Nasheed “highest authority liable” for Judge Abdulla detention: HRCM

The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) has concluded former President Mohamed Nasheed was the “highest authority liable” for the military-led detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Along with Nasheed, the report concluded that the former president’s Defence Minister, Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, was a second key figure responsible for the decision to detain Judge Abdulla on January 16.

The commission stated that the judge was not physically harmed during the 22-day detention at the military training island of Girifushi.  However, the HRCM did claim that the government had “violated his human dignity” and made attempts to manipulate the judge through a psychologist who visited him at the facility where he was detained.

These alleged attempts at manipulation were said to include efforts to remove the judge from his senior position, as well as forcing him to leave the country, the commission’s findings stated.

“The investigation reveals the highest authority liable for the arrest and detention of Judge Abdulla at Girifushi, as well as depriving him of fundamental constitutional rights, is former President Mohamed Nasheed.  Under him was the former Minister of Defence and National Security Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu who gave orders to the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF),” the HRCM added.

“Furthermore, as this operation was carried out by the MNDF, the [commission] believes that the Chief of Defence Force, Moosa Ali Jaleel should take responsibility.  Those who issued unconstitutional orders and those who obeyed the orders must also share responsibility on various levels,” the commission added.

The commission’s findings released on Tuesday (August 21), concluded that Judge Abdulla’s arrest was a clear violation of both the country’s laws and its constitution.  The report also stated that judge’s human rights and fundamental freedoms, guaranteed under international law, were also denied.

HRCM explained that its investigation had found that the pair were both behind the “unlawful orders” to approve the judge’s arrest, which was a violation of article 46 of the Constitution, particularly violation of Article 12 clause (a) of the Judges Act.

Article 44 of the Maldives Constitution states: “No person shall be arrested or detained for an offence unless the arresting officer observes the offence being committed, or has reasonable and probable grounds or evidence to believe the person has committed an offence or is about to commit an offence, or under the authority of an arrest warrant issued by the court.”

Article 12 clause (a) of the Judges Act states that a judge can be arrested without a court warrant, but only if he is found committing a criminal act. The same article also states that if a judge comes under suspicion of committing a criminal act or being about to commit a criminal act, they can only be taken into custody with a court warrant obtained from a higher court than that of which the judge presently sits on.  This warrant has to be sought by the prosecutor general.

However, the commission observed that the warrant was not obtained.  Additionally, orders to release the judge by the Supreme Court, High Court, the country’s lower courts and the prosecutor general were ignored.

Both Nasheed and Tholhath, alongside former Chief of Defence Force Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad are already facing charges for their alleged role in detaining Judge Abdulla in January.

The charges include a breach of article 81 of the Penal Code: “Arresting an innocent person intentionally and unlawfully by a state employee with the legal authority or power vested to him by his position is an offence. Punishment for a person guilty of this offence is imprisonment or banishment for 3 years or a fine of MVR 2000 (US$129.70).”

These charges were filed by the Prosecutor General’s Office in July, based on the findings of HRCM investigation, which were not publicly released at the time.

The judge was arrested by the military on request of police after he blocked a summons to present himself to the police headquarters for questioning and later opened the court outside normal hours to order the immediate release of current Home Minister and Deputy Leader of the Dhivehi Quamee Party Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed.  Jameel was arrested after the President’s Office requested an investigation into so-called “slanderous” allegations he made that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives.

The government contended that the judge was a “threat to national security” after he lodged an appeal at High Court to cancel police summons, which granted an injunction until it reached a verdict on the appeal.

The Nasheed administration accused the judge of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, having links with organised 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.

In August 2010, the judge was publicly accused by the police of “obstructing high-profile corruption cases.”

However, the commission’s report concluded that its investigation proved that Judge Abdulla was not a threat to national security, on the grounds that no meeting of the National Security Council was held at the time.

The Commission also observed that its requests and attempts to visit Judge Abdullah were unfulfilled by the MNDF and government.  Conversely, it  deemed the arrest as an attempt to “influence” his role as Criminal Court chief judge.

The HRCM report also identified what it called breaches of multiple rights and freedoms of Judge Abdullah during the detention process.  These were said to include; the right to be treated equal before law and right to the equal protection and benefit [article 20];  right to life, liberty and security [article 21]; freedom to travel or move within and outside the country [article 41]; Procedurally Fair and and lawful administrative action [article 43];  the right to be to be informed immediately of the reasons for detention and to be brought within24 hours before a Judge [article 48(a) and  (d) ]; right to the assistance of legal counsel [article 53] and no subjection to cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment, or to torture under [article 54].

Furthermore, it noted that the arrest of the Judge contravened section 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states: “Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.”

Furthermore, violations were said to include, the right he “not be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile” [section 9] and similarly not being subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to suffer attacks upon a person’s honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks [section 12].

HRCM has also observed that “anyone who is deprived of their liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful” under section 9(d) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the same declaration, section 10(a) states that: “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.”

It also states that the “Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance” prohibits the arrest, detention or abduction of a person against their will or otherwise deprived of their liberty by officials of different branches or levels of Government, or by organized groups or private individuals acting on behalf of, or with the support, direct or indirect, consent or acquiescence of the Government, followed by a refusal to disclose the fate or whereabouts of the persons concerned or a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of their liberty, which places such persons outside the protection of the law.

“Therefore, the [arrest of Judge Abdullah] was carried out in contravention of the aforementioned rights and freedoms guaranteed under the international declarations.” the HRCM concluded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Two men arrested on suspicion of brewing alcohol in Laamu Atoll

Police have arrested two men accused of brewing alcohol in an abandoned house in Gan, Laamu Atoll.

Police said three 1.5 Litre bottles and a single 20 Litre bottle all containing alcohol were found at the property upon arrival.

The two male suspects were aged 21 and 25, police said.

Police had not revealed the names of the persons arrested.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police discover 52 cans of beer drifting in the sea around Male’

Police discovered 52 cans of ‘Bintang’ beer drifting in the sea near Male’s West Park restaurant yesterday afternoon.

According to police, the cans were first discovered yesterday at about 4:40pm.

The Drug Enforcement Department (DED) and Marine police are keeping watch over the area.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“The good news is that the Maldives is not about to disappear”: President Waheed

“First of all, I want give you a bit of good news. The good news is that the Maldives is not about to disappear,” President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has told a group of Sri Lankan businessmen in Colombo yesterday, according to media reports.

Speaking during his official state visit to the Maldives’ closest neighbour, Waheed told an assembled group of business heads at the Hilton Colombo hotel that the country could mitigate the effects of climate change and global warming.

Waheed made the comments in an attempt to assure his audience in Colombo yesterday that steps were being taken to stabilise the political climate in the country, as well to retain investor confidence.

The President said that large sections of the state budget were currently being spent on combating coastal erosion, providing clean water for the islands and developing renewable energy to minimize overall expenditure.

Since assuming the presidency, Waheed has pledged to work towards the previous administration’s carbon neutrality strategy, while also announcing intentions to make the Maldives the world’s largest bio-reserve.

There has also been discussion of a green energy fund to raise US$100 million for renewable energy projects through voluntary tourist contributions.

The country’s energy sector had been headed for a dramatic overhaul this year before the political instability surrounding February’s transfer of presidential was claimed to have deterred potential investors in such a project.

The Scaling-Up Renewable Energy Programme (SREP) promised to attract up to $3billion in risk-mitigated renewable energy investment and reduce the Maldives’ dependency on imported oil.

The environmental obstacles besetting the low-lying archipelago had been championed by former President Mohamed Nasheed, who garnered international media attention with his underwater cabinet meetings and a promise to make the country carbon neutral by the year 2020.

Nasheed’s media campaign was covered in the documentary film, “The Island President”, which highlighted his negotiations at the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Summit.

Before assuming office, Nasheed told international media that he had discussed the idea of purchasing land in Sri Lanka, amongst other nations, “as an insurance policy for the worst possible outcome.”

Investor Confidence

Waheed assured his audience in Colombo yesterday that the government was also focused on bolstering investor confidence.

Threats to renationalise Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) – currently being developed by Indian company GMR – have recently brought calls from within the national-unity government for greater consideration of the longer-term impact on foreign investment.

President Waheed is also reported as having told Sri Lankan media that both the economy and the tourism industry, which indirectly contributes around 70percent of GDP, were growing.

A President’s Office statement, however, has reported that Waheed told the group gathered at the Hilton that there had been a decline in the tourism industry recently.

The Tourism Ministry’s most recent figures show that, compared with the same point in 2011, tourist arrivals were up by 2.8 percent, whilst occupancy rates had dropped 1.2 percent.

Figures published by the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) show that the economy was expected to grow by 5.5percent this year, a slight slow down on the previous year.

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb, who is accompanying President Waheed to Sri Lanka, was unavailable for comment when contacted today.

At present, a key economic concern to the government is the current budget deficit, anticipated to reach MVR9.1billion (US$590million) – over 28 percent of nominal GDP.

Haveeru reported that Waheed has informed the Sri Lankan press of austerity measures which were delivered to the Majlis by the Finance Ministry earlier this month.

The Sri Lanka Daily News meanwhile reported that he was in the process of finalising agreements which would strengthen bilateral ties in trade and investment as well as the legal and the educational sectors.

Minister for Economic Development Ahmed Mohamed and President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza were not responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives Police Service to establish Law Enforcement Institute

The Maldives Police Service (MPS) has said it soon expects to open a Law Enforcement Institute in Male’, providing officers with opportunities for further education up to degree-level.

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz, speaking during a speech at the certificate awarding ceremony of the 21st Police Recruit Training Course, discussed ongoing plans to establish a career path in law enforcement.  He claimed the institute, to this end, would aim to provide officers with the opportunity to complete studies up to First Degree Level.

Speaking to Minivan News today, Police Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef said that the establishment of a Law Enforcement Institute in Male’ had been a long-term plan for the institution.  The institute is expected to to be officially opened soon, he added, with the MPS planning additionally to open up the courses to interested members of the public as well.

According to a release on the official MPS website, Commissioner Riyaz also spoke of the importance of all officers speaking to members of the general public with due respect.

Riyaz also said that the country was now in a politically sensitive period after having recently come through a lot of social and political changes, and that it was the responsibility of the police to maintain the nation’s unity. He added that completely new offences were now being committed in the country – particularly at a time when crime rates were at a record high.

Riyaz said that police were also facing challenges due to instances where officers, in trying to maintain peace, were being obstructed and harassed in the course of their work. He also claimed that police officers faced physical harm and even death due to such actions.

The comments were made as the role of the police force in the Maldives, particularly during February’s controversial transfer of power, faces scrutiny from institutions including the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) and the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM).

Earlier this week, the HRCM claimed a police crackdown on a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) march across Male’ on February 8, which left dozens of demonstrators injured was “brutal” and “without prior warning,” in an investigative report (Dhivehi) released to the public.

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has meanwhile stated its own intention to release findings from ongoing investigations into alleged breach of laws and regulations by officers during the lead up to and in the direct aftermath of February’s controversial transfer of power.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Maldives to face India in Nehru Cup tonight

The Maldives National Football team face hosts India in their second match in the 2012 Nehru Cup this evening after recording victory over Nepal on Thursday (August 25).

The Maldives squad beat the Nepalese 2-1 with goals from Abdulla Asadhulla and  Easa Ismail in the 7th and 77th minutes respectively. With practically the last kick off the game, Jumanu Rai grabbed a consolation goal for Nepal.

Meanwhile, India beat Syria on the opening day of the tournament by the same score, prompting their Dutch coach, Wim Koevermans, to predict a place in the final for his defending champions if their form continued.

In contrast, Maldives coach, Istvan Urbanyi, has told India Today of his concerns regarding his team’s fitness.

“Most of my players have just come after a month of observing Ramadan. Also, we had little practice before coming here,” said Urbanyi.
Tonight’s match kicks off at 7:00PM (IST) – 6:30PM in Male’.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police recover stolen jewellery and electronics

The Maldives Police Service’s Serious and Organised Crime (SOC) Department has recovered stolen jewellery and electronic items with a combined estimated value of Rf500,000 in two separate operations.

Police said a 22 year-old male was arrested in connection with the stolen jewellery, while another 24 year-old man was arrested in connection with the stolen electronics.

According to police, the Rf500,000 worth of jewellery was stolen from a goldsmith located at Maafannu ‘Vaikaradhoo’ and the electronics were stolen from Villa Technology Office located at Galolhu ‘Greenge’.

A total of 12 laptops and five external hard disks were stolen from Villa Technology Office, according to police.

The stolen jewellery meanwhile was discovered inside the residence of the 22 year-old man living, police said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

HRCM’s report claims Nasheed’s life was never in danger during resignation

The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) in a report investigating alleged human rights violations on February 6 and 7 has said former President Mohamed Nasheed’s life was not in danger at the time of his resignation.

“The investigation did not find that anyone had tried to assassinate President Mohamed Nasheed during the time he spent inside Bandaara Koshi – the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) headquarters – on February 7,” the HRCM concluded.

According to the report, the commission was requested to investigate claims that the former president’s life was in danger while he was inside military barracks.  The request was made on April 11, 2012 by the chair of parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee, MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed,

The HRCM report was compiled based on the findings of its own investigations, which included witness statements from the police and the MNDF, media reports, video and photographic evidence as well as eyewitnesses accounts from representatives of all political parties.

However, the commission noted that despite repeated attempts, Nasheed refused to cooperate with the investigation, which forced them to compile the report without his statement or account of events leading up his resignation.

The report focused on six areas: the incidents that took place at Male’s Artificial Beach area on the night of February 6; vandalism of the former ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Haruge camp or gathering spot by rogue police officers; the attack on private broadcaster Villa TV (VTV); incidents that took place at the Republican Square on February 7; the storming of the compound of state broadcaster Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC) by police and army officers; and Nasheed’s claim that mutinying or rebellious officers tried to lynch him inside the MNDF headquarters.

Clashes at artificial beach

On the night of February 6, demonstrators from the ‘December 23 coalition’ of eight political parties of the then-opposition were facing off supporters of the MDP at the artificial beach, following three weeks of opposition protests that saw attacks on journalists of the state broadcaster MNBC and MDP-aligned Raajje TV as well as vandalism of a minister’s residence.

The HRCM report contended that the violence that took place on February 6 at the artificial beach area was triggered by an “unlawful” order directly from President Nasheed for riot police to withdraw from the protest zone.

The commission noted that article 6(d) of the Police Act clearly states that the police must maintain safety and public order while article 6(h) states that police should maintain order at venues set up for public use or gatherings.

The order for police to withdraw from the artificial beach area was therefore in violation of the law and constitutional provisions, the HRCM report stated.

“[…] despite repeated advice given by the police officers on ground that it was not a good move for the police to abandon the scene, the Home Minister and several senior officers from the police ordered the police to leave the area in violation of the aforementioned clauses, which resulted in police not being able to fully carry out their duty,” the HRCM report stated.

The police eventually left the area after MNDF officers arrived at the scene, but the commission’s report claimed that the incoming military officers also retreated soon thereafter, leaving the rival protesters to throw stones at each other for 15 minutes.

“Despite article 7(b) of Maldives National Defence Force Act setting provisions to defend and protect the Maldives’ independence and sovereignty, as well as protecting the national interests of the country, the MNDF officers at the order of the president, left the scene even when it was evident that the tensions between the two protesting group would give rise to violence,” the report stated.

HRCM noted that the MNDF failed to take adequate measures to prevent the violent confrontation.

“Due to this, the protesters were dispersed after several participants got severely injured from the violence that began.  Therefore the MNDF had failed in carrying out their legal duty,” the findings stated.

The report also noted that senior police officials tried to obstruct officers who left the police headquarters at the Republic Square when they heard of the clash between the protesters.

It also claimed that the police did not take any action to confiscate items that the protesters wielded at the time, which could have been used as weapons despite officers having knowledge about it.

The commission, based on the findings, has urged the MNDF, Maldives Police Service and the Police Integrity Commission to investigate and take action against those officers who obeyed the “unlawful” order and also called on the political parties to be more responsible in carrying out their activities.

Vandalism of MDP Haruge

Based on the information collected from the members of MDP present at Haruge during the time of the alleged police vandalism, the report stated that about 30 police officers in Special Operations (SO) uniform entered into premises at a time between 12:00am to 12:30am in the early hours of February 7.

“Police entering into Haruge smashed plates, toppled a bondibai (traditional Maldivian rice pudding) buffet, overturned a pickup truck inside the premises, brought down the MDP podium and attacked one person, while another person was grappled and thrown against a wall, after which he had to seek medical assistance from ADK Hospital,” according to information provided by MDP.

The report also stated that former State Minister for Home Affairs, Mohamed ‘Monaza’ Naeem was attacked by the police, while one person present was pepper sprayed in the face as the police officers present hit another individual on the back with a chair.

The MDP, in the information given to the report, also claimed that the police had smashed the window of the Maldives Media Council office with a baton before they left the area.

Attack on Villa TV

The HRCM in its report, highlighted that private broadcaster Villa Television (VTV), owned by the now government-aligned Jumhoory Party (JP) leader Gasim Ibrahim, was attacked by two men who had attempted to set the station on fire.

“On the night of February 6, a group of people attacked Villa TV and set fire on some parts of the building and this instilled fear and chaos within the employees of the station, who had suffered psychologically,” the report stated.

The report noted that the station suffered damages to the building’s structure, as well as the broadcaster’s equipment.

The HRCM also highlighted that police, who were asked to ensure the security of the premises following previous requests, were not present when the attacks took place.

“Following the instability in Male’ and with numerous threats received to the station, the company running the station had requested assistance from the police for security and police kept guarding the premises.  However, the police officers who were to be present at the station for security purpose were not there when the attacks took place on the night of February 6,” read the report.

The HRCM requested that the Maldives Police Service and the PIC investigate the matter and take action against those found responsible.

Incidents at Republican Square on February 7

HRCM observed that after vandalising MDP Haruge, the mutinying officers headed back to the Republican Square area of the capital.

“An order was issued to all the police officers who came from artificial beach to assemble in the Republican Square in the helipad area.  Meanwhile officers who were not in uniform and those in working uniform were ordered to be present on the third floor of the police headquarters building by Deputy Commissioner of Police Ahmed Muneer,” it read.

The police who had assembled were told by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Ahmed Atheef that certain officers had disobeyed their orders and therefore should be responsible for any circumstances that were to arise from their action.

“There were claims that the police institution was falling apart because of the ongoing corruption within, including drug issues and other concerns, and that complaints over the issues were retained in the middle management which meant the police officers had to rely on the middle management.  The police officers at the scene decided not follow any unlawful orders and to demand the commissioner of police to not to take any action against officers following their actions,” read the report.

The report claimed that the police officers, when they heard the news that the MNDF were coming to arrest them, came to alert their colleagues and claimed that they were prepared to confront the military officers.

Initially the commissioner of police refused to meet the mutinying officers, but later agreed to meet them at the police barracks in Iskandhar Koshi (IK).

“When the Commissioner of Police (CP)’s secretary came and requested that the officers go to IK to meet him, the police stood up to go, but when the MNDF were instructed to go to there without their shields, arms and riot gear, the police changed their mind and demanded the commissioner of police to meet them at the Republican Square,” the report claimed.

Police who had given information to the report claimed that the officers were exhausted and very hungry after the continuous duty from the night of February 6, adding they could only go to toilet with an authorized officer.

At about 06:08am, President Mohamed Nasheed arrived to Republican Square to talk to the mutinying officers.

The report claimed that Nasheed had told the officers that they had committed a “very despicable act” and to hand themselves over to MNDF, but the officers responded saying “no sir!”

Nasheed later left the area and went inside Bandaara Koshi (BK), the MNDF barracks.

At 8:00am, police in the report claimed while they were reciting the police oath, a group of protesters with metal rods and wooden sticks came barging into republican square chanting “arrest Baaghees (rebels)”.

They claimed that in the group of protesters, MDP MPs including MP Eva Abdulla, MP Ahmed Easa and MP Mohamed Shifaz were present.

“When the group entered into the Republican Square, police confronted the group with their battons and claimed that when the violence arose, confrontations were going on even between civilian groups,” read the report.

The HRCM said the constitution, in article 46, stated that a person could be arrested only if they are found committing a crime; there was valid reason to believe they may commit a crime, there were evidence that a suspect had committed a crime or a court order had been issued approving such an action.

“…but the MNDF under the direct order of the president tired to arrest police officers who assembled at the Republican Square under the order of senior officials of police,” the report highlighted, implying that Nasheed’s order was unlawful.

The report highlighted that the situation escalated because of Nasheed’s alleged unlawful orders and because of it, a lot of civilians and police officers suffered injuries of varying nature.

Raiding of MNBC

At about 6:00am, the HRCM said were rumours were circulating that anti-government protesters were planning on entering the offices of state broadcaster, the Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC), to take over the station.

The report claimed that on the night of February 6, a group of civilians with batons and sticks who had previously been in the MDP Haruge area were inside the MNBC offices, claiming to be on guard for an impending raid from the mutinying police and anti-government protesters.

Police officers arrived to the station in the morning of February 7, but were attacked from the civilians present, who were claiming to be handling the security of the station.

“Confrontations took place between police, who came in a pickup truck to MNBC building, and the civilians.  The civilians attacked the police with ground chili and other objects, including wooden sticks and stones, which forced the police to leave,” the report read.

According to the report, the police attempted to take over the station twice, succeeding the third time when they came along with several civilians who were presumed to be anti-government protesters.

It also claimed that the civilians who entered into the premises used foul language towards the employees of the station, with one civilian quoted by the report stating; “you’ve spread enough lies”.

The report claimed that the first person to enter the newsroom was a civilian with a metal rod, who entered the room and ordered all the staff to leave. However, the police later entered and told staff that they were present, but not to attack any employees.

People who entered into the MNBC offices then ordered staff to change the station’s feed to private broadcaster VTV’s feed.

“A person who claimed to be the representative of the vice president, along with a person representing the opposition came to the station and said that ‘from now onwards there will be no MNBC and the station would now be called TVM,’ and the name was changed following the demand,” read the report.

The HRCM, in the report, requested that police and the Police Integrity Commission look into the unlawful actions carried out by both the civilians and the police officers.

Alleged attempt to lynch Nasheed

Following remarks made on April 11 during a parliament committee meeting held with the members of HRCM, several MPs posed questions to the HRCM to determine whether they had knowledge that the opposition had plans on “lynching” Nasheed on the day his government was toppled.

Following the remarks, the HRCM in its report stated that it had questioned the police, the MNDF and Nasheed’s bodyguards.

The report also claimed that it had analysed statements that Nasheed gave to media after his resignation, however it said that no information from Nasheed was included in the report as he did not provide a statement.

Nasheed’s bodyguards in the report claimed that there was no threat posed to Nasheed’s life or any of his family members.

“When people call for the resignation of the president, it is not deemed to be a threat to his life, and it was not a situation where any extra measures have to be taken and if he had wanted to go out, it could have been arranged.  If the president sees a threat posed to him, the people whom he should first inform are his bodyguards, but the president had never said anything about a threat,” read the report.

The report added that the president had asked the MNDF officer if his family were safe, to which the officers replied that the family was safe and bodyguards were with them for protection from any impending harm.

“When Nasheed went to the Presidents Office from the MNDF barracks [to resign], there were a large crowd of people gathered near the car chanting disapproval of him, and some of the people in the crowd threw cigarette butts towards his car but despite how bad the situation was, Nasheed would have been easily transferred safely to anywhere he wished to go, and the MNDF officers had made way within the crowd gathered for his car to safely pass,” it read.

The report also stated that some military officers who had rebelled had “smacked” his car while he was being taken to the President’s Office on several occasions, but it was still a safe situation.

It also said that the President’s Office, when Nasheed arrived, appeared to be calm, with no signs of unrest inside the building at all.

“The commission finds in the investigation that following the obeying of orders given by President Mohamed Nasheed against the constitution, the international conventions, the police and military act by senior officials of the MNDF and Police, the chain of command among the police and military was broken, several MNDF and police officers and civilians got injured and large amount of public property was damaged.  Several rights were also compromised.

“The investigation also finds that there was no threat posed to President Mohamed Nasheed while he was in the MNDF Barracks on the day of February 7,” the HRCM report concluded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Security forces did not take “sufficient measures” to control Addu City unrest: HRCM

Security forces did not take “sufficient measures” to control the unrest in Addu City on February 8 as damage to private and public property could have been “minimised” if police and army carried out their duties, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) concluded in its investigative report (Dhivehi) released publicly this week.

On February 8, a brutal police crackdown on supporters of the formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) sparked riots across the country, with police officers forced off many islands while police stations and courts were burnt down in the southern atolls.

Following reports of police brutality and rumours of the death of a protester in Male’, police stations, police vehicles and the police training academy in Gan, as well as court houses, were set ablaze in Addu City. Addu is an MDP-stronghold and the second most populated area in the Maldives after the capital Male’.

Concluding its report on the events of February 8, the HRCM recommended that the Maldives Police Service (MPS), Police Integrity Commission (PIC) and Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) should investigate the failure to contain the unrest and take legal action against security service personnel who were deemed negligent or responsible for the inaction.

MPS and PIC should also “immediately investigate” allegations of torture in custody and inhumane treatment of detainees from Addu City and take action against the responsible police officers, the HRCM recommended.

In addition, the commission stated that legal action should be taken against police officers who were negligent in providing medical treatment to detainees as well as against officers who “violated the dignity of private households and infringed upon the rights of residents” during the arrest of suspects from their homes.

Moreover, the HRCM recommended providing “training and information on not committing cruel or inhumane acts during arrests or in all interactions with those detained at various stages of investigations.”

The report concluded that the unrest in Addu City “caused fear among citizens and deprived them of a number of rights” while “irreparable damages” to police stations, property and court buildings posed “serious obstacles to provision of many basic services.”

The commission stated that it received complaints of torture and inhumane treatment of detainees in the wake of the unrest and widespread arson, noting that fundamental rights of those arrested were not protected “in an ideal manner”.

“Signs of torture”

In its concluding observations, the HRCM noted that 17 people were treated for varying degrees of injuries caused during the unrest in Addu City. The injuries included a fractured bone and half-inch deep head wound.

During a visit to a detention center in Addu City, the HRCM team observed “signs of torture” on the bodies of 10 detainees who alleged mistreatment, including bruises and wounds on most of them as well as a two-inch deep gash on the shoulder of one detainee.

The team also observed “signs of a cigarette burn on the soles of the feet of one detainee.”

Five to six detainees were kept in cells with a capacity for two inmates, the HRCM noted. Detainees in Hulhudhoo were kept handcuffed in the police station’s sitting room, the commission found, adding that the cuffs were only removed for trips to the toilet.

The HRCM investigative team in Addu City corroborated allegations by the detainees that police officers covered their bodies in ash. The commission noted that several detainees were not treated for injuries despite being taken to the Hithadhoo Regional Hospital on February 11.

Moreover, the detainees alleged that in addition to using obscene language in front of family members during their arrests, police officers threatened to kill and torture them and damage their houses in retaliation.

Based on its findings, the HRCM concluded that police actions towards detainees in Addu City following the unrest of February 8 were in violation of constitutional protections as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

However, the HRCM found that rumours of detainees being abused on coast guard vessels were unfounded as there was no evidence to support the claims.

The commission also took note of serious damage to state assets and property – including court documents – as well as personal belongings of police officers, recommending that the state identify and compensate the officers.

Following investigations of arson by the police, the Prosecutor General’s Office pressed terrorism charges against more than 60 individuals from Addu City, including an MDP MP and a councillor.  However, charges have not been pressed against any police officer to date.

On May 30, the PIC issued a press statement revealing that a case against Staff Sergeant Ali Ahmed was forwarded for prosecution after the commission obtained video footage of the accused officer striking an MDP protester while he was on the ground.  It is unclear if the case been filed at the Criminal Court.

Responding to allegations by the MDP on August 15 that the commission was “deliberately delaying” releasing its findings to the public for “political interests”, the HRCM issued a press release stating that its investigation into human rights violations on February 8 was “not an investigation that was initiated following a case filed to the commission” but rather a “self-initiated investigation”.

The commission also claimed that the report had been sent to the relevant authorities on May 28, and that it had additionally shared “necessary information” with the public during a press conference on July 18.

Violence in Addu City

In a press conference on February 10, former President Mohamed Nasheed claimed that police and military were “ransacking Addu City.”

Nasheed claimed that police were working together with members of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), who were “dragging people out from their homes and asking them if they are MDP or PPM. If they say MDP, they are spraying them with pepper, beating them and arresting them.”

Minivan News was contacted by a man, identifying himself as an MDP supporter, who claimed to have been “arrested and beaten” on Hithadhoo in Addu City, at 1:30pm on February 9.

He alleged that he was targeted because the Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) in Addu sent a list of people who had participated in protests to the police.

He was taken from his house with his family: “They threw my sister like a dog, and said all kinds of very bad words to my parents.”

He was taken to Gan with 33 others where the station had been burned.

“They poured petrol around us and said: ‘We will burn you, we can do anything because no one knows where are you are and no one will come to save you.'”

The military and police members allegedly removed some peoples’ clothes, sprayed them with pepper spray, and made them all “dance like dolls. They were doing it for their own entertainment, smiling and laughing.”

On February 11, Al Jazeera reported allegations of “savage beatings” by the police and custodial abuse in Addu City with footage of injuries exhibited by victims.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)