Category: Politics

Elections Commission to publicise presidential election mandate for police

The Maldives Elections Commission (EC) is drafting a document to articulate what Maldives Police Service (MPS)’s mandate will be during the September 7 presidential elections.

“We are in the process of drawing up a small document that will outline what the police will and will not do during elections, which we will make public,” EC Vice President Ahmed Fayaz told Minivan News today (August 14).

He expects the document to be completed before the end of next week.

Fayaz explained that while the EC has requested the MPS play a supporting role to help ensure peaceful, free and fair elections take place, police officers cannot intervene without a specific EC request.

“Police can intervene only at the request of the Elections Commission staff,” said Fayaz.

“The police are playing a support role and support will be requested [by EC officials] in case anything happens that would prevent a smooth election,” he continued.

“Police must maintain a 100 foot radius distance from ballot boxes,” he added.

Fayaz explained that regarding elections, the MPS mandate is limited to enforcing law and order and monitoring the situation on each island.

“We have requested police provide assistance on every single island that will have ballot boxes,” Fayaz said.

Police teams consisting of a “very small number of people” will be deployed to each island where voting is taking place, according to Fayaz.

“The assumption is that police will not be confined to their office headquarters the day of presidential election,” Fayaz noted. “They will be present on each island [where voting is occurring] and free to move around the island that day.”

In July, the EC President Fuwad Thowfeek outlined some of the key regulations related to concerns regarding police interference with elections while speaking with Minivan News.

“Police cannot stand within a 100 foot radius of the ballot box,” Thowfeek confirmed.

“Police can enter the area only if the Head of Polling Station requests their assistance to control any criminal activity that goes beyond his control,” he continued.

“The role of the police will be to assist the Elections Commission in keeping peace and public safety,” he added.

If voting is halted, not solely a police failure: Police Commissioner

Meanwhile, in an interview given to local media outlet DhiTV Monday (August 12) Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz emphasised that the police are working to maintain peace and stability and that if the September 7 presidential election is halted it would not be solely a police failure.

“Though the Maldives Police Service was, is and will be preparing to maintain peace and stability during the election days, the public should also do their part to maintain order,” said Riyaz.

“If for whatever reason, the voting process comes to a halt, it should not be seen as a failure solely on the Maldives Police Service’s part,” he continued.

“The aim of the police is to prevent conflict before, during and after the elections on an operational level,” he added.

Riyaz noted the importance of all relevant authorities and political leaders work together to ensure peaceful presidential elections and that the MPS would provide the support requested of them by the EC.

“I believe that political figures, political parties and relevant institutions must work together to ensure that the election ends peacefully,” said Riyaz.

Riyaz also noted that a National Coordination Committee has been established with representatives from different political parties and relevant institutions so the committee can address any election issues that may arise “using diplomacy rather than out on the streets.”

In regard to Commissioner Riyaz’s DhiTV interview, Minivan News contacted Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef today to clarify specifically how the MPS will assist the EC on September 7, how law and order will be maintained, and how near to ballot boxes police teams will be stationed.

While Haneef had not responded to these enquiries at time of press, he noted that “The police are releasing all information regarding their role during elections through public mediums,” such as on the MPS website.

Furthermore, Haneef said the police have already “revealed the story of Riyaz” in regard to his DhiTV interview.

The MPS website states that the “Peaceful Conduct of the Presidential Election 2013” is an operational priority.

“Following the change of government in February 2012, the society is highly polarised and fragmented on political affiliations. Therefore, it is imperative for meticulously plan and prepare for the Presidential Election 2013,” as noted on the website.

The objective of this operational priority is to “Create an environment conducive for the conduction of Presidential Election 2013 and effectively manage any possible post-election conflicts,” states the website.

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

JSC appoints magistrate accused of copying test paper as Head Magistrate for Vaavu Atoll

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has appointed Head Magistrate of Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll Mohamed Raqib Ahmed as the Head Magistrate for Vaavu Atoll, in accordance with a Supreme Court order.

The magistrate was previously dismissed from a diploma course held at Kulliyyathul Dhiraasathul Islamiyya in 2010 over allegations that he had copied the test paper.

The JSC said in a statement that Ragib had recently sent a letter to the Supreme Court requesting he be transferred to Vaavu Atoll.

According to the statement, on 5 August 2013 the commission received a letter from the Supreme Court signed by Chief Justice Faiz Hussein asking the Ragib be appointed Vaavu Atoll Head Magistrate as per his request.

According to the statement, the JSC had already sought applications for interested candidates for the position when it received the letter from Supreme Court, and had therefore invalidated the announcement.

The statement also declared that Ahmed Ragib would commence work as the Vaavu Atoll Head Magistrate from 18 August 2013.

According to local media reports, in 2010 Ragib was dismissed from a Law Diploma Course held for Magistrates at Kulliyyathul Dhiraasathul Islamiyya [Faculty of Sharia and Law/Maldives National University] after the college board found him guilty of copying during the test.

The JSC appealed the dismissal and Ragib was later offered the course, however media reports stated that the Anti-Corruption Commission had asked JSC to take action against Ragib.

Speaking to Minivan News today, President of the Anti-Corruption Commission Hassan Luthfy said the commission investigated the case of the magistrate copying in the exam and had found him guilty “beyond doubt”.

”But it is not our mandate to take action against judges – it is in the mandate of the JSC to take action against him,” Luthfee said.

”So we sent our findings to the commission and informed the JSC that action should be taken against him because he was  magistrate when he sat the exam.”

Luthfy said the ACC had not received any information of any action taken against Ragib.

In March 2011 the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) appointed Judge Mohamed Naeem – who was a Civil Court Judge – to the Juvenile Court, as punishment for disobeying the decision of a superior court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: A case for more mature defamation laws in the Maldives

“Reputation, reputation, reputation! O! I have lost my reputation. I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial. My reputation, Iago, my reputation!” said Cassio in Act II of Shakespeare’s Othello.

So did Maumoon Abdul Gayoom almost every day whenever before 2008 whenever his government wanted to stymie any criticism from anyone that he didn’t count as a supporter.

So did Maumoon Abdul Gayoom in June 2010, when the New York Times published the now (in)famous “looters” article and when Miadhu decided to reprint it.

So did Mohamed Nasheed in January 2012, when DQP’s Dr Mohamed Jameel alleged Nasheed was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests”.

These three moments/phases define the journey of defamation laws in our country and reflect three aspects of the maturity and adequacy of these laws. They reflect “the good, the bad and the ugly” of defamation laws in the Maldives and underlie the case for further refinements in these laws for us to have a stable, progressive and a coherent Islamic society.

Evolution of defamation laws in our country has come a long way from the times where it was a criminal offence punishable with up to six months of jail under Gayoom’s era. However, they seemed to have been too weak and toothless under Nasheed, and this in some sense led to his downfall that ushered in a volatile political environment for the last one and a half years.

The purpose of laws is to not just to punish actions that are undesirable for the peace of society but to also deter actions that can potentially harm such peace and harmony. This is especially true of defamation laws, which must create the fine balance between promoting responsible freedom of expression and providing enough deterrents against slander that can do unreasonable harm to reputation of individuals and to the cohesion of societies.

It is worthwhile to look back at how the defamation laws have evolved over time in the Maldives and reflect on whether we need to revisit these laws going forward, in order to make them more effective in serving the purpose that these laws are supposed to serve.

Before defamation was decriminalised in November 2009, defamation was one of the most abused laws in the Maldives. Section 125 was invoked by Gayoom administration every now and then to put their opponents under arrest and stymie any criticism of the government. Section 125 stated that “Where a person makes a fabricated statement or repeats a statement whose basis cannot be proven, he shall be punished with house detention for a period between one to six months or fined between Rf25 and Rf200”.

This of course reflected “the ugly” of our defamation laws and was dropped by the newly elected democratic government of Mohamed Nasheed. Such decriminalisation was hailed as a key democratic reform of the previous government and was appreciated by global rights watch bodies such as Article 19 and Freedom House as well as the United Nations itself. This was a significant movement for a society that was used to being under the shackles of the government and was enjoying its now-found ‘democratic society’ status.

Then, in June 2010, Gayoom decided to take Miadhu to court for reprinting an article published in New York Times. This article, which spoke of how money from the exchequer was inappropriately used for personal consumption under Gayoom’s regime, was based on the Nasheed government’s audit reports of Gayoom regime’s expenditure. This defamation suit was to be a watershed moment in democratic evolution of the country where a newspaper carried a story, which they believed to be credible, fearlessly. This was also a landmark moment with respect to freedom of expression and media in the Maldives; it was also the first case that Gayoom had lost in 32 years in the country! It showed Maldives to be on the right path of socio-judicial democratic reforms where some of the key tenets of globally accepted defamation regulations were shown to be working in our system.

However, this was soon followed by how ‘the bad’ of our defamation laws were exposed after ex-DQP leader and now-running-mate of Abdulla Yameen, Dr Mohammed Jameel Ahmed decided to slander against the then-President Mohamed Nasheed. In a closely knit Islamic society such as ours, an accusation of working against the nation’s religion, which is what binds us together, is a matter of supreme importance – more so, if such an accusation is made against the nation’s President.

If backed by proof, then it is a matter of strategic importance for the nation’s institutions to investigate but if it is unsubstantiated, it is slander of the most deplorable nature and must be handled with utmost urgency. In this case, it was interesting to note that while Dr Jameel made these allegations, they came from the political leader of a party whose other major leader, Dr Hassan Saeed, had declared during many election rallies in 2008 that as Gayoom’s Attorney General, he was aware that Nasheed was investigated for his association with western churches.

He had declared during these rallies that Nasheed had come totally clean after detailed investigations. Moreover, Nasheed’s government was accused of voting in favour of Israel at the United Nations, whereas Maldives’ voting in any UN resolution is public knowledge and clearly this accusation was untrue as well. However, despite these issues being common knowledge, a political leader could believe that he could make the most serious and slanderous allegations against the President of the nation and could expect to be let off the hook easily for such slander.

It’s another matter that there are a number of structural issues with respect to the judiciary in the Maldives which also played their part in how this case snowballed into significant political turmoil for the country. While I do not intend to comment on or discuss the issue of judicial reforms through this article, the core issue that I want to highlight is that even the laws must have had loopholes for which a political leader such as Dr Jameel had hoped to get away with slander. I say this because, had the laws been specific and if they had enough teeth to be deterrents by themselves, scope of judicial manipulation would have been limited in this case. For instance, while slander and libel were decriminalised in 2009, the maximum penalty for civil action against slander was set at MVR 5000 (US$325). That’s hardly a deterrent for a man who is known for his panache for Hugo Boss suits! He may as well have deposited MVR 5,000 in the President’s office in advance for every time he got a set of these ‘slanderous’ booklets printed!

This saga that set off arguably the biggest political turmoil in Maldivian history was not the end of it, as for the woes against weak defamation laws. Foreign investors like Nexbis and GMR complained of continuous undermining of their business reputation through unsubstantiated and irresponsible corruption allegations by local politicians such as Sheikh Imran and Hassan Saeed. For instance, in the case of GMR, while the likes of Sheikh Imran and various ministers in Dr Waheed’s cabinet made corruption allegations against the GMR deal, the Anti-Corruption Commission later gave a clean chit to the deal.

The impact that these experiences, with respect to the safety of investment climate and investor protection against local political interests, of these two foreign companies will have on future investment flows only remains to be seen in the times to come. What is very clear is that re-looking at defamation laws is not only important from a socio-political perspective but from an economic development and foreign investor protection perspective as well.

In essence, we have come a long way from pre-2009 days when criminal defamation was widely abused but are now at a place where anyone can make any sort of irresponsible allegations without worrying about the consequences. This is not only limited to the domain of politics but to our economy as well as everyday life. It is clear that defamation cannot go back to being a criminal offence but it is also important for us to consider if the current civil defamation laws reflect the desired balance that is important to maintain order in our society.

Clearly, the current laws are unable to make this balance and need to be strengthened – how, though, is a matter of broader socio-politico-legal debate.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Political bias limiting right to information: panel

The biased editorial practices of media outlets owned by politicians is one of the major impediments preventing the right to information from being upheld in the Maldives, journalists and civil society actors highlighted during discussion panels organised by the US Embassy this week.

Maldivian journalists and NGO leaders met with representatives from the US Embassy, the UN, as well as a US attorney representing the American Society of News Editors, Kevin Goldberg, to discuss the current status and future efforts needed to protect this human right in the Maldives.

The state is the guardian of information and the public have a right to access that information, according to the forum.

This is essential for not only holding the government accountable to the public – so residents of the Maldives can understand what the government is doing for the people – but also for instilling public trust in government institutions.

Any type of information, including documents, electronic records, audio, video, etc., produced, held or maintained by a state institution should be easily accessible. Uninhibited access to events held in the public domain, such as protests, are also protected, the forum was informed.

Journalists and NGO representatives alike noted the lack of cooperation from government institutions as well as the shortcomings of media outlets in disseminating balanced information.

The media discussion panel held Monday (August 12) was nonetheless poorly attended, with three journalists from Sun Online, one Maldives Media Council (MMC) official, and one Minivan News representative participating.

While two Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC), also known as Television Maldives (TVM), reporters were present during part of Attorney Kevin Goldberg’s opening remarks, they left prior to the group discussion taking place. No representatives from the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC), Raajje TV, Villa TV (VTV), DhiTV, Haveeru News, Channel News Maldives (CNM), Miadhu News, or Minivan Radio attended the event.

Although the panel was small, discussion was lively, with everyone in attendance concerned about editorial policies that catered to the government or a specific political party, which they said had staunched the flow of information reaching the Maldivian public.

Unbalanced reporting in favor of the state during the February 2012 controversial transfer of power that followed former President Mohamed Nasheed’s resignation, as well as government authorities cutting Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) aligned-Raajje TV’s feed, were highlighted as concerns.

In addition to the need for a culture of balanced, ethical reporting, journalists highlighted the difficulty in obtaining information from various government representatives and institutions.

Goldberg noted that “information delayed is information denied”, and that procedural mechanisms should be in place to allow the public, including journalists, easy access information. The state should “proactively disclose” information of public interest, individuals “shouldn’t have to ask for it”, he said, explaining that readily available information was as much a means for public officials to protect themselves from the media as it was for the media in conducting investigative journalism.

Goldberg, as well as the Human Rights Advisor to the UN Resident Coordinator’s Office, Safir Syed, stated that MBC’s requirement that journalists be licensed to enter a protest was a human rights violation.

Goldberg emphasised that it takes time to build enough collective momentum to effectively pressure a government to uphold the right to information, and that collaboration between media outlets and civil society was essential to do so.

NGO representatives echoed the concerns noted by journalists during the discussion panel held Tuesday (August 13) and emphasised that unethical reporting and the media’s lack of cooperation with NGOs had limited civil society’s trust of local media outlets.

The inability to appeal to the judiciary to obtaining access to public information was also highlighted as a problem.

Transparency Maldives Project Director Aiman Rasheed explained to Minivan News that while Article 19 of the Maldivian Constitution guarantees the right to information, current practice was limited to the executive. He added that the right to information regime needs to be spread across all state institutions, including the judiciary, parliament, independent commissions and state companies.

Furthermore, the Maldives is a signatory to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which also protects this human right.

“The right to information is important for citizens to make informed choices, participate in the democratic process, and hold the government accountable,” said Rasheed. “Freedom of information is a key prerequisite for democracy.”

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

Islamic Minister concerned over “extreme ideologies” being preached in Dharumavantha Mosque

Minister of Islamic Affairs Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed has voiced concerns that Friday prayers conducted in the Dharumavantha Mosque in the capital city Male’ are conducted by Imams who do not hold state-issued authorisation to preach.

Shaheem emphasised the importance of putting an end to the practice of Dharumavantha Mosque conducting Friday prayers in a manner different from all other mosques in the country. He furthermore said that he had personally received reports that the sermons given in the mosque preached a “stricter, more extreme ideology [of Islam]”.

“In the Maldives, we follow the practices of Sunni communities, especially when it comes to matters concerning religion. And then [they] refuse to pray in other mosques behind authorised Imams and form their own prayer congregations elsewhere. The ‘Imams’ conducting Friday prayers at Dharumavantha Mosque do not have permits to lead Friday prayers, nor are they even well-educated. I’ve also been informed that sometimes very extreme preachings are made by them,” Shaheem said on Sunday, speaking to local media.

The minister added that mosques in the capital are now under the jurisdiction of the Male’ City Council, and that the Islamic Ministry no longer has the mandate to act against any “undesirable activities” being carried out in mosques.

Mosques were transferred from being under the watch of the Islamic Ministry to the councils in late 2011 after the ratification of the Decentralisation Act.

Shaheem stated that he had nevertheless worked to ‘reform’ people who attended these prayers with the help of various religious scholars who provided advice to these individuals.

A Male’ City Council official noted that Councillor Hassan Afeef is in charge of overeeing mosques. Afeef was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Dharumavantha Miskiiy

Dharumavantha Mosque (Miskiiy) is recorded to be the oldest mosque in the country, according to the former National Center for Linguistic and Historical Research.

The mosque, which is exclusively for men, is a one-room structure with an attached veranda, located near Sultan Park.

Dharumavantha Mosque is attributed to Mohamed-Ul-Adil, the first Sultan of the Maldives, who was the first to enforce Islamic law in the country.

On March 6, 2013, the mosque was robbed and vandalised. The matter was reported to police by those attending early morning prayers.

Police have so far not publicised details of the investigation, and the case is believed to remain unsolved.

Dharumavantha Mosque is the only known mosque in the capital which refuses to read out pre-written sermons issued by the Islamic Ministry during Friday prayers, as is the current practice.

Islamic Minister Sheikh Shaheem Ali Saeed was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

AG accuses Civil Court of negligence as City Council proceeds with US$30 million development of West Harbour

The Attorney General has filed a complaint at the Supreme Court accusing the Civil Court of negligence in holding a hearing of a case filed by the state, seeking to prevent Male City Council from outsourcing the development and operation of the West Harbour Area.

Last Sunday Male City Council announced its intention to hand over the development and operation of the West Harbour Area – locally known as the ‘T-Jetty Area’ – to a local company called West Gate Assets Private Limited for a lease period of 25 years.

The project, worth US$30 million, once completed will include coffee shops, cafes, petrol sheds, shopping malls and spacious parking zones intended to resolve severe congestion in Male’ City.

Meanwhile, in its complaint filed at the Supreme Court, the Attorney General’s office claimed the Civil Court’s failure to proceed with the case meant that the government could take no action against the project.

“If that agreement proceeds as it is now, [the Attorney General’s Office] believes that will be carried out unlawfully and this office will continue to take necessary actions against the project,” read a statement from the AG’s office.

The AG further claimed that last December, when the city council announced opened bidding for the project, a case was filed at the Civil Court to invalidate the process through an injunction to stop the bidding process.

However the Attorney General’s office said the Civil Court had failed to hold any hearings into the case since May.

The statement claimed excuses for hearings being delayed included the city council’s lawyer calling in sick, the court being unable to deliver court chits and the judge being on leave.

The project

In a press conference on Sunday, West Gate’s Consultant Ismail Firag told the press that the company intended to develop the area as a phase by phase project with development of the first phase to commence on September 1.

The City Council claimed that the lease agreement had been signed by the City Council and West Gate six months ago, after the project received approval from both the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) and the Housing Ministry.

Male City Council Member Ibrahim Sujau at the press conference said the council would try its best to make arrangements to ensure that the project was completed smoothly without disruptions.

He added that the decision to complete the project in several phases was made to ensure its smooth completion.

The councillor claimed that area was leased to West Gate for a sum of MVR 400,000 (US$ 25,940.34), approximately MVR 320,000 (US$ 20,752.27) more than the current MVR 80,000 (US$ 5,188.07) a month generated in income generated from the area by the City Council.

Opposition

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)-dominated Male City Council has come under heavy fire from the government over the project as both the Housing Ministry and the Attorney General have voiced against outsourcing of the harbour development.

Shortly following the announcement, Housing Minister Mohamed Muizz dismissed the claim made by the City Council that his ministry had given approval to the project.

Speaking to local newspaper Haveeru, the Minister claimed the city council had not shared anything with the ministry before handing the project over to West Gate.

Muizz further contested that city council could not take such major decisions without consulting the ministry as the West Harbour area is considered an important economic zone in Male’ City.

“It is a very important strategic location in Male’. On the other hand, development of that area is a massive project. They can’t hand over the development of the area without obtaining permission from the ministry. We even do not know how they plan to develop the area. It is an outright lie that we had given them the approval,” he said.

Housing Minister claimed the ministry had previously made a master-plan to develop the area and said that he did not believe the city council could hand the project to West Gate under a new master-plan.

Previously, the housing ministry’s bid to stop the project through the Anti Corruption Commission failed after the commission concluded that there was no corruption involved during the bidding process.

But Muizz claimed that he was determined to stop the project.

“We will look into ways to stop the project. But we have not yet decided what will be our actions. Previously, similar attempts had been made to stop other such projects. But the current legal framework itself has difficulties for such actions,” he said.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

AG slams former government over foreign investment “damage” from alleged lack of financial research

Attorney General Azima Shukoor has accused the previous government of failing to conduct sufficient research before signing several major foreign investment projects, that had now been terminated by the present administration.

Azima was quoted by private broadcaster Villa Televison (VTV) (Dhivehi) as claiming that unspecified “economic damage” currently faced by the state had resulted from a lack of economic and legal research by the administration of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

She was quoted in local media arguing that “damages” to the state had resulted from a number of foreign investment projects signed by Nasheed’s administration, including the US$511 million concession agreement signed with GMR to build and manage a new terminal at Ibrahim Nasir International Airport. Azima also raised over another deal with Malaysia-based Nexbis to manage and operate a border control system in the country.

Both agreements have since been terminated by the administration of President Dr Mohamed Waheed, with the Maldives facing a US$1.4 billion compensation claim from GMR after its contract was suddenly declared void in November. The company was then given a seven day notice period to leave before being evicted by authorities.

Nexbis was last week given 14 days to vacate by the government, which likewise terminated its concession agreement with the company.

However immigration officials last week questioned whether  replacement technology was ready to be implemented, in place of the Nexbis system.

Former government response

Responding today to the attorney general’s criticisms, Mahmood Razee, former economic development minister during the Nasheed administration, stressed that the former government had engaged with the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC) before moving ahead with the airport privatisation program.

As such, he rejected accusations that no research had been conducted before undertaking such a high profile project.

“Clearly this was not a stab in the dark,” Razee said of the deal. “[The World Bank engagement] determined how best to proceed with the airport development for the benefit of the government and the people. After looking at the revenue streams, it was concluded that it was best to move forward with the public private partnership.”

He claimed that aside from potential financial benefits of agreeing the deal, the consortium consisting of GMR and Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhard (MAHB) had been picked based on the companies’ experience in managing other airport projects.

With the deal now terminated, Razee added that it remained critical to secure development at the airport as soon as possible, claiming the current facilities at INIA did not meet the required standards.

Waheed’s government last year accused the IFC itself of negligence during the bidding process for the development of INIA, charges the World Bank rejected at the time.

By June this year, the Maldives’ Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) ruled out corruptionin the awarding of a concession agreement in June 2010 to the GMR/MAHB consortium. The government meanwhile continues to insist the sudden termination of the contract was in the national interest.

“Cause and effect”

Former Economic Development Minister Razee said the Maldives would remain reliant on development funding for future development projects, which would cost hundreds of millions of dollars out of reach of the government.

With the country now lacking sufficient rating to obtain credit commercially, Razee argued that development funds remained the only means for a country like the Maldives to secure sizeable finance.

The present government’s decision to cancel two major foreign investments would have a “cause and effect”, he suggested.

Should the MDP be elected to power in the presidential election scheduled for next month, the party would have to consider returning to negotiations with GMR in a bid to avoid huge financial fallout from arbitration proceedings now being conducted in Singapore.

He claimed that the cooperation of international bodies such as the World Bank in securing the GMR deal would likely to be sought in other high-profile investment projects sought under an MDP government.

Economic problems

The Maldives National Chamber of Commerce and Industries (MNCCI) meanwhile last month accused senior politicians under successive governments of trivialising the severity of the country’s economic problems.

MNCCI Vice President Ishmael Asif claimed parties were addressing financial concerns and issues impacting foreign investment with negative slogans rather than actual policies in the run up to September’s election.

While accepting the present “bad shape” of the Maldives economy, the chamber of commerce was particularly critical of what it called negative economic campaigning by senior figures in the last two governments – arguing they had done little to address an ongoing shortage of US dollars and a lack of investment banking opportunities and arbitration legislation in the country.

Asif’s comments were made in response to claims by the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) that foreign investors were now turning away from the Maldives due to concerns about political stability and safety in the country.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

JP, PPM file complaint against EC Legal Director for “political tweeting”

The Elections Commission (EC) has said it is investigating complaint filed by the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and the Jumhoree Party (JP) against its Legal Director Haneefa Khalid, for alleged political tweeting ahead of the upcoming Presidential Elections.

The JP and PPM filed multiple complaints at the Elections Complaint that included Khalid’s “politicised” tweets. Other complaints involved a group of Indian IT specialists working at the commission, and issues concerning voter registration.

Speaking to local media after filing the complaint, PPM Spokesperson MP Ahmed Mahloof said the party’s main concern was that Khalid was the wife of Dr Ahmed Ashraf, who contested the by-election of parliament’s Ungoofaaru constituency on a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) ticket following the murder of sitting MP Dr Afrashim Ali. The election was won by the PPM by a narrow margin of 81 votes.

Other grounds for the complaint filed against Khalid, Mahloof said, included her allegedly “politicised” tweets, and singled out one he claimed had offended PPM President and 30 year autocratic ruler, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

“When Gayoom got the [country’s highest civilian honour] Haneefa tweeted that the award was ‘tainted with blood’,” Mahloof said. Gayoom was awarded the Nishaan Ghaazeege Izzaiytheri Veriyaa (NGIV) on the Maldives’ independence day this year.

Minivan News observed that Khalid did not make the remarks herself, but had instead shared a YouTube video of a report on Gayoom’s award aired by opposition-aligned TV station Raajje Television, titled “The Highest Honour tainted in blood”.

Mahloof told the media that it was completely “unacceptable” for a person in such a position to tweet such political remarks and claimed this would affect the credibility of the presidential elections.

Speaking during a press conference on Sunday, the Vice President of Elections Commission Ahmed Fayaz said  the commission would look into the matter and would take administrative action should it find the need to do so.

“We have received the complaint. We will take action after looking into it,” he said.

On the same day, local newspaper Haveeru reported that the Attorney General’s office had begun probing into a disciplinary case concerning Khalid following a complaint filed against her by the police.

Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham told the newspaper that no comment could be give to media as the case is still under investigation.

Haveeru claimed the police filed the complaint after Khalid “addressed the police disrespectfully” while she was inside Male’ jail meeting a client whom she had been representing in court.

It further alleged that Khalid had been acting as the defense counsel of a man accused of robbing US$122,000 from the Relax Inn Hotel, and had yelled “Money, money” at the officers present at the jail implying that police had robbed the hotel themselves and were attempting to frame her client.

A police media official told Minivan News the matter had been “brought to the attention of the Attorney General’s Office”.

“Yesterday, lawyer Haneefa Khalid while inside Male’ jail disrespectfully addressed the police officers and therefore we have brought this to the attention of the Attorney General’s office,” said the official.

Minivan News was unable to contact Haneefa Khalid at time of press.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

DRP denies holding coalition talks with President Waheed’s election rivals

The government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) has rejected allegations it ever considered forming a coalition to back a candidate other than President Dr Mohamed Waheed.

Local media quoted senior figures in the Jumhoree Party (JP) of accusing DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali of unsuccessfully trying to become the running mate of its presidential candidate MP Gasim Ibrahim, before opting to side with the incumbent in May this year.

JP candidate Gasim, one of the country’s highest-profile business figures, has since formed his own coalition with the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP) and Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) after they both defected from President Waheed’s ‘Forward with the nation’ coalition in July.

“Last minute” decision

DRP Spokesperson Ibrahim Shareef today categorically denied that discussions had ever been held over backing any other candidate for this year’s election, claiming the decision to stand in a coalition with President Waheed has been made by the party’s council at the “last minute”.

“We were originally trying to run on our own [as a party] right up to the last minute,” he said. “However, it was decided to sacrifice [the party’s] ambitions for the sake of the nation.”

Shareef claimed that in comparison to the three other candidates preparing to contest this year’s election, President Waheed was not promising policies that could not be delivered under the current economy.

He accused Gasim, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) candidate Abdulla Yameen and opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate former President Mohamed Nasheed of being “very unrealistic” with their campaign promises.

“We are careful to make promises within the resources we have available and within the budget,” Shareef added.

Both the PPM and MDP have previously accused President Waheed of making development pledges outside the approved budget, while also alleging he had been using state resources to campaign for his own Gaumee Ihthihad Party (GIP).

According to Shareef, the ‘Forward with the nation’ also faced notable challenges in terms of limited party financing compared to other parties, accusing both the AP and DQP of defecting to Gasim’s coalition simply to secure an increased campaign budget.

“They went to the person who has money, while we are concerned with running an effective campaign,” he added.

Shareef said this year’s election was very much a “money game” that had affected the wider campaign atmosphere in the country, notably in how individual candidates were being portrayed in the media.

He expressed particular concern at the role the country’s media – often owned and controlled by political parties and business men – played in the electoral process.

Shareef argued that with media in the Maldives controlled by just a few powerful figures, it was difficult in the country’s fledgling democracy to effectively explain a candidate’s individual stand to the “ordinary public” and therefore allow them to make an informed decision and hold public figures to account.

On the campaign trail

A source in President Waheed’s campaign team told Minivan News that the defection of the AP and DQP from the ‘Forward with the nation’ coalition had required little change to the coalition’s campaign strategy, and that the party’s internal polling data suggested this had had a negligible impact on the coalition’s election chances.

The source said the departure of the AP in particular had actually increased the party’s support among the under 35 demographic.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)