Comment: Maldives caught in Russo – American tiff

Through a deft post facto damage-control, the Government of President Abdulla Yameen seems to have diffused and warded off – at least for the time being – what threatened to be a major diplomatic incident for Maldives, and involving the US and Russia, the two ‘Cold War’ era competitors who havce lately been flexing their political muscles in distant Europe.

The issue relates to the arrest of a Russian national on Maldivian soil, and his immediate handing over to waiting US marshals, who flew him away, seemingly without giving Male enough time for second thoughts – and naturally so. How things shape may now depend more on how events play out on the domestic front in Russia and/or on the international arena relating to the Russo-American stand-off/trade-off in the ‘Ukraine-Crimean crisis’ which refuses to die down, than on anything Maldivian.

Maldives was literally and possibly unknowingly caught in the Russo-American politico-diplomatic cross-fire after the local police reportedly arrested Roman Valerevich Seleznyov, the 30-year-old son of a Russian parliamentarian, whom the US has claimed was a ‘hacker and bank fraud’ wanted by American courts since 2011. Seleznyov was apprehended at the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) in Male and handed over to the US Secret Service – though a slightly different version has claimed greater credence.

Russia sought an immediate explanation from Maldives. Valery Seleznyov, the parliamentarian-father of Roman, even wanted Moscow to impose economic sanctions on Male, for allowing three waiting US marshals to fly away with his son. He also claimed that the US flew his son to the western Pacific territory of Guam, where not all protection under US civil laws were available/applicable, for his son to seek relief.

MP Valery charged the US with ‘kidnapping’ his son for a (possible) trade-off against the return of Edward Snowden, a sub-contractor of the US’ National Security Agency (NSA), who has taken refuge in Russia after leaking top-secret American phone-and-email tapping records the world over. Thankfully for the US – and possibly for Maldives, too – the Russian Government is not known to have shared the parliamentarian’s claims linking the US action now to a Snowden ‘trade-off’.

‘Abduction’ and ‘outrage’

Either owing to domestic pressure, or the opportunity to hit the US once more in the prevailing circumstances of ever-dipping bilateral equations, the Russian Foreign Ministry lost no time in coming down heavily on the ‘Cold War’ era adversary. “It is not the first time that the US resorts to de facto abduction of a Russian national, ignoring the bilateral 1999 treaty on mutual legal assistance” ministry said. With much of the rest of the world media reporting near-nothing on the episode – it’s true in India, too – the Maldivian media reported that Russia had compared the Seleznyov incident to two other extradition cases. One was of Viktor Bout, whom the US claimed was an arms-dealer. The other related to an alleged drug-smuggler Konstantin Yaroshenko. They too were “forcibly taken to the US from third countries and convicted on dubious charges”, the Russian Foreign Ministry claimed in its early reactions to the Seleznyov incident.

Moscow simultaneously claimed that Maldives had not kept them informed of the imminent arrest, and called upon Male to provide the necessary explanations. “The stance of Maldives’ authorities cannot be but outraging, since despite the existing international legislation norms they allowed another country’s special service to kidnap a Russian citizen and take him out of the country,” the ministry said further. Independent of ‘sovereignty’ issues that may be weighted in Male’s favour, in practical terms, these were strong Russian words against a small country like Maldives.

Seleznyov’s father advised fellow-Russians not to travel to Maldives, whose economy is heavily dependent on international tourism. Whether he had this alone in mind when he demanded ‘economic sanctions’ against Maldives, or something more specific pertaining to possible abrogation/cut in government-to-government arrangements is unclear.

As the Maldivian media recalled, in September 2013, Russia had issued a travel advisory, asking its citizens to avoid countries where US law- enforcement can arrest and extradite its citizens. Would Maldives’ name be found on the Russian list, if any, too is unclear. It is another matter that according to available statistic, the Russian market for inward tourism in Maldives “deteriorated further posting a negative growth of 7.5 percent for the period from January to May 2014. Market share of Russia stood at 6.4 percent at the end of the period”.

‘Cyber crook’, says US

According to the US, Seleznyov was arrested by the US Secret Service and was transported to Guam Island where he was presented to a court. He is under detention until a second hearing on July 22, the US has clarified since. In a related development, US Attorney for the Western District of Washington, Jenny A. Durkan, in a statement thanked the US Secret Service for apprehending Seleznyov. “Cyber crooks should take heed: you cannot hide behind distant keyboards. We will bring you to face justice,” said Durkin, who also heads the US Justice Department’s Cyber-crime and Intellectual Property Enforcement Sub-committee of the Attorney-General’s Advisory Committee.

According to the American statement, Seleznyov was indicted as far back as March 2011 in the Western District of Washington for hacking into point-of-sale systems at retailers throughout the country between October 2009 and February 2011. He is said to have been involved in the criminal underground for carding (verifying validity of stolen credit card data), where he is known as “Track-2??.

In this, Seleznyev is accused of engaging in a bank fraud scheme, hacking into retail POS systems and installing malicious software on them to steal credit card numbers. He is also accused of creating and operated infrastructure – among the servers that hosting carding forum websites selling stolen credit card numbers.

“The arrest of Roman Seleznyov is yet another example of how the Secret Service continues to successfully combat data-theft and financial crimes,” according to Robert Kierstead, Special Agent in Charge of the US Secret Service Seattle Field Office. “The Secret Service utilised state-of-the-art investigative techniques to dismantle this criminal network. Our success in this case and other similar investigations is a result of the extraordinary work of our investigators, and our close work with our network of law-enforcement partners,” the Maldivian media quoted US official statements as saying.

The US statements clarified that Maldives acted under its own law in the matter. Yet, the local media also referred to the fact that the current passenger-identification system installed at the Male airport was a gift from the US. If they had questions if the same had been linked to American computer-aided person/passport identification systems installed elsewhere in the country other than that of the Interpol’s, to facilitate tracking and detaining persons ‘wanted’ by the US, the media has been silent over flagging such issues – at least thus far.

Procedural lapses, if?

In between, the Opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) lost no time in bringing out the nation’s purported embarrassment through media statements, and laying the blame at the doorsteps of the Yameen Government. The MDP statement claimed that Seleznyov was not accorded ‘consular services’ from the Russian Embassy in Colombo before his detention, nor was a court order obtained under the law in Maldives for his arrest.

It is another matter that the MDP, which is now being seen as more sympathetic to the ‘Russian cause’, as if by a matter of principle, was more inclined towards supporting the American line in international fora when party leader Mohammed Nasheed was the nation’s first democratically-elected President, but short-lived in the post (2008-12). At the time, Maldives was seen as backing the US line UN fora, boldly inviting Israeli farm scientists and medical doctors to work in the country despite the nation’s traditional reservations flowing from the ‘Palestine issue’. The one issue that keeps coming to mind from that period was the reported Maldivian decision to accept a Guantanamo Bay detainee at American instance – though domestic protests put paid to the proposal before long.

No detention order from court?

According to social media claims, the criminal court in Maldives had declined to issue the detention order, indicating that the airport detention was the last-ditch but successful effort at ensuring that Seleznyov did not jump the American coup. These reports also indicated that Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, whom the MDP Government had detained in January 2012, but restored later, was at the centre of the current controversy attending on the possible denial of detention order against Seleznyov.

The reports also indicated that the Russian Embassy in Colombo might have been brought into the picture post facto, and not before Seleznyov’s detention and transportation to Guam. Whether the official Maldivian intimation to Russia came before Seleznyov’s father’s public statement or not remains unclear, however. However, reports indicated that it might have been otherwise, thus upsetting Russia, and the Russian Embassy in Colombo.

Social media circles have since pointed out how a section of the Maldivian media had removed previous references to possible legal advice purportedly provided to the Government in the matter, sometime during the course of the detention discourse within. It is unclear if the removal of an earlier media reference to the advice that the Government could stamp Seleznyov’s passport as ‘Departed’ and then have him arrested inside the airport was removed at anybody’s instance and insistence. It is however not uncommon for the media to remove such references in subsequent despatches, if later inquiry or clarification had put things in perspective.

There has been relative silence from the Russian side after the US statements that Seleznyov was a ‘cyber crook’ and ‘bank-fraud’. If nothing much comes off on that front, it may remain that the Maldivian lapses, if any, might have been procedural at best. Sooner than the Russian reactions came out, President Yameen, and the Maldivian Home Ministry, in quick succession, lost no time with their clarification. Accordingly, Maldives had acted on an Interpol ‘Red Alert’, as always.

“As Interpol is the biggest international police institution and the Maldives has been a member of the Interpol since 1984, the government of Maldives considers Interpol ‘Red Notices’ to be of high priority and takes serious action (regarding such notices),” the Maldivian Home Ministry said in a statement. The ministry also said the Maldives respects international treaties it is party to and strives to sustain relations with friendly nations.

However, questions have been raised, particularly pertaining to the ‘due process’ – followed or not by the Maldivian authorities. Maldives does not have an extradition treaty with the US, and ‘social media’ critics in the Indian Ocean archipelago have asked how their Government could hand over the detained person to the waiting American marshals, without handing him over through the Interpol, under the circumstances. Questions have also been raised about the kind of coordination required to apprehend the Russian and hand him over to the US personnel, who might have already been there on Maldivian soil.

The social media has gone viral with purported details that no Government has denied, or clarified, since. According to eye-witness accounts quoted in these reports, US marshals were the ones who actually effected the arrest at the airport after shouting their presence – as seen often in Hollywood films — even as Maldivian Tourist Police personnel looked on. If however there was any visual evidence to the same – as it often happens by the use of a mobile-phone camera or the like — it has not made its appearance on the social media networks.

The first and foremost question remains — why the Maldivian authorities did not go public about the 5 July arrest until after the Russians had made an issue of the same. Though initial confusion remained if Seleznyov was apprehended when he was landing or departing at Male, the social media has since come up with reports that have not since been denied.

Accordingly, a woman (variously described as his wife or girl friend) and child had accompanied Seleznyov, and they had been staying in Maldives for five days before departure. Having been allowed to proceed to Russia with Seleznyov’s detention, they had taken up the matter with his family and the Government. Father Seleznyov, reportedly heading a regional political party in Vladivostok that is partnering with President Vladimir Putin’s Government, his anguished voice could not have but found resonance in official reactions, initially. Or, so goes an argument.

‘An isolated incident’

With strong and unexpected reaction from Russia possibly taking the Maldivian Government by surprise, President Yameen lost no time in sending out a delegation of senior officials to Colombo, the seat of the Russian Embassy and Ambassador, co-accredited to Sri Lanka and Maldives, to explain the situation. This has since been followed in double-quick time by Maldives’ A-team, comprising Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon and Attorney-General, Mohammed Anil, meeting with Russian officials, again in Colombo, to take forward the discussions.

Critics of the Yameen Government nearer home would want to believe that the first-round official-level talks with Russia did not go on Maldives’ expected lines, hence the need for despatching a senior minister and the AG, personally. However, after her round of talks, Foreign Minister Dunya said later that the “strong, mutually beneficial” relations between the two countries would not “derail” due to an “isolated incident” like Seleznyov’s arrest.

According to a Maldivian Foreign Ministry statement, the two ministers explained to the Russian officials that the Maldives had followed “past practices” in dealing with Interpol ‘Red Notices’. The two sides also discussed on entering into agreements in order to avoid such incidents in the future, the ministry added. With President Yameen now on expanding the nation’s external relations with a visit to Japan earlier this year, and one to China next month, the two countries may also consider a presidential visit to Russia on a subsequent occasion. Or, would they, just at the moment when things would still be hot in Moscow?

India’s ‘sphere of influence’

Weeks ahead will determine how the ‘Seleznyov episode’ plays out in the Russo-Maldivian relations. Considering in particular that the US, withdrawing from Afghanistan yet wanting its political and naval presence relatively intact in the Indian Ocean region has been wooing nations like Maldives and threatening those like Sri Lanka in the neighbourhood, the current Russian diplomatic stand-off with Male, may have consequences for India too in its ‘traditional sphere of geo-strategic and politico-economic influence’.

With the new Government in general and Prime Minister Narendra Modi lending greater focus to the immediate South Asian neighbourhood, it remains to be seen how India views the recent developments in Maldives. It is another matter that in the overall context, India has no role to play per se, either before, during or after the event, as it pertains entirely to Maldives’ ‘sovereign’ decision-making capacity and inherent capabilities as a nation-State that cherishes its independence even more. Yet, India may not be able to look the other way if the current Russo-Maldives impasse were to blow out of proportion. Or, if the US marshals’ presence and actions in Maldives, without due information to a neighbour like India – or, Sri Lanka – came to be viewed as something more, and well into the future.

The question would then arise when and how far did Maldives take India into confidence on the ‘Seleznyov affair’, if at all. The sub-text would relate to the need – or, absence of it — for Maldives doing so, particularly in the context of the new and ‘independent’ Foreign Policy that President Yameen unveiled after assuming office – but which would have been on the works earlier, too. In context, the question would arise if the Maldivian Government would have benefited from any Indian advice or intervention in the matter, had it been sought.

For now, however, as and when the entire issue blows over, there could be an internal inquiry into the entire affair within the Maldivian Government on the facts and circumstances leading to Seleznyov’s detention, and the diplomatic precautions that the nation would have to take in similar circumstances in the future. All of it with the full realisation that no two episodes of the kind are one and the same – in terms of facts and circumstances, politics and diplomacy.

N Sathiya Moorthy is a  Senior Fellow at the Chennai Chapter of the Observer Research Foundation in India.

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)

MPs debate legislation on public referendums

Preliminary debate began at today’s sitting of parliament on legislation submitted by Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Abdulla Khaleel on legislation governing public referendums.

Presenting the bill (Dhivehi) on behalf of the government, the MP for Faafu Nilandhoo said the proposed law would specify circumstances whereby public referendums could be held as well as procedures to be followed by the Elections Commission (EC) in conducting polls.

Khaleel explained that the legislation stipulates that a public referendum must be held before approving an amendment either to chapter two of the constitution, which outlines fundamental rights and freedoms, or term limits of parliamentarians and the president and vice president.

The constitution authorises both the president and parliament to “hold public referendums on issues of national importance.” Parliament is also authorised to call for public referendums to override a presidential veto on a bill.

The bill defines matters of national importance as issues that parliament believes requires public approval before enactment as law, Khaleel noted.

The bill stipulates that parliament shall pass a resolution calling for a public referendum and provides details on how to conduct the poll, he continued, adding that the public must be informed of the pros and cons of the issue prior to voting.

The first public referendum following the adoption of the new constitution in August 2008 took place in October 2010, which saw small islands overwhelmingly reject a government proposal for administrative consolidation.

The bill on public referendums along with the special economic zones (SEZs) bill was accepted for consideration today and sent to committee for further review.

The SEZ bill was accepted with 46 votes in favour and 16 against.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Court rules in favour of Medianet in World Cup rebroadcasting dispute

The Civil Court has ruled yesterday that the Maldives Broadcasting Commission’s (MBC) order for cable TV service provider Medianet to cease airing FIFA World Cup matches on any channels except state broadcaster Television Maldives (TVM) and Villa TV (VTV) was unlawful.

Medianet had sued the commission after MBC ordered the company to halt rebroadcasting matches on channels Sony Six, Sony Six HD and Sony Pix pending an inquiry, insisting that only TVM and VTV were authorised to broadcast matches.

In its verdict, the Civil Court reportedly ruled that the commission had not followed due process and was not authorised to issue such an order under broadcasting laws and regulations.

The court’s decision came ahead of the World Cup final match last night. MBC members have since told local media that the commission was seeking legal advice before deciding whether to appeal the verdict at the High Court.

Following Medianet’s refusal to comply with the commission’s first order, MBC had issued a second order instructing the company to comply “without any conditions”. Both orders were annulled by the Civil Court ruling yesterday.

Medianet had also refused to comply with instructions from the commission to broadcast matches shown on TVM and VTV in high definition.

Medianet is currently the only cable television service provider in the Maldives.

Lobbying group

At a press conference following the verdict yesterday, Medianet Director Ahmed Nashid – opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP for Komandoo – contended that the commission could no longer be considered an independent institution.

A recently formed lobbying group comprised of private broadcasters was exerting undue influence over the MBC, he alleged, adding that the group had “hijacked” the commission.

The commission ordered Medianet to cease airing World Cup matches on channels except TVM and VTV a day after a meeting between the lobby group and MBC members, he noted.

Nashid further accused the MBC of participating in the lobby group’s alleged efforts to defame Medianet.

Claiming financial losses caused by the dispute, Nashid also said the company was considering suing MBC members for damages.

The lobby group meanwhile released a press statement yesterday accusing the MBC’s legal counsel of not adequately defending the commission’s stance.

The commission’s lawyer had conceded in court that the matter was under investigation and that due process was not followed, the lobby group said.

Moreover, the lawyer had not attempted to prove that Medianet deliberately misled the commission, the statement added.

Medianet had not sought authorisation in accordance with FIFA rules for rebroadcasting matches, the lobby group insisted.

MBC had maintained that Medianet’s agreement with Indian broadcaster Sony MSM was not made in accordance with Maldivian broadcasting law and that the company’s decision to charge an MVR100 fee for viewing matches on channels 100 and 100 plus was also illegal.

The FIFA World Cup was a “listed event” and Medianet had not sought authorisation to broadcast matches, MBC had said.

Moreover, the commission noted that only TVM and VTV had obtained rights to broadcast the event.

However, Nashid explained yesterday that the company had signed an agreement with Sony Six to broadcast the channel’s content for two years.

He stressed that the agreement was not limited to airing World Cup matches.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MJA urges Majlis to expedite Information Commissioner approval

The Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) has called on the Majlis to expedite the vetting and approval of the Information Commissioner.

The position was created by the landmark Right to Information Act (RTI) which came into force on July 12.

The MJA also called on state institutions to appoint information officers to all offices as soon as possible, and thanked the Maldives Police Services for being the first to appoint an information officer.

The government, state institutions and government officials must provide access to information without restrictions, the MJA said and warned the government that it would monitor the state’s actions.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Office of the Information Commissioner established

President Abdulla Yameen has established the Office of the Information Commissioner as per the landmark Right to Information Act (RTI).

The Act, ratified in January, came into force on Saturday, July 12.

Yameen has nominated former Progressive Party of the Maldives MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abu Bakr for the position in June.

According to the RTI Act, the People’s Majlis must approve an Information Commissioner within 30 days of the act’s enforcement.

The commissioner’s tenure is five years and has the power enforce a fine on information officers who deliberately refuse access to information. Such a fine may not exceed MVR5000 (US$324).

The commissioner may also fine any individual who destroys requested information, obstructs a public authority or the Information Officer’s from providing access to information. Such a fine may not exceed MVR25,000 (US$ 1621).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Auditor General questions valuation of assets of state-owned enterprises

The Auditor General’s Office has questioned the valuation of assets of the Thilafushi Corporation Ltd (TCL) and State Electricity Company (STELCO) in audit reports of the state-owned enterprises for 2013.

The TCL audit report released last week explained that the Finance Ministry transferred land and buildings on Thilafushi Industrial Island to the corporation at a value of MVR12 billion (US$778 million).

“The consideration for such transfer had been made by the issue of 150,000,000 equity shares of MVR10 each issued at a premium of MVR74.13 to Ministry of Finance and Treasury,” the report stated.

Following valuation of the island and property therein by a professionally qualified party “on the basis of capitalised lease rentals to perpetuity,” the leased land was valued at MVR5,725 (US$371) per square foot.

Additionally, “land pending reclamation and lease at the time” was valued at MVR1,200 per square foot, “the reasonableness of which cannot be readily established.”

The report noted that the transaction took place between TCL and the Finance Ministry, “its sole shareholder.”

Moreover, in the “absence of a valuation adopting alternative approaches in the context that this is the first purchase of land transaction at Thilafushi,” the Auditor General’s Office was “unable to conclude whether the rates per square foot derived above are reasonable.”

The report stated that auditors were “unable to satisfy ourselves whether the land and buildings thereon and share premium shown in the balance at MVR12,618, 789,042 and MVR11,118,789,042 [US$713 million] respectively are fairly stated.”

Work in progress

The report also noted that MVR33 million (US$2 million) was paid to Heavy Load Maldives for land reclamation, which was stated in the balance sheet as capital work in progress.

However, in 2011, the company incurred a further MVR23 million (US$1.4 million) for the project, increasing the total capital work-in-progress amount to MVR61 million (US$3.9 million).

Auditors found that the MVR23 million had been “capitalised by transferring the amount from capital work-in-progress to land towards the industrial zone reclamation,” while the remaining amount had not been capitalised.

“In the absence of evidences supporting the work done for the remaining amount of MVR38,889,767, we are unable to conclude whether the company has received value for the amount paid and therefore whether the capital work-in-progress has been fairly stated,” the report concluded.

In January 2013, local media reported that TCL incurred MVR650 million (US$42 million) worth of losses as a result of Heavy Load not reclaiming the agreed 152 hectares of land within the granted six month period.

As a result of the issues flagged in the report, the audit office was “unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion,” and subsequently did not express an opinion on TCL’s financial statement.

STELCO and MPL

In the audit report of STELCO for 2013, the audit office noted that while the company’s financial statements gave “a true and fair view” of its financial position, performance and cash flow as of December 31, 2013, Auditor General Niyaz Ibrahim qualified his opinion due to questions over the valuation of assets.

The report explained that the government-owned company’s property, plant and equipment were revalued by an external valuer during 2011.

“Accordingly, the assets having net book value of MVR434,455,893 [US$28 million] as at 31 December 2011 were revalued for MVR847,932,997 [US$54 million] and a revaluation surplus of MVR413,477,104 was recognised in the books of account,” the report revealed.

However, it added, assets worth MVR26 million (US$1.6 million) were excluded from the revaluation report and “the company accounted these assets at their respective net book values based on historical cost,” which was in violation of international accounting standards.

Consequently, “in the absence of valuation of these assets,” auditors were unable to conclude that MVR15 million (US$972,762) included in the property, plant and equipment of MVR1.5 billion (US97 million) as well as a revaluation reserve of MVR314 million (US$20 million) in the balance sheet was “fairly stated.”

Meanwhile, the audit report of the Maldives Ports Ltd (MPL) for 2013 noted that the company was owed MVR13 million (US$8 million) from the dissolved Maldives National Shipping Ltd, which was a receivable that has been “outstanding for more than four years and therefore, doubtful of recovery.”

As a result, the report noted, auditors were unable to conclude “whether the amount shown under related party receivables in the statement of financial position is recoverable and [whether] the results for the year and receivables were are fairly stated.”

Auditors also found that MVR24 million (US$1.5 million) was “incurred on the construction of a tug boat for harbour operations.”

However, the construction had been discontinued since 2010 “due to a dispute with the constructor,” auditors found.

“Further, we were not allowed to access the premises of the tug boat. Hence, we are unable to satisfy ourselves regarding the physical existence and recoverability of the asset,” the report stated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: The scramble for the Maldives

This article first appeared on Dhivehi Sitee. Republished with permission.

The political changes that marked Maldives’ transition to democracy have not translated into equal distribution of wealth or access to basic public services such as clean water, health care, electricity, waste-management and sewage systems, throughout the country.

The rapid political changes and crises experienced in the past decade has done little to confound the popularized image of the Maldives as a hedonistic paradise for tourists, despite being considered ‘one of the most miserable countries in the world’ for its own citizens.

Continuing this story of two Maldives: the real and the represented, the Yameen government has submitted the Special Economic Zones (SEZs) Bill to the People’s Majlis. In doing so, the government is attempting to sell the illusory tale that liberalisation of trade by autocrats – granting incentives to multinational corporations (MNCs) – trickles wealth down to ordinary citizens.

President Abdullah Yameen Abdul Gayoom, brother of former strongman Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, announced plans to develop SEZs in April 2014 at an investor forum held by the Maldivian government in Marina Bay Sands, Singapore.

Notable investors such as US company Blackstone (which acquired a controlling interest in Maldivian Air Taxi “MAT” and Trans Maldivian Airways “TMA” in February 2013), Singapore-based HPL Hotels and Resorts, China Machinery Engineering Corporation (CMEC), the Carlson Group of Companies, Pan Pacific Hotels and Resorts, United Bunkering and Trading Group, and Singapore Enterprise were present at the forum.

The SEZs bill entails demarcation of specific geographic areas into zones where special customs regime and laws apply for investors and developers. Developers’ Business Profit Taxes (BPT) can be exempted, and Goods and Services Taxes (GST) are exempted initially for ten years, and can be withheld or exempted for additional years if the SEZs board allows.

Shareholders are exempt from paying BPT on their dividends, and tax relief can be afforded to developers through special procedures by the SEZs board. The SEZs board can also lease land in the Maldives to foreign companies for up to ninety-nine years and Maldivian companies are exempt from tax when acquiring ownership of land.

The SEZs defined under the bill include the following: Industrial Estate, Export Processing Zone, Free-Trade Zone, Enterprise Zone, Free Port, Single Factory Export Processing Zone, Offshore Banking Unit, Offshore Financing Service Centre, and a High Technology Park (Articles 9-18).Government officials have echoed Singapore, Hong Kong, Oman, Qatar and Dubai as examples of SEZs stimulating foreign direct investment.

China and India have been touted by the World Bank as proof of economic growth through introduction of liberal economic policies and legislations such as SEZs. Gradually, China and India began to structurally transform its economies in the 1980s and 1990s respectively, with its GDP growing at an annual average rate of 10% and 6% over the past two decades. In the case of China and India, although SEZs are associated with trade liberalization, studies have shown that it does not always result in human development, economic growth or liberalization of domestic markets (Leong 2013).

Speaking to the media in June 2014, the Minister of Economic Development Mohamed Saeed likened existing tourist resorts to SEZs, possibly to suggest how potentially profitable these policies could be.

Contrastingly, the recently published second Maldives’ Human Development Index report by the United Nations Development Project affirms that despite being lucrative and effective at enabling economic growth, the luxury tourism industry has not alleviated socio-economic inequalities, but rather contributed to it.

Speaking to local news website Minivan News, Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb defended the bill claiming that it is in line with decentralization, and that it will shift the focus away from the densely populated capital Malé.

However, a Facebook Community named The Maldivian Economist – a forum where economic and financial policies are discussed – has published a detailed refutation of the notions put forth by the government regarding the SEZs bill. The Maldivian Economist notes that the bill takes power away from the people – local government and elected officials, concentrating wealth under a “centralized autocratic government.” Although the bill purportedly aims to limit Maldives’ reliance on tourism income, it provides additional import duty, tax and foreign labor concessions specifically for hotel, tourism-related, and real estate businesses.

Primarily, the Bill aims to run nine types of SEZs. But the 17-member SEZs board called ‘the Board of Investments’ – made up of unelected government officials, including two presidential appointees – decides how many zones, and of which types would be set up across the Maldives (Article 22).

The bill affords the SEZs board the discretion to extend incentives, such as tax relief or increase the allocation of expatriates and migrant workers upon request. If the bill is enacted, it will prevail over existing laws (according to Article 80(b), 14 existing legislations to be exact) and regulations made prior to it.

Only special SEZ ‘facilitating’ regulations made by relevant governmental authorities, decisions and regulations made by the SEZs board, obligations cited under the developer’s permit, and terms and conditions stipulated under the investment agreement or concession agreement would be applicable within any SEZ (Article 33(b), Article 70).

Although the bill states that discussions shall be made between councilors, and that the Chairperson of the SEZs board and the Minister of Economic Development shall be answerable to the parliament, it does not afford government oversight any decision-making powers.

All the decision-making powers with regard to which investors attain development projects and which areas are designated SEZs is vested with the SEZs board and the President. The SEZs board also decides which existing tourism related businesses could be relocated into an SEZ. (Article 74(c)).

Under an authoritarian government, the SEZs board would end up assuming overwhelming wealth through developers, and in the absence of competition laws invisibilize local fishermen and entrepreneurs who call these SEZs home.

Once the President demarks an area as an SEZ, even if it currently belongs under the authority of a local council, its authority is transferred to the Ministry of Economic Development, as per Article 33(a) of the Bill. The Maldivian Economist states that this allows “all the revenue to bypass local councils and go into the state budget.” Article 37(b) of the bill states that if a development project aims to relocate island communities to the area being developed, the SEZs board has the discretion to grant the developer additional incentives.

The concession agreement with GMR Malaysia Airport Holdings consortium and the Nasheed administration signed in June 2010 to develop and run Malé international airport, was the largest foreign direct investment in the Maldives. The coup regime of Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, which included members of the current government expelled India’s GMR citing ‘void ab initio’, but used religious rhetoric and an ultranationalist anti-India campaign to drive home the now debunked legal argument.

Due to the xenophobic GMR fiasco, it seems as if an entirely different government has submitted the SEZs bill, ready to embrace the globalized world economy.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party has dubbed the bill, “the Artur Brothers bill”, invoking top government officials’ links to famous Armenian gangsters, and possibility of increased money laundering due to offshore financing.

Resonating sentiments of SEZs critics, Salma Fikry, one of Maldives’ foremost experts on decentralisation and development, told Minivan News last week that, “it [SEZs bill] is not sustainable nor empowering for the Maldivian population.”

Canadian author Naomi Klein’s book “the Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism” is a literary indictment of the radically liberal free-market policies introduced by economists trained at the Chicago School of Economics.

In her view, policies espoused by Milton Friedman and his protégés world-over have historically exploited crises: “wars, terror attacks, coups d’état and natural disasters” in the developing world.

Post-tsunami opportunism during Gayoom’s dictatorship is also mentioned in Klein’s well-researched hypothesis. Following the 2004 Tsunami, with funding from the World Bank and other international bodies, the Maldivian government announced the Safe Island Program in order to relocate island communities.

Klein argues that the regime was merely “freeing up more land for tourism.” This argument is convincing as she notes, “in December 2005, one year after the tsunami, the Gayoom government announced that thirty-five new islands were available to be leased to resorts for up to fifty years.”

To a certain degree, the SEZs bill is similar to the Safe Island Program; it glorifies “the blank”, a country with special privileges and policies for MNCs and foreigners, void of its inhabitants. As the Maldivian Economist has noted, in the Maldivian context of escalating socio-economic disparities, and corruption within the judiciary, government and parliament, this bill will not enable the human development it envisions. Instead, it solely empowers the government and corporations associated with it.

These policies will do more harm than good to a small economy such as the Maldives, which does not have any existing legal barriers to foreign direct investment.

Likes(4)Dislikes(0)

Maldives acted under its own laws in Seleznyov expulsion, says US Embassy

The Maldives acted under its own laws in the expulsion of Russian national Roman Valerevich Seleznyov, the US Embassy in Colombo has said.

Seleznyov, 30 years, was reportedly about to board a flight to Moscow after holidaying in the Maldives when he was arrested from the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

He was then transported to Guam Island with the help of the US Secret Service. Seleznyov is the son of Russian parliamentarian Valery Seleznyov.

Russia has earlier called Seleznyov’s arrest a “kidnapping” by the US Secret Service and described the actions of Maldivian authorities in the incident as “outraging.”

A spokesperson with the US Embassy in Colombo said Seleznyov was detained by the Maldivian authorities “following the issuance of an Interpol Red Notice” in relation to indictments relating to bank and computer fraud that affected thousands of American citizens.

“This was a law enforcement action, and was based solely on law enforcement considerations. The indictment in this case was returned on March 2011, and thus long predates any current issues involving Russia and the United States. It has nothing to do with any of those issues. Nor was this a ‘kidnapping’ or in any way illegal,” the US Embassy said.

Seleznyov “was arrested following his expulsion from another country, acting under its own laws. He was advised of his rights and given consular notification. These actions also were in no way inconsistent with any treaty arrangements with Russia.”

The Maldives Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have also claimed Seleznyov’s “expulsion” was in response to a Interpol red notice and said the government followed due process.

President Abdulla Yameen has also dismissed claims of a US Secret Service operation on Maldivian soil as baseless.

During a press conference at Muleeage on Wednesday night, he said the arrest was not prompted by a request from the US.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has accused the government of flouting due process in Seleznyov’s arrest.

In a statement on Wednesday, the party said that personnel of Maldivian security services must make arrests within Maldivian territory and a warrant from a Maldivian Court must be obtained for such seize-and-arrest operations.

Further, the suspect should also be produced at the relevant court in Maldives prior to repatriation, the party said.

The MDP has also expressed concern the incident may have adverse effects on trade and tourism.

Russia is currently the fifth in terms of the number of tourist arrivals to Maldives, with more than thirty three thousand tourist arrivals within the first five months of 2014.

Yameen said he hoped the Seleznyov incident would not affect bilateral relations with Russia and said the government is already working on relieving tensions between the two countries.

A high level delegation from the Maldives, led by Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Fathimath Inaya, met with officials from the Russian Embassy to Sri Lanka and Maldives in Colombo today to explain details of the incident.

According to the Foreign Ministry, Inaya told Russian officials that the Maldives is certain this incident would not severe bilateral relations with Russia.

The Russian officials have said the country is prepared to work with Maldives in preventing any future incidents, the ministry said.

Other members in the delegation include s the High Commissioner of the Maldives to Sri Lanka Zahiya Zareer, Deputy Attorney General Ahmed Usham and the Chief Superintendent of the Maldives Police Service (MPS) Mohamed Riyaz.

In its statement today, the US also denied Russia’s allegation that the arrest was a violation of a bilateral treaty on mutual legal assistance between the two countries.

The move was “in no way inconsistent with any treaty arrangements with Russia,” the embassy said.

Further, Seleznyov was advised of his rights and given consular notification, the US added.

The US has thanked the Maldives government for their commitment to other Interpol member states, and thanked them for the support “in pursuing justice for the victims of these crimes.”

President Yameen has pledged to introduce legislation on extradition within the coming week.

The Maldives has signed a number of extradition treaties with other nations, but they are not being enforced due to the lack of necessary legislations, Yameen said.

The Maldives does not have an extradition treaty with the United States at present.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Row escalates over FIFA World Cup broadcasting rights

Cable TV service provider Medianet is suing the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) after the commission ordered the company to halt airing FIFA World Cup matches on any channels except state broadcaster Television Maldives and private broadcaster Villa TV (VTV).

Medianet has been airing matches on channels Sony Six, Sony Six HD and Sony Pix under rebroadcasting agreements. But the MBC said only TVM and VTV are authorized to broadcast World Cup matches.

In a letter to the MBC, Medianet’s legal representatives claimed the MBC’s order is unlawful and said a proper investigation must be conducted.

MBC had said Medianet’s agreement with Sony MSM had not been made in accordance with the Maldives rebroadcasting regulations.

MBC also stated that Medianet had charged an extra fee from customers in early June for viewing the matches on channels 100 and 100 plus against the rebroadcasting regulations.

Medianet has accused MBC of prejudice against the company and said it will sue the company and every individual member for damages caused by the commission’s order.

The company filed a case at the Civil Court on Wednesday seeking annulment of the Medianet’s order. According to local media, the judge presiding over the case estimated hearings will be completed by Sunday.

Medianet further stated that the MBC order released wrongful allegations to the public and said the commission’s sudden order issued to halt broadcasting of matches on channels other than TVM and VTV could be interpreted as an attempt to benefit certain parties.

MBC has also responded to the letter sent by Medianet’s legal representative, dismissing the claims that their orders are unlawful. They, in turn, have ordered Medianet to follow their orders without setting further conditions

MBC also stated that Medianet had charged an extra fee from customers for viewing the matches on channels 100 and 100 plus against the rebroadcasting regulations.

It also stated that the commission has received complaints that Medianet had refused to cooperate with repeated requests from TVM and VTV to broadcast their matches in high definition. It advised the company to provide such services to all channels without discrimination.

MBC has further announced on Wednesday that it is opening an opportunity for other interested parties to apply for cable TV provision licenses. Currently the only company providing the service is Medianet.

The commission claimed that it is taking this step to increase competition in the field, which will in turn lead to the provision of better services at more competitive prices to the public.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)