Nasheed sole focus of government’s charges following CNI findings: Home Minister

Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has told local media that former President Mohamed Nasheed was the only individual the government would charge following the findings of the Commission of National Inquiry’s (CNI)’s report.

Addressing the February 8 police crackdown on demonstrators, Jameel claimed that the government had not yet been able to organise or appoint a full cabinet on the day.  He added that the police themselves were responsible for their acts at that time and any potential charges they may face over the report’s conclusions.

Dr Jameel said that the Police Integrity Commission (PIC), according to its mandate, will look into issues concerning police conduct.

The fourth key finding of the CNI report called for an investigation of acts of police brutality of February 6, 7 and 8, although this was not revealed by President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan during the report’s release on Thursday.

Spokesman for the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Hamid Abdul Ghafoor today responded to Jameel’s comments, saying: “The people who committed these crimes are responsible for implementing the CNI. The CNI has given room for politicians to free themselves.”

Ghafoor said that the report “articulated urgency” with regards to generating confidence in the nation’s key institutions.

He also reiterated the MDP’s call for the immediate implementation of legal proceedings against those implicated in wrong doing.

During a press conference yesterday, Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim stated that he wanted to further highlight Nasheed’s “lies”.  He added that contrary to Nasheed’s claims the day before, the CNI report made no mention of any illegal actions or involvement in an alleged “coup d’etat” by the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF).

Former President Nasheed recently suggested that a core of 300 police and military officers were “undermining the public interest of the entire country”.

Ghaoor said today that as long as these people remained in their positions, “the country will be run by a military dictatorship”, before appealing to CMAG to review the findings of the report.

“I do not believe they will leave the country at the mercy of armed forces,” said Ghafoor following the Commonwealth’s encouragement of all sides to respect the report’s findings.

Jameel yesterday indicated his belief that the CNI report relieved the current government of any further obligations to negotiate with Nasheed, regardless of any external pressure.

“No international power can coerce this government into discussions with Nasheed again. This chapter closes here,” Dr Jameel said.

Both Jameel and Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor went on to advise the country’s youth against backing Nasheed, calling him a “habitual liar”.

“Do you realise what sort of a man you are following? He is a habitual liar, do you understand? And what exactly do you achieve by staying behind him? You just have to keep facing police and military action, be answerable to PG and courts, and end up in jail, leaving your young wives and children behind. Is this the future you want?” Dr Jameel said.

Statements from the United States, India, the United Nations and the Commonwealth all urged continuing dialogue amongst political actors.

Nazim said that, just as he had stated prior to the release of the report, the government would not be taking any action against any MNDF officers with regard to the CNI report.

Nazim did confirm that he would be taking legal action against all persons who referred to any MNDF soldier or to himself as ‘baaghee’ (a Dhivehi word meaning: a traitor who had brought about or participated in a coup).

The executive summary of the CNI report stated that urgent reforms were needed to the “basic institutions of democratic governance” and that justice “needs to be seen to be done in order to reassure the public and inspire their confidence.”

Nazim instead focused on the report’s ruling that there had been no coup in the Maldives, and hence no one had a right to label as traitors either the soldiers or any member of the executive, including himself, who, despite having been relieved of his duties officially, had acted as a commander of the MNDF Forces on February 7 in a personal capacity.

“Because I was there in a personal capacity, President Nasheed has often named me as a man who has administered a coup. But I would like to point out that my name does not come up in the CNI report at all,” Nazim claimed.

Nazim is identified in the CNI report as one of three “critical participants” on February 7  as one of three people who – along with current Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz –  “had been watching what was going on at Republican Square and felt it was their moral obligation and  public duty to intervene.”

“These three men, when they arrived at Republican Square, appeared to  enjoy positive rapport with the opposition groups outside the MNDF HQ and quickly  assumed leadership roles, particularly with the police. There is no suggestion that they were appointed or given specific authority,” the report states.

Regarding a statement by the international advisers in the CNI defending the commission’s professionalism and integrity, Attorney General Shukoor said that the international community may have taken Nasheed’s nominee Ahmed Saeed (Gahaa)’s claims more seriously had he submitted a dissenting opinion instead of handing in his resignation.

The attorney general alleged that Saeed was unable to do this as he did not have enough evidence to back his claims.  She said that if anyone wished to contest the findings of CNI, they were advised to file the case in court.

Ghafoor today lamented what he saw as the failings of the CNI: “It does not seem as if [the MDP’s] troubles are over. Doesn’t look as if trouble for the country as a whole is over.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court re-accepts ex-President Nasheed’s prosecution case

Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has decided to re-accept the prosecution case of former President Mohamed Nasheed, who has himself called for any trial against him to be expedited.

Nasheed along with former Defence Minister Tholath Ibrahim kaleyfaan and three Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) officers are being charged for their alleged role in detaining Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Abdulla Mohamed, who was a central figure in the downfall of former President Nasheed, was brought under military detention after Nasheed’s government accused him of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, having links with organized crime and “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist” to protect key figures of the former dictatorship from human rights and corruption cases.

The three MNDF officers facing charges are former Chief of Defense Forces Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier-Retired General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad.

General Didi, who was serving as the Male’ area commander at the time of Judge Abdulla’s arrest, penned his“premature” resignation” after 32 years of service in the military upon the PG’s decision to prosecute him.

Ex-Chief of Defence Force Jaleel had also retired following the controversial transfer of power on February 7, while Colonel Ziyad has maintained he would be present in his uniform to defend himself in the court.

Initially the magistrate court refused to proceed with the trial stating that it did not have the jurisdiction to deal with such cases under the Judicature Act.

Magistrate of the court, Moosa Naseem at the time told Minivan News that they had “studied” the case and had identified that the court “did not have the jurisdiction to deal with the case” referring to article 66 of Judicature Act.

According to article 66(b) of the act, Naseem contended that the Hulhumale’-based court could only accept the case after the Chief Justice issued a decree in agreement with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and the Judicial Council.

Article 66(b) of the Judicature Act states that: “in accordance with section (a) of this article, if additions or omission to the jurisdictions stipulated in schedule 5 of this Act has to be carried out, the modification has to be done in agreement with the Judicial Service Commission and the Judicial Council and by a decree issued by the Chief Justice.”

The Magistrate court’s decision to overturn its initial refusal follows the High Court’s invalidation of its decision, following appeals from the authorities.

In invalidating the magistrate court ruling, the High Court stated the case was based on the “unlawful detention” of a person, adding that magistrate courts in the country had the jurisdiction to proceed with such cases.

The ruling also said that as the incident occurred in Male’ area, the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court again had the jurisdiction to proceed with the case.

An official from the Prosecutor General’s Office told Minivan News today that the case was submitted yesterday afternoon along with that of the other MNDF officers.

The Judicial Administration department today announced that the hearings of the case will be conducted in the Justice Building, located in Male’.

An official from the department told local media that the decision was made after considering the fact that holding the trials in the Justice Building would ease the administrative process and that the facilities available would also be an advantage.

“The trials will proceed at the hall in the ground floor of the building,” he added.

The letter

Following High Court’s decision, ex-President Nasheed stated in a press conference held last Friday that he had sent a letter requesting the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court to expedite the case.

Initially, the magistrate court denied the receipt of Nasheed’s letter but later in a press statement acknowledged the reception of the letter and stated that steps were being taken to commence the trial as soon as possible.

Nasheed maintained that he is willing to be present at court to defend his decision to arrest the Judge, reiterating that if he should return to power again, he would still do the same, alleging that Judge Abdulla was central to the flawed criminal justice system of the country.

In April, Nasheed told the UK’s Guardian that he did not like arresting a judge, but he “just couldn’t let him [Abdulla Mohamed] sit on the bench.”

“There is a huge lack of confidence in the judiciary, and I had to do something and the constitution calls upon me to do that. It’s not a nice thing to do. And it’s not a thing that I would want to do. And it’s not a thing that I liked doing. But it had to be done,” he added.

Nasheed, who is also now the presidential candidate of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), stands charged with violating Article 81 of the Penal Code, which states that the detention of a government employee who has not been found guilty of a crime is illegal.

If found guilty, Nasheed and Tholhath will face a jail sentence or banishment for three years or a Rf 3000 fine (US$193.5), a sentence that would bar him from contesting the elections.

The opposition MDP has claimed that the case is politically motivated by Nasheed’s opponents in an attempt to bar him from running for future elections.

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel in a post on social media service Twitter has said the “historic criminal trial” is the “first step towards the national healing process.”

Meanwhile, the MDP claimed it expects the trial – whether in Hulhumale’ or another court – to go ahead regardless of legality.  The party has alleged the case serves solely as a mean to convict the former president and potentially prevent him from contesting in the next presidential election.

MDP Spokesperson MP Imthiyaz Fahmy did not respond to calls at time of press.

The Arrest

The chief judge was detained by the military, after he had opened the court to order the immediate release of the current Home Minister and deputy leader of the Dhivehi Quamee Party Mohamed Jameel Ahmed.

Jameel was arrested after President’s Office requested an investigation into “slanderous” allegations he made that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives.

The judge’s whereabouts were not revealed until January 18.

As Judge Abdulla continued to be held, Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz later joined the High Court and Supreme Court in condemning the MNDF’s role in the arrest, requesting that the judge be released.

The police are required to go through the Prosecutor General’s (PG) Office to obtain an arrest warrant from the High Court, Muizz said, claiming the MNDF and Nasheed’s administration “haven’t followed the procedures, and the authorities are in breach of law.They could be charged with contempt of the courts.”

He then ordered the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the matter.

Judge Abdulla’s arrest sparked three weeks of anti-government protests, beginning in January, while the government appealed for assistance from the Commonwealth and UN to reform the judiciary.

As protests escalated, elements of the police and military mutinied on February 7, alleging Nasheed’s orders to arrest the judge were unlawful. A Commonwealth legal delegation had landed in the capital only days earlier.

Nasheed publicly resigned the same day, but later said he was forced to do so “under duress” in a coup d’état. Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has taken to the streets in recent months calling for an early election.

Judge Abdulla was released on the evening of February 7, and the Criminal Court swiftly issued a warrant for Nasheed’s arrest. Police did not act on the warrant, after international concern quickly mounted.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

The Maldives’ foreign relations and the CNI

“It was just a week ago that Maldivian President Dr Mohamed Waheed was in Colombo, meeting diplomats, businesspeople and the media on a mission to strengthen the existing friendly relations between Sri Lanka and the Maldives,” writes Lasanda Kurukulasuriya for Sri Lanka’s Sunday Times.

“The visit came just days ahead of the release of a report by a commission appointed to investigate the controversial circumstances in which he, as deputy to former president Mohamed Nasheed, assumed office as President of the Maldives in February.”

“The travel destinations of the Maldivian political leaders (past and present) point to their keen awareness of the geostrategic imperatives in the region. For the small Indian Ocean archipelago these considerations dictate that the support and goodwill of its close South Asian neighbours need to be maintained, whilst simultaneously fostering good relations with China.”

“President Waheed when he visited in May sought to reassure Delhi that ‘China will not replace India.’ But the Maldives, just like others, wants to develop trade links with the economic powerhouse.”

Read more

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Waheed says China to grant Maldives $500 million loan

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has told Reuters that China will grant the Maldives US$500 million (MVR7.7billion) in loans during his state visit to the country.

The loans, equal to nearly one quarter of the Maldives’ GDP, would include $150 million (MVR2.3billion) for housing and infrastructure, with another $350million (MVR5.4billion) from the Export-Import Bank of China, reported Reuters.

This state owned bank is mandated with facilitating the export and import of Chinese products and promoting Sino-foreign relationships and trade, according to its official website.

China’s aid may provide an immediate salve to the government’s financial ailments which are on track to leave a MVR 9.1 billion ($590million) deficit in this year’s budget.

Former Foreign Minister and current UN Special Rapporteur to Iran, Dr Ahmed Shaheed, explained that it was unlikely China would give any money to the Maldives as cash, suggesting that it would more likely come as assistance in kind, which was often difficult for the economy to “absorb”.

Shaheed said that the loan should not be interpreted as a change in foreign policy after former President’s Nasheed and Gayoom both recognised the importance of cultivating ties with China.

“This is very much in keeping with past policy. There has been a growing Chinese interest in the Maldives – a relationship based on trade, tourism and political contact,” said Shaheed.

“The lines so far drawn have demonstrated that the Maldives remains primarily SAARC focused, followed by trading partners in the EU and Singapore. China has moved into this second category,” he added.

“Nothing will change the fact that we are only 200 miles from Trivandrum,” he said.

A Chinese embassy opened in Male’ in time for the opening of the SAARC summit last November, reciprocating the opening of a Maldivian mission in Beijing in 2007.

Indian officials were reported at the time as having concern that the move was part of China’s “string of pearls” policy which supposedly involves Chinese attempts at naval expansion into the Indian Ocean.

On this matter, Shaheed acknowledged that India would be worried about Waheed’s arrival in Beijing after its apparent diplomatic failings during the Maldives’ recent troubles.

However, Shaheed said that a genuine policy shift would have to involve enhanced military cooperation, something avoided by former President Nasheed after his predecessor had shown some interest.

“Nasheed understood that the Maldives should not become a playground for the big powers,” he said.

Similarly, when asked upon his recent return from Sri Lanka what the Maldives’ policy was regarding Sino-Indian competition in the region, President Waheed is said to have responded that the policy of a small nation like the Maldives ought to be to avoid too great an involvement in geopolitics.

Waheed’s first official state visit after becoming president saw him travel to India in May. The Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) conducted joint naval operations with India in the same month.

More recently, Waheed has visited the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and Sri Lanka.

The vast rise in the number of Chinese tourists visiting the Maldives was a point Waheed was keen to make to both Reuters and the Chinese state news agency, Xinhua.

“The purpose of this visit is we have a growing relationship with China,” Waheed told Reuters. “The most tourists from one nation are coming from China. So it is really important to have a good relationship and to also encourage Chinese tourists to continue to come to the Maldives.”

China leapfrogged the United Kingdom in 2010 to become the number one source of arrivals for the country’s travel industry.

Official figures from the Maldivian Ministry of Tourism reveal that China has provided 22.2 percent of all arrivals to the Indian Ocean nation this year – up 14.5 percent from last year.

When speaking with Xinhua, Waheed thanked the Chinese for choosing to visit the Maldives before going on to give praise to China’s policy of non-interference in foreign affairs.

Waheed has been critical of the Commonwealth’s role in the country’s recent political turmoil, suggesting that the organisation’s calls for early elections were “premature”.

In a comment piece for local newspaper Haveeru this week, Waheed’s Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed said that the Maldives should not tolerate interference from people “who fail to practice what they preach in their own country.”

“We need to have the confidence to challenge those diplomats and politicians in the international community who sometimes seem to let their personal political sympathies determine their approach to our problems,” said Saeed.

Xinhua reported that Waheed had lauded China for understanding the international affairs of smaller countries.

“China is emerging as one of the superpowers now. In that sense, it will inevitably play a significant role in world affairs,” said Waheed.

On this point, Shaheed argued that the mention of ‘non-interference’ alongside ‘world power’ was a non-sequitur.

“The world has moved on from this approach. It is now state business to interfere when partners appear to have violated agreements,” he said.

Shaheed added that praise for a host country’s policies was standard in these instances, “a nicety”, and suggested that people should “not read too much into it.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Habitual protests “hindering Maldives development as a modern democracy”: CNI Advisers

International advisors to the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) – Judicial Advisor Sir Bruce Robertson and Legal Advisor Professor John Packer – have defended the commission’s independence and professionalism in the wake of criticism from the MDP’s representative.

Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed resigned from the commission the evening prior to report’s publication, expressing concern that the CNI had experienced the withholding of evidence, non-cooperation from crucial witnesses, non-examination of witnesses, witnesses being intimidated or obstructed, testimonies and evidence that was not reviewed, and misleading translations.

“Four of the five members acted at all times with independence and integrity in carrying out the important task for the future of the nation,” stated Robertson and Packer, in an appendix to the report. “The other member was not at all times willing or able to act independently and resigned the evening before the report was submitted and published.”

Saeed’s resignation created “discord and mistrust” in a community “in desperate need of reconciliation”, the pair claimed, defending the professionalism of the CNI’s methods.

“We have seen nothing but objective and independent professionalism in the institution. The Commission has sensibly and sensitively heard all who wanted to make a contribution. It has firmly and fairly held participants to telling what they had heard and seen for themselves and deflected them from conjecture and speculation without facts.”

“The nation has been well served by the Commissioners and any assertions of bias or lack of objectivity levelled against those remaining have no justification. They reflect badly on those making unfounded allegations,” Packer and Robertson stated.

“For the evidence collecting exercise to have value all witnesses had to be questioned and challenged about their recollections of events and the basis for them. Equally they had to be confronted with alternative evidence so they had the opportunity to comment on it. Some found this process unsettling. Many were familiar and only comfortable with making assertions and not being required to justify or explain how they had reached their view,” they noted.

As the evidence unfolded, the advisors said they observed “a national obsession with street demonstrating at an alarming level”.

“Some would want to call [this] an example of the rights of freedom of expression and assembly. In reality it is rather more bully-boy tactics involving actual and threatened intimidation by a violent mob,” they stated.

“This perpetual behaviour is sapping public life and hindering the Maldives’ development as a modern democracy.”

The evidence revealed longstanding tensions in the Constitution as a result of a Presidential system being “grafted” on to a parliamentary system.

“The creation of independent commissions will only be the safety valve intended when they are adequately resourced and fulfil their mandates in a timely and decisive manner,” they observed.

Furthermore, “Fundamental to the operation of a modern democratic society is the existence of an operating and absolutely independent judiciary which has the confidence of the entire community. Radical action is required to breathe utility into much of the state framework, especially to ensure the proper administration of justice. This cannot wait.”

Dunya writes to McKinnon

The comments from the international advisers followed a letter sent to Commonwealth Envoy to the Maldives Sir Donald McKinnon by State Minister for Foreign Affairs Dunya Maumoon., daughter of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

In the letter, obtained by Minivan News, Dunya advises McKinnon that Saeed had “put the Commission’s work at risk by publicly questioning the credibility of its draft report, three days before its scheduled publication.

“He has also questioned the integrity of the highly respected senior judge from Singapore, Justice Selvam, the Co-Chair of the Commission, who was recruited by the Commonwealth. This is a disturbing development that could inflame the already heated political environment in the Maldives,” Dunya wrote.

She informed McKinnon that it was “time the Commonwealth puts into perspective the pattern of behavior by former President Nasheed since he resigned from the office of President, and ponders the credibility of his accusations and claims.”

“The government is committed to bringing stability into the country and cultivating the values of democracy in the Maldives,” she claimed.

“You may recall that while accepting Mr Saeed’s name to the CNI, the government made it very clear its strong reservations about Mr Saeed’s impartiality and independence because of his close associations with the MDP.

“We request you call upon former President Nasheed and his supporters in the MDP, as well as Mr Saeed, to stop their intimidatory actions and let the work of the CNI proceed to a successful conclusion. The Commonwealth’s valuable role in resolving the political tensions in the maldives is a critical one, and that role should also be seen to be fair as well,” Dunya wrote.

“Otherwise there is a risk that the country’s young democracy might be pushed into a steep decline where only chaos will reign.”

Former President Nasheed on Friday accepted the CNI’s report, subject to Saeed’s reservations, however he observed that the report had effectively set a legal precedent under Maldivian law for the overthrow of an elected government through police or mob action.

This, he said, left the Maldives “in a very awkward, and in many ways, very comical” situation, “where toppling the government by brute force is taken to be a reasonable course of action. All you have to do find is a narrative for that course of action.”

Minivan News is currently waiting for a response from MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: So long, and thanks for all the democracy

On the night of August 29, groups of uniformed officials of the Maldives Police Service were observed going around Malé in trucks, singing songs and mocking opposition MDP activists – the same ones they brutalised in a nationally televised theatre of violence during the events of February 7th and 8th.

The next morning, large groups of uniformed police were huddled together on the streets in their riot gear, their faces concealed by balaclavas, while the country awaited an announcement from the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) appointed by the Waheed regime to ‘investigate’ the controversial transfer of power.

The announcement surprised exactly nobody; the council of pigs had found in favour of Napoleon. There was no coup, it ruled. In fact, there wasn’t even a police mutiny. And if there was one, it didn’t quite break any law, the report found.

By evening, the Waheed regime’s Police Service – now apparently empowered to make their own laws – had declared that calling them ‘traitors’ was now a crime, and any person indulging in the act would be arrested.

The declaration followed in the footsteps of two citizens being arrested in recent days for the offence of calling Waheed a ‘traitor’. Journalists witnessed one lady being taken away on 30th August, allegedly for the crime of taking photographs of the police.

Over the course of the day, scores of MDP protesters would be detained by the police in ancticipation of large scale protests against the findings of the report, and the continued demands for early elections.

With the international community apparently eager to wash its hands off the Maldives, there will be plenty of time and opportunity for the police to deal with troublesome critics over the remainder of Waheed’s rule.

The CoNI Report

Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed, the sole representative of President Nasheed on the 5 member Commission, resigned the day before the report was to be made public. In a press conference following the publication of the report, Saeed pointed out what appear to be serious lapses in gathering evidence and recording testimony in preparation of the final report.

Among them, he highlighted that CCTV footage was provided for only 3 out of 8 cameras around the MNDF area, and even those had hours of footage edited out. No sufficient explanation was given by the security forces.

The Commission was not provided any CCTV footage by the Police and the President’s office, according to Saeed. Nor was CoNI granted access to information gathered by the Police Integrity Commission.

Furthermore, no interviews were held with any official of the notorious ‘Special Operations’, the highly trained riot control force that played a crucial role in the ouster of the first democratically elected government, as well as the subsequent targeted attacks on civilians, MDP leaders and party activists. Also missing was the testimony of Umar Naseer, the Deputy Leader of PPM who has publicly declared his role in the overthrow of the elected government, and revealed the existence of a ‘command centre’.

According to Saeed, other prominent interviewees alleged to have played a role in the coup d’etat appeared to have been coached, with all of them giving standard, non-commmital responses.

None of these alleged lapses or limitations were highlighted in the final report.

Illegal duress

Section 4F of the report, defining ‘Coercion in Law’ begins as follows:

“Coercion, as used in the Decree, refers to the American legal concept of illegal duress or the English legal concept of intimidation. This is a real threat delivered by one or more wrongdoers to another to harm and injure the latter or his family if the victim does not do something as demanded”

But surprisingly, the report makes no mention of the leaked audio recordings, first aired by Australia’s SBS Dateline program, that clearly reveal the President pleading for the safety of his family in return for his resignation on the morning of February 7.

There were a few other sections of the report that raises eyebrows. Regarding an allegation about an SMS purpotedly sent by the then Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Environment, allegedly asking for the disbursement of 2.4 million Rufiyaa to the mutinying cops, the Commission had this to report:

“[Mr. Saleem] debunked the message effortlessly, claiming that he did not recall sending such a message. After hearing him, the Commission would not invade and investigate the privacy and personal affairs of all and sundry…”

While the first sentence suggests some truly extraordinary levels of trust placed by the Commission in the testimony of the accused, the second reveals an inexplicable reluctance in pursuing every possible avenue of inquiry to uncover all relevant facts behind the power transfer – which, by definition, was the Commission’s job.

Furthermore, the report seems to paint a picture that the President was completely secure and faced no threat inside the MNDF HQ, when in reality it is undisputed that sections of the already outnumbered military had broken ranks and joined with the hostile police and opposition protesters in rioting outside.

Video recordings aired on National television showed military officers refusing to obey the President’s orders. Retired colonel Mohamed Nazim, in the video clip where he is seen addressing the mutinying forces outside, talks about being received warmly inside the MNDF HQ.

Indeed the CoNI report itself quotes him as saying “When I entered the military headquarters I was given a very happy scene. Everyone within the military lifted me up and very completely revealed their support for me. God willing, things will happen today as we want”.

If one is familiar with the fate of former Maldivian rulers facing chaotic mobs, then one realizes that guns were not necessary to threaten the President’s life. All that was required was for a solitary soldier to throw open the gates.
The report itself states elsewhere that all command and control was lost.

All of this appears entirely contradictory to the conclusions of the report that asserts that President Nasheed remained in control and had legal options to employ force to deal with the situation, which he refused to do – and therefore could not claim he resigned under duress.

This lends some credence to President Nasheed’s claims that the report was prepared with the political situation in mind, rather than with any serious ambition of uncovering facts.

Options before the MDP: Way forward

It is unrealistic to imagine that ordinary civilians, no matter how numerous or passionate, can topple a regime that is protected by a modern, trained, unsympathetic – and in this case, hostile – police and armed security forces.

The police have superior training, equipment, strategy, organization, intelligence gathering and other resources to counter and defeat any move that civilian protestors could possibly make. The same forces that protected the dictator Gayoom against an overwhelming tide of unpopularity can sufficiently protect his alleged puppet.

Given these realities, it is wise that President Nasheed has chosen to make a major concession and accept the findings of the report, while calling to implement its much welcome recommendations that include the strengthening of various institutions such as the HRCM, Police Integrity Commission, JSC and the Judiciary while also calling for swift action to be taken against rogue cops, who the report acknowledges had engaged in acts of brutality towards civilians.

While there remain serious injustices to be addressed and plenty of reasons for the MDP to be rightfully outraged, the path forward necessarily involves having to break the political gridlock that has paralyzed the nation since late last year.

It is clearly in the best interests of the public that the All Party talks resume and the daily business of running the nation and fixing the economy take centre stage again.

There are important lessons to learn from February 7. President Nasheed and the MDP need to introspect and reflect on their own considerable mistakes and poor judgments. The most important among them, perhaps, is committing to uphold the rule of law without any compromises, no matter how morally justifiable it may be.

With under a year left for the next scheduled elections, the MDP would be well advised to direct its efforts and resources on going back to the people and rallying them behind larger ideals.

Ultimately, one must remember that it was the people who handed a mandate to President Nasheed in 2008, and despite the ugly precedent set by the police and military, it will hopefully be the people once again who will make the decision in 2013.

So long, and thanks for all the democracy

With the publication of the CoNI report, and the apparent willingness of the international community to confer the same legitimacy on Waheed that it once granted the iron-fisted Gayoom – ostensibly with ‘stability’ in mind – the clocks have effectively been turned back a few years.

The Maldives’ unprecedented democratic revolution that began in the early 2000’s has ended prematurely, and many of the gains made since then have now effectively been reversed.

After three years, the Police have once again become an entity to be feared and loathed. The familiar intimidation of the media, and bullying tactics that were so widely prevalent during the Gayoom dictatorship is also back.

Waheed’s regime has been outright hostile to the free media, repeatedly barring the only opposition-aligned TV station from covering President’s office press conferences, and permanently withdrawing police protection for the channel’s reporters – despite explicit constitutional safeguards upholding media freedom. There is plenty of visual evidence of Raajje TV’s reporters being harassed and pepper sprayed at close range by the police; targeted attacks on the station by pro-government goons in August forced the station to interrupt services.

Citizens now face arrest for merely calling Waheed and his police forces ‘traitors’, whereas his regime regularly and unapologetically refers to citizens demanding early elections as ‘terrorists’.

The runaway judiciary remains weak and ineffectual, and there is no longer an elected President in power with any interest in fixing this crucial, but broken third leg of the base on which the country’s democracy was built to stand.

With a spineless media, a lethargic civil society, an incompetent Judiciary, weak institutions and watchdogs, a heavily politicized Police and military, not to mention the overarching influence of money and corruption in the whole process, the gargantuan task of achieving practical democracy in the Maldives appears forbidding, if not downright impossible.

To sow the seeds for a new revolution, the MDP needs to go back to the grassroots and educate the public.

February 7: the legacy

February 7 has left in its wake some very unwelcome precedents and niggling questions.

First among them is the newly acquired role of the police and military in determining the transfer of power, which the constitution had originally envisaged as being the sole prerogative of the voting public.

Will all future governments of the Maldives be required to buy the loyalty of the uniformed services with a range of perks, pay hikes, unprecedented promotions and turning a blind eye to their excesses and brutality in order to remain in power, as demonstrated by the Waheed regime?

Shall the Maldives follow in the footsteps of Pakistan that, over 65 years since independence, has failed to see a single democratically elected government complete a full term?

Finally, will the Maldivian judiciary ever become a house of justice for the public? Or will it remain perpetually overrun by incompetent fools, resistant to any external attempt bring them in line with the ideals enshrined in the constitution?

Does the Maldivian public really stand a chance to complete the democratic transition process we embarked on nearly a decade ago? Or will the next guy to attempt this Herculean task also pay the same price that Mohamed Nasheed did?

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(1)Dislikes(1)

CNI report leaves Maldives with “awkward”, “comical” precedent: Nasheed

Additional reporting by Mariyath Mohamed

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has said he accepts the report produced by the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) subject to the reservations of his member on the Commonwealth-backed commission, Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed.

The CNI found that there was no coup on February 7, that Nasheed did not resign under duress, and that police and military officers did not mutiny.

Saeed resigned from the commission the evening prior to report’s publication, expressing concern that the CNI had experienced the withholding of evidence, non-cooperation from crucial witnesses, non-examination of witnesses, witnesses being intimidated or obstructed, testimonies and evidence that was not reviewed.  Concern was also expressed over the organisation by the CNI secretariat.

“I believe the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) will consider the reservations about the CNI’s work that Saeed has noted, and that these issues will also be included in the CMAG report,” Nasheed said, at a press conference this afternoon.

The former President observed that the CNI’s report had effectively set a legal precedent under Maldivian law for the overthrow of an elected government through police or mob action.

This, he said, left the Maldives “in a very awkward, and in many ways, very comical” situation, “where toppling the government by brute force is taken to be a reasonable course of action. All you have to do find is a narrative for that course of action.”

“The pronouncement on the transfer of power was a political announcement – not based on findings or facts. This political pronouncement is based in my view on what would be best for the country from now on, not on exactly what happened that day,” Nasheed said.

“I see the report as a document that tries to map a way forward. The commission was of the view that reinstating my 2008 government would be so messy that it would be best to move forward with another election. So the report has tried so hard to come out with this view through a proper narrative. You will have read the narrative and will understand that at times it is comical, but still, it is a narrative.

“I still am of the view that the commission report has established a precedent which in many ways is not very alien to our past practices. Usually if a mob comes to the palace and stands there for a lengthy amount of time, and if other locals are connected to the mob, the king has very little room to maneuver,” Nasheed said.

“We seem to have been unable to get away from this very feudal system of governance. We were hoping the new constitution would be enlightened enough to give us a system whereby governments would change simply through the ballot box, but it now looks like it was not so simple. I think it will take time before we are able to settle down to more democratic forms.

“My message to the international community is when you recommend issues, situations, solutions programmes and projects to other societies and people, it is so very important to understand the detailed intricacies of the local conditions.

“We still hope elections will be held early, and we will go to elections with a programme, as we always have, and we believe that we will win that election in the first round very handsomely. We have no doubt about that.”

Nasheed noted that all major coalition-aligned parties had signalled their acceptance of the report and its recommendations, including former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) Leader Thasmeen Ali, “and my former vice president Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik”, and emphasised that one of the major recommendations in the report that they had agreed to was for action taken against unlawful acts committed by the security forces.

“We call for a criminal investigation, and they must then be tried in court and be sentenced as due,” he said.

“We are not surprised, this was one outcome the MDP had predicted. If the report suggested there was no duress [in the resignation] but that there were wrongdoings by the police and military, then all these wrongdoings must be addressed immediately within a period of one month, with the international community’s support in doing so,” Nasheed added.

During his speech at the report’s release on Thursday, President Mohamed Waheed did not reveal the CNI’s fourth finding – that there were “acts of police brutality on February 6, 7 and 8 that must be investigated and pursued further by relevant authorities”.

Referring to the CNI report’s conclusion that the controversial February 7 change of power was “constitutional”, Nasheed said that if this were the case, then he believed that parties who were not included in the victorious 2008 coalition had no right to participate in the current unity government, specifically Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and the DRP.

Nasheed called for his impending trial at Hulhumale Court – a move recently upheld by the High Court – to be expedited, and also expressed concern at the arbitrary arrest of his supporters for calling police and public officials ‘baghees’ (traitors).

“It is always their hard work that brings things to realisation, that impresses upon everyone the gravity of issues, and if you have a look at who was arrested last night, you can see that the core of them are the intelligentsia of this country,” Nasheed said.

“They are young, highly qualified and they have an opinion. If you want to keep arresting people with an opinion, that says very little about your democratic credentials.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government claims all-party talks consensus as MDP maintains “early” election calls

The President’s Office has claimed all-party talks held last night at Bandos Island Resort and Spa concluded with senior representatives for the government and the nation’s political parties agreeing to move ahead through parliament to address the discussion’s key aims.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad told Minivan News that the all-party talks – the last of which, held in June, failed to reach a consensus on an agenda that included setting dates for early elections – saw representatives agreeing on revising the aims of the talks to reflect the findings of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI).

However, the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), which continues to criticise the CNI findings – alleging they lack key witness testimonies and evidence – has today said it remained committed to pressing for early elections at the earliest possible date in line with calls from the European Union.

The comments were made after the CNI, charged with investigating the circumstances around the controversial transfer of power on February 7, concluded that the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan came to office constitutionally.

The Commonwealth, which backed the CNI under a reformed mandate and composition, yesterday called for report’s outcome to be respected – a stance shared by the US, India and the UN.

Following the CNI’s conclusion yesterday, Masood claimed the talks, which were attended by President Waheed, MDP Chair and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, “successfully” agreed to amend the aims of the talks. He added that these amended aims would now likely be addressed through the People’s Majlis rather than through continued external discussions.

Masood added that in light of the CNI’s findings, representatives at yesterday’s talks agreed on a new agenda, such as addressing legislative issues through parliament.  He contended that this work could potentially be dealt with through the formation of a special all-party parliamentary committee.

Speaking to Minivan News yesterday, DRP Leader Thasmeen said ahead of the talk that he believed the focus of discussions, which had previously outlined an agenda including potentially agreeing early elections for this year, “should now change”.

“There had previously been serious contention over the transfer of power. At this point we had been willing to discuss early elections. I think these questions have now been answered [with the CNI report]. It is now time for national reconciliation,” he said.

Thasmeen contended that the talks would likely no longer focus on agreeing a date for early elections, which President Waheed has previously said under the constitution can be scheduled for July 2013 at the earliest.

“I think it should be possible to move on and try finding common platforms for agreement,” he said at the time.

Both Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Interim Deputy Leader Umar Naseer and MDP Chair Manik – who were both representing their respective parties at the talks – were not responding to calls from Minivan News at the time of press.

MDP MP and Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said today that in spite of the CNI outcome, early elections remained a “key” focus of the opposition party going forward.

According to the MDP, the Commonwealth had not yet announced a change in its policy of pressing for early elections to be held this year to address the current political stalemate in the country.

Ghafoor added that he had also been encouraged by comments made by President Waheed in local media to hold talks between the leaders of the country’s parliamentary parties and himself, discussions he contended that would be limited to five key Majlis representatives.

In outlining the future focus of the party’s plans, former President Mohamed Nasheed was on Friday expected to hold a conference at 4:00pm in Male’ at the Mookai Hotel on Meheli Goalhi.

Addressing the party’s conduct following the CNI report yesterday, the MDP claimed that it believed 60 people were arrested during yesterday’s demonstrations as a result of an ongoing special operation launched by police in attempts to reduce unrest in the capital and wider atolls.

According to Ghafoor, the party was itself concerned with the large number of officers wearing balaclavas as they patrolled the capital, making it impossible to identify them individually.

“They were singing at MDP protesters and mocking them to try and provoke the public,” he claimed. “I myself observed spontaneous protests yesterday that were not organised offcially by the party. These were people who walked out of our national conference meeting yesterday. This situation saw a large number of arrests late into the night.”

According to official police figures, 50 people had been arrested as of yesterday afternoon. Of these suspects, seven were female and one person was classed as a minor.

By midnight, authorities confirmed that a further 13 people had been taken into custody. All suspects were charged with obstructing police in performing their duties.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef today confirmed local news reports that police would be arresting any member of the public heard calling officers “traitors” or alleging they had played part in a “coup”.

Haneef did not clarify if any arrests had been made on these grounds at the time of press.

Police said earlier this week that they will provide full support and security services to the demonstrations held “peacefully and within the contours of laws”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“I realised it was all going wrong”: member Saeed on CNI’s final days

“I realised it was all going wrong,” recently resigned member of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed told a press conference at Dharubaaruge this evening.

During the press conference, Saeed revealed comprehensive details of the admissions from the final CNI draft which led to his resignation on Wednesday.

“I did push for the initial extension, but this time around I realised that even if the time was extended, there was no possibility that the report would come out any different,” he said.

Saeed said that he had accepted the post because he had been deeply affected by the brutality and the injustice he observed in the events following February 6, and felt he could make a constructive contribution to the commission’s work.

He emphasised that he was not a politician and did not take up these responsibilities with any political interest in mind. Saeed provided a copy of a letter which he says was presented to the commission’s co-chairs on August 26 as well as a copy of his resignation letter.

The first letter, written on August 18, detailed Saeed’s concerns about the commission’s progress, which included the following:  withheld evidence, non-cooperation from crucial witnesses, non-examination of witnesses, witnesses being intimidated or obstructed, testimonies and evidence that was not reviewed, and organisation by the CNI secretariat.

“I feel compelled to formally register with you a number of issues that I believe, if left unaddressed, will seriously undermine the credibility of the report. I also believe these matters defeat the purpose for which the CNI was established,” read the August 26 letter, sent to the other members of the commission as well as Commonwealth Special Envoy, Sir Donald McKinnon, and members of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) – whose pressure led to his appointment.

Saeed told the press today that he had submitted his concerns regarding Singaporean Judge G.P. Selvam’s extended absences to the Commonwealth, but that he had so far not received a response.

He mentioned that there were a total of 31 days in which the commission was not able to work with the full commission’s presence, alluding to Selvam’s lengthy absence.

In responding to questions from media, Saeed said that Judge Selvam had brought gifts for the commission members ranging from dictionaries to perfume.

He said that the last gift, which had been offered along with the draft of the CNI report, was an Apple iPad for each member of the commission.

Saeed confirmed that while he had not accepted any of these gifts, the other commission members had.

Saeed also spoke of material worth thousands of Singaporean dollars that Judge Selvam had donated to the Villingili Hiya Children’s Center and the Maafushi Juvenile Detention Centre.

In the distributed letter, Saeed decried the fact that no CCTV footage from the police or the President’s Office had been made available to the commission.

“Only three out of eight CCTV cameras in and around MNDF have been provided and these have some crucial hours of footage missing,” wrote Saeed.

Saeed added that, “after much stonewalling”, he was simply told the footage was not available.

Saeed also wrote that the CNI was unable to access the information compiled by the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) despite repeated requests.

He also said that the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) report was not received until August 16, describing the eventual report as “superficial and inconclusive”.

The letter suggested that key witnesses, believed to have played crucial roles in the events of February 7, appeared to have been coached – all giving standard responses to questions such as “no”, “I don’t know”, or “I can’t remember”.

Saeed also suggested that the non-cooperation of Deputy Leader of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Umar Naseer was unacceptable after he had made public statements detailing his role in Nasheed’s resignation.

He also alleged that the original members of the Commission (Dr Ibrahim Yasir, Dr Ali Fawaz Shareef and chairman Ismail Shafeeu) showed a lack of interest in witnesses, “rarely posing questions.”

Using the examples of MC Mohamed Hameed and Superintendant Adnan Anees, Saeed expressed his belief that pressure was being put on members of the security forces not to cooperate with the CNI.

He added that a number of potentially crucial witnesses had been transferred, sometimes overseas, “making it extremely hard or impossible for them to appear before the CNI.”

Writing 12 days before the report was due for release, Saeed had mentioned his concerns that a lot of evidence had yet to be reviewed in the limited time remaining.

The final point raised in the August 26 letter was the poor scheduling of the witnesses by the commission’s secretariat.

Saeed said that inadequate notice had been given to enable his preparations for questioning. He also suggested that the most important witnesses were scheduled at the least convenient times.

The quality of translations services provided by the secretariat were also criticised, being described as “inappropriate and to some extent misleading.”

Additional details of Saeed’s concerns came in the August 29 resignation letter in which he alleged that the reformed five-man commission had not reviewed the finding of the original three-man group, “despite inconsistencies”.

The resignation letter detailed that no officer from the Special Operations branch of the police force had been interviewed. “The CNI has not been able to ‘summon’ any of the alleged ‘perpetrators’ or ‘culprits’,” he wrote.

Saeed criticised the nature of the commission’s work, arguing that it lacked the “investigative powers to thoroughly probe accusations.” He mentioned that the group had been unable to access key individuals’ bank accounts or phone records.

In concluding the press conference, Saeed said that he felt the Commonwealth had welcomed the final CNI report even though Saeed himself had not signed it because after his resignation, he was no longer a part of CNI and his signature would no longer be needed.

Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma has welcomed the release of the report by the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), and urged “all concerned to respect the findings of the commission so that, moving forward, all actions and reactions reflect the sense of responsibility and restraint necessary in the best national interest.“

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)