution and the jurisdiction of the court laid out under various articles of this Act, the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to do the following: a) The power to give all orders under this Act and the Supreme Court Regulation, relating to a matter ora case submitted to the court, and to administer justice with regard to such matters or cases, and to take necessary actions to prevent the misuse of the judicial system and to uphold the confidence in the judicial system, b) In its own initiative or at the behest of a concerned party, in order to administer justice and to prevent the exploitation of the judicial system the power to issue various orders in accordance with the law, if any party is found to have violated this law or any principles of the Supreme Court regulation, c) In accordance with the law and regulation, the power to summon people in relation to a case or matter submitted to the Supreme Court, d) In relation to a case or matter submitted to the Supreme Court and for the purpose of finding the truth or any facts surrounding the case, the power to pose any question to any witness or party to the case at any time or in any manner, e) The power to issue an order requesting for the submission of any document required by the court in relation to a case or matter submitted to the Supreme Court.”

‡‡Article 77 states, “In carrying out the ruling of a court if it has not be delayed by that court or a court where the case was appealed, the ruling of every court is binding towards, the executive,parliament, the judiciary, persons in independent positions, state institutions, persons fulfilling state positions, the security service sector composing of the police and defence force and all other members of the public.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: MDP condemns, government coalition commends decision

Following the Supreme Court’s removal of Elections Commission (EC) President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz from their posts, responses have come from across the political spectrum.

While coalition partner Jumhooree Party (JP) leader and tourism tycoon Gasim Ibrahim has spoken in support of the court’s decision, senior members of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) have condemned the verdict, with former President Mohamed Nasheed appealing to the public to stage demonstrations.

Meanwhile, the government has announced that it will proceed with setting in place arrangements to ensure that the upcoming Parliamentary elections are held on schedule on March 22.

Verdict must not be challenged: Gasim

Gasim has stated that no one holding any state position should challenge the verdict of the apex court, which he has claimed demonstrated that no one in any state position can act against any decision of the Supreme Court.

Speaking at an event held at the JP’s central campaign office Kunooz on Sunday night, he asserted that the verdict was the direct result of the actions of EC President Fuwad Thowfeek. Fuwad himself had admitted to having acted against the orders of the Supreme Court, he added.

“The reason why I am praising the decision of the Supreme Court is because, in order to maintain national unity and peace, this verdict has demonstrated that no one can act in breach of the rule of law,” Gasim is quoted as saying in local media.

Gasim stated that the final decisions lie with the apex court, and no one – including the parliament – can challenge these decisions. He called upon those displeased with the court’s verdict to “adopt the way of peaceful dialogue instead of taking to the streets and protesting”.

Nasheed calls on citizens to protest

Speaking at a political rally in the island of Dhihdhoo on Sunday night, former President Mohamed Nasheed described the verdict as “unconstitutional” and called on citizens to come out in protest.

He stated that it was the saddest moment in the constitutional history of the Maldives, accusing the apex court of “undermining the constitution which consists of high hopes of the citizens” and of “stripping independent commissions of their powers”.

“Tonight we are seeing the Supreme Court undermine the constitution of the Maldives by leaving the EC powerless and sentencing its president and vice president to jail.”

“It is the parliament that is tasked with oversight of the work of the EC. The constitution very clearly states this. Tonight we have seen [the Supreme Court] attempt to undermine the hopes of a large number of citizens”.

Nasheed stated that the new constitution of the Maldives was set in place and accepted by the people due to the bitter experiences that they had previously known.

“It was because injustice, discrimination, and inequality had settled among us to alarming extent. The Maldivian people wanted to enjoy the country’s richness to its full extent, Maldivians wanted to enjoy the certainty of having human rights safeguarded at its fullest. They wanted justice to be served in the Maldives.”

“If the elections are not held in a free and fair manner, then the resulting government will not be free or fair either,” Nasheed stated, calling on citizens to get strength from one another, to overcome their fears, and to come out in protest against the Supreme Court’s decision.

Nasheed said that the MDP needed to decide whether it will participate in the upcoming parliamentary elections. A meeting of the party’s National Council will take place at 9pm tonight.

Party Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik questioned whether the court had the authority to remove members of the EC, whilst Spokesman Hamid Abdul Ghafoor described the decision as “evidence that we will not see a free and fair election in this country”.

Will take necessary action to implement SC verdict: Government

The government has meanwhile stated that it will take all necessary action to implement the Supreme Court verdict without delay.

“The government will not criticize or challenge this verdict. In the current system of governance, the executive’s role is to implement whatever responsibilities that such an order places on us without further delay. We will proceed to do just that,” President’s Office Spokesman Ibrahim Muaz Ali stated.

The president will work on sending names for the vacant EC posts of the parliament as soon as possible, he said, noting that the court’s verdict ordered the elections to go ahead on schedule.

“The government believes that the parliament should also cooperate in such matters. The sad thing is that this is not the spirit we are seeing from the parliament,” Muaz stated, expressing concern about the delay in parliament in appointing a member to the previously vacated EC position.

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: EU observers note “time pressure” on March 22 polls

The Supreme Court’s decision to convict Elections Commission members for contempt of court will make the holding of the March 22 polls difficult the EU’s Election Observation Mission (EOM) has said.

“With less than two weeks remaining before the scheduled elections on 22 March, the mission recognises the time pressure that now weighs on the preparation of these elections, and the many associated challenges related to organising them in a manner that ensures they are credible, transparent, inclusive and fully representative of the wishes of all Maldivians,” read an EU EOM statement released last night.

Yesterday’s court verdict gave the relevant institutions six days to “make all necessary arrangements” for the scheduled parliamentary elections.

Meanwhile, a legal source has described the Supreme Court as now exercising a “dictatorship” over the other branches of government.

A Majlis statement released yesterday evening asserted that the procedures for appointing and removing members of the EC is detailed in the constitution and the Elections Commission Act.

“Because the People’s Majlis is tasked with the procedures on appointing and removing of members in that commission, we state: the Majlis can comment on the said Supreme Court verdict only after receiving and reviewing that document.”

The Majlis at the time said it had not received the court’s verdict, of which conflicting versions have been given in verbal and written forms.

The President’s Office has today called for applications from candidates wishing to fill the two commission places left vacant after dismissal of Chair Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice Chair Mohamed Fayaz yesterday.

The deadline for applications is 3pm on Wednesday, with application forms available on the President’s Office website.

Former Chair Thowfeek yesterday told Minivan News that he was left uncertain as to how the elections could now be carried out

“To fill our posts the president has to call for applications and select some names and send them for the parliament’s approval of more than fifty percent.”

“Very difficult for me to say anything because the Supreme Court reason given for our punishment is because of when I spoke about the impracticality of the 16 point guidelines.”

“When I talk about the practical difficulties, they say nobody is supposed to talk about the practical difficulties.”

Contempt

Thowfeek’s concerns over what constitutes contempt of court following the court’s ‘suo moto’ proceedings against the EC are also evident in both the political and legal communities.

Asked to comment on the Progressive Party of Maldives’ position following yesterday’s ruling, MP Ahmed Nihan said that he was reluctant to talk about the court.

“In my opinion, since the verdict is connected to contempt of court, if we even say something there might be another trouble. I would have to really think twice before I go ahead and say anything about the Supreme Court”

“I’m an elected MP from Villimaafanu but still, knowing that the Supreme Court may think that it’s a contempt of law if I said anything.”

One local lawyer reiterated these concerns, wishing to share his thoughts about the case anonymously.

“Anyone speaking out against the court is promptly suspended. You can easily be blacklisted.”

He suggested that the censure of all but a few prominent and well-connected lawyers was deterring many from entering the Maldivian legal profession.

“In a sense, you could say that the judiciary is the dictatorship of the three powers and is acting outside of the mandate of the highest court in a country.”

“In a sense it’s the power of the parliament that the courts are usurping, the function of lawmaking”

The lawyer revealed that he had been researching the newly introduced ‘suo moto’ regulations used by the court to both bring and oversee the case against the EC.

“Suo moto proceedings are sometimes used in public interest cases – especially in jurisdictions such as India and Pakistan – or places where one would see the judge as someone who puts wrongs right, as opposed to a judge being a formal adjudicator.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Human Rights Commission receives Juvenile Court summons

The Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) has been summoned to the Juvenile Court for a report that gave a “negative impression” of the court’s conduct during the sentencing of a 15 year old rape-victim to flogging and house arrest.

Following the release of the confidential report, the Juvenile Court has sent an order to every individual involved from the HRCM, summoning them to a court hearing this Wednesday (March 12) at 1:30pm.

The HRCM stated that they will release an official press statement after the court summons this Wednesday.

On February 26 2013 the Juvenile Court convicted the 15 year old girl on the grounds of fornication and sentenced her to 100 lashes and 8 months house arrest. The case attracted global concern from both local and international organisations, and the charges were later annulled in August of the same year.

Although the sentence was eventually annulled, the case attracted international attention to the Maldives’ juvenile court system and their policies in dealing with victims of sexual abuse.

Speaking with Minivan last year, HRCM member Jeehan Mahmoud said that the sentence represented a “continuous failure” on behalf of the whole state to protect children and other victims of sexual abuse.

The HRCM submitted an investigative report on how the court handled the case, taking into account safeguards, rights, and protections afforded to a victim of child abuse under the Maldivian constitution, Islamic Shariah, and international human rights standards.

Spokesperson for the Juvenile Court Zaima Nasheed explained that some points outlined in the HRCM report were not reflective of how the court conducted its work. She noted that it portrayed a negative impression of the court and tried to exert undue influence on its work.

Zaima added that the HRCM did not hold any discussions or ask for any questions from the Juvenile Court while they were compiling their review.

The Juvenile Court wished to clarify that they sent a letter to the HRCM last month to arrange a meeting, though the commission said that it would not be able to attend.

Following this, the court compiled a written document with all of its concerns and shared this with the HRCM. In addition to this, the court asked to meet again with the HRCM yesterday (March 9) at 10am. The HRCM did not respond to the letter and failed to attend the meeting, said Zaima.

In light of this, the HRCM was in breach of the constitution’s Articles 141, said Zaima. These state that no officials performing public functions can “interfere with and influence the functions of the courts”, instead they must “assist and protect the courts to ensure the independence, eminence, dignity, impartiality, accessibility and effectiveness of the courts.”

Following the 15 year-old’s conviction, local NGO Advocating the Rights of Children (ARC) called on the Maldivian government to pass legislation concerning the treatment of sexual abuse victims.

ARC also previously called for reforms of the juvenile justice system and reform of the current protection mechanisms provided to minors who are kept in state run institutions, such as homes and foster programs.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)