Category: Politics

Juvenile Court sentences 17 year-old boy to four months in prison for kissing girl

Additional reporting by JJ Robinson

The Juvenile Court has sentenced a 17 year-old boy to four months in prison after he kissed a 16 year-old girl in a court waiting room.

The girl was sentenced to four months house arrest.

The sentences were given after the boy was brought to court for a remand hearing in an ongoing drugs case, and kissed the girl who was in the waiting room. The pair were convicted for indecent behaviour and contempt of court for kissing on court premises.

“The boy was taken out of where those in custody are kept to the general waiting area, and walked right up to a girl standing there and kissed her in public. We found the girl to be 16 years of age,” a Juvenile Court official told Minivan News on condition of anonymity.

The official said although the girl involved in the matter had been sentenced to four months under house arrest, the court had ruled to delay implementation of the sentence for three years as this was her first offence. If the girl did not commit repeat offences of a similar nature in the next three years, the sentence against her would be annulled, the official said.

The four months would be added to the boy’ s drug sentence, the official added.

Harsh sentencing

Belying the country’s reputation as a luxury honeymoon destination, Maldivian courts issue harsh sentences for sexual offences.

In February 2013 a 15-year-old rape victim was sentenced to 100 lashes and eight months of house arrest, for a separate offence of fornication.

The girl had given birth to a baby in June 2012, which was discovered buried in the outdoor shower area of her home. Her stepfather was later charged with child sexual abuse, possession of pornographic materials and committing premeditated murder.

Following global outrage and a two-million strong petition threatening a tourism boycott by online activist group Avaaz.org, the girl’s sentence was overturned in the High Court on appeal.

Meanwhile in July 2013 the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) – the judiciary’s watchdog body – rejected the recommendation of its own subcommittee calling for the suspension of Supreme Court Judge Ali Hameed.

Multiple leaked videos circulating on social media showed the judge fornicating with unidentified foreign women in a Colombo hotel room.

The JSC declined to suspend the judge, citing “lack of evidence”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

‘Al Andalus’ speech did not violate broadcasting code of ethics: Broadcasting Commission

The Broadcasting Commission has ruled that the Maldives Broadcasting Corporation (MBC)’s televising of a sermon by Jamiyyathul Salaf preacher Sheikh Adam Shameem Ibrahim did not violate any regulations.

The MBC’s chairman Ibrahim Umar Manik along with members of the Broadcasting Commission were summoned before Parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee, following complaints by MPs of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) that the sermon infringed the rights of the party’s presidential candidate.

“We definitely do not consider [televising the sermon] as anti-campaigning against a particular candidate using religion. [But] around 11:35pm, because his talk was changing a little, we stopped the live [broadcasting],” Manik told the committee.

In a brief statement the Broadcasting Commission declared today that the state broadcaster had not violated the broadcasting code of ethics by airing the sermon.

In the sermon, titled ‘Al Andalus’, Sheikh Shameem drew comparisons between the Maldives and factors he claimed led to the collapse of the medieval Islamic state that occupied much of Spain, Portugal, Andorra and southern France.

“In the struggle among political parties to come to power, we are seeing dangerous parallels with the real reasons why Andalus fell: seeking help from non-Muslim leaders, bringing in their power and companies to our country. It is not prohibited to have non-Muslim labourers, but if we let any non-Muslim entities exert their power, even in business, over Muslims in our land, that is the end of us,” Shameem said.

“Some people tell us that despite supporting a certain politician, their faith cannot be changed, although they say they know [the politician] does not believe in Allah. I am very happy that there are people with such strong faith among us. It is indeed an extraordinary man who can hold onto his faith while being with a kafir, an infidel who commits sinful acts and uses intoxicating substances.

“However, he used to say there will be no way any other religion can be practised here, but his tune has changed. Today he says that despite churches being built, his faith will personally not change. That people of other religions should also be able to live here freely and be granted rights as Islam is a peaceful, just and caring religion. This is very true, but what he wants is a horrible result. He wants to challenge Allah about the justice in our religion.

“This country will have a dark future if we allow the police and army to be exposed to the training sessions given by non-Muslims, outright kafirs, in the guise of professional development. The kafirs will then have an opportunity to make the police and army hate Islam,” he preached.

Read the translation of the sermon

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Scattered protests erupt in capital after MDP declares continuous protests against election postponement

Additional reporting by Zaheena Rasheed and Mariyath Mohamed

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has declared it will hold continuous protests after the Supreme Court’s sudden decision on Monday (September 23) evening to indefinitely postpone the second round of the presidential election.

The Supreme Court’s controversial injunction came just hours after parliament passed a resolution calling on all state institutions to ensure that the second round of the presidential election be held as scheduled.

Scattered protests involving hundreds of people erupted across the capital city of Male’ after the MDP’s National Council unanimously supported a motion calling for demonstrations until the Supreme Court allowed the elections to proceed.

During the meeting, MDP presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed, who obtained 45.45 percent of the votes in the first round of polling on September 7, urged the Elections Commission (EC) to disregard the Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of parliament’s resolution and continue with election preparations.

“The Chief Justice has to find a solution. I call on the Chief Justice to uphold his duties,” Nasheed said, asking police to support the EC and the military “to keep us safe”.

Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid confirmed to Minivan News that he was pepper sprayed by police while several MDP MPs, including Ali Azim and Mohamed ‘Bonda’ Rasheed, were reportedly taken away by police. Rasheed was reportedly released while Azim was taken into police custody.

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef could not confirm the number of arrests, whether pepper spray was used, or provide further details at time of press.

Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) spokesperson Colonel Abdul Raheem confirmed to Minivan News that military personnel had been deployed around the military’s headquarters following the Supreme Court’s election injunction, in line with “standard procedure”.

Demonstrators initially tried to enter Republic Square before being pushed back by a dozen police and being barricaded near Fareedhee Magu. Minivan News observed a small number of police equipped with riot gear on standby nearby.

A group protesters were observed hanging a large pair of white underpants on a police barricade, a reference to recently-leaked videos of Supreme Court judge Ali Hameed apparently fornicating with unidentified foreign women in a Colombo hotel room.

“This is not acceptable. The people’s voice cannot be blatantly rejected by four disgraced judges,” said 33 year-old Ahmed Thahseen, a demonstrator near Fareedhee Magu.

“I’m not going home until the Supreme Court gives a ruling and lets people have the due election,” 23 year-old protester Aishath Shaffa told Minivan News.

“Let’s see how that disgrace of a politican Gasim runs his businesses when the electorate goes on strike. The people are what matters. We are everything and the Supreme Court Needs to realise that,” said 52 year-old protester Fathimath Shareefa.

“The Supreme Court order is an absolutely unacceptable act. After all the work we have done, the protests, the campaigns, we won’t watch it all go to waste,” said Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed, the MDP’s member on the Commission of National Inquiry (CONI), who joined the protesters.

“If you look at all the statements given at CONI which have since been leaked, you will see the injustice that people have faced. We are being pushed back to square one all over again and the people refuse to sit back and take it,” he added. “We are here filled with hope. There is another force and I believe truth will prevail.”

The controversial injunction

Jumhooree Party (JP) presidential candidate and resort tycoon, Gasim Ibrahim, initially filed a case in the Supreme Court seeking annulment of the election results after he narrowly missed a place in the run-off with 24.07 percent of the vote, declaring at a rally that “God Willing, Gasim will be President on November 11″.

The case was intervened by the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and Attorney General Azima Shukoor, both of which sided against the Elections Commission.

The EC has defended itself arguing that not only had the JP had failed to substantiate or give the specifics of any evidence of fraudulent voting submitted against it, but even if this evidence were to be proven beyond reasonable doubt it was still insufficient to affect the outcome of the first round of election results.

The commission also pointed to unanimous positive assessments of the first round polls by local and international election observers, including the Commonwealth, US, UN, and Transparency Maldives.

In response President Mohamed Waheed’s government called on international groups to “help, not hinder the state institutions in exercising their constitutional duties”, while JP running mate and lawyer Dr Hassan Saeed declared in court that election observers “do not carry much weight”.

Monday evening’s sudden injunction stated that it had been discussed by all judges on the seven member bench, before being signed by Justice Abdulla Saeed, Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed, Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla, and Justice Dr Abdulla Didi.

“Based on Article 144 (b), we order the Elections Commission and other relevant state institutions to delay the second round of the presidential election scheduled for 28 September 2013 until the Supreme Court issues a verdict in this case,” read the Supreme Court order.

Lawyer for the Elections Commission, former Attorney General Husnu al Suood, tweeted that the interim order by the Supreme Court “has no legal basis, and violates the constitution.”

MDP lawyer Hissan Hussein also said the Supreme Court’s order was unconstitutional, stating that the article 144 (b) it had invoked concerned the Supreme Court’s capacity to delay lower court verdicts, not elections.

Meanwhile, article 111(a) of the constitution stipulates “that a President shall be elected by over fifty percent of the votes. If no candidate obtains such majority, a run-off election must be held within twenty one days after the first election.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court issues injunction indefinitely delaying election run-off

The Maldives Supreme Court has issued an injunction delaying the second round of the presidential election until it has finished looking into alleged discrepancies in the first round.

The second round had been scheduled for this coming Saturday – September 28.

“Based on Article 144 (b), we order the Elections Commission and other relevant state institutions to delay the second round of the presidential election scheduled for 28 September 2013 until the Supreme Court issues a verdict in this case,” read the Supreme Court injunction.

The ruling was discussed by all judges on the seven member bench, before being signed by Justice Abdulla Saeed, Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed, Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla, and Justice Dr Abdulla Didi.

The decision came today just hours after Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) members held a demonstration outside the Supreme Court, brandishing stills from one of the numerous sex-tapes allegedly involving Justice Hameed.

The MDP – the party with the most votes in the first round, with 45.45 percent – reconvened the People’s Majlis in order to push for the reconstitution of the Supreme Court bench.

“We will not allow a courthouse that consists of some disgraced judges who face allegations of lewd conduct to abrogate the will of the people and disrupt the constitution,” the MDP said in a statement last week.

Despite chaotic scenes inside the Majlis yesterday, the party was able to push through a motion today calling for the second round to go ahead as scheduled.

MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor has said he was not surprised by the decision.

“The Supreme Court has gone against all common sense, international opinion and the majority of the country without any evidence to do so,” he said.

Ghafoor added that any indefinite postponement of the second round vote was unrealistic, while claiming the decision had been made by the court without any real evidence to support its decision.

The MDP said it was too early for the party to announce how it would seek to move forward on the basis of the court’s verdict today, though he said it would “likely involve direct action.”

A meeting of the party’s National Council has been announced for 10:30pm at Male’ City Hall.

Constitutional?

The court accepted the case six days ago, after the Jumhooree Party (JP) – which placed third in the first round – filed a case to annul the vote, alleging multiple discrepancies and fraud.

In a week’s worth of hearings, the complainant has still to produce concrete evidence, with the Election Commission’s lawyer – former Attorney General – Husnu Al Suood likening the case to a “fishing expedition”, alleging the JP was hoping to file another lawsuit based on any evidence collected from the current case.

The JP has rejected any assumption that an indefinite postponement to the country’s election may lead to political instability in the nation.

JP Deputy Leader Dr Ibrahim Didi said that ensuring a free and fair election was ultimately the most important factor in assuring stability within the Maldives and a “sustainable democracy” going forward.

“Political stability depends on political leaders’ actions, reactions and their party’s activities,” he said.

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen, who was set to stand against MDP candidate Mohamed Nasheed in the run-off vote, told Minivan News there was “nothing unconstitutional” with the court verdict.

“The Elections Commission got the opportunity to argue out their case and establish the credibility of the process,” he told Minivan News.

Yameen, who came second in the first round vote with 25 percent, said the country “should elect” a president soon.

“There’s time for that.  In [the presidential election of] 2008, voting was held on October 28,” he said, arguing that a postponement would not lead to any form of political instability.

Article 144 (b) of the constitution, titled ‘powers in constitutional matters’ states that, when deciding a constitutional matter within its jurisdiction, a court may make any order that is “just and equitable”, including:

“An order suspending the declaration of invalidity (of a statute, regulation or action due to inconsistency with the Constitution) for any period and on any conditions, to allow the competent authority to correct the defect.”

Elections Commissioner Fuwad Thowfeek previously told Minivan News that the constitutional timetable for the transfer of power could not be met should the run-off be delayed.

“120 days before the end of the current president’s term a presidential election must be held. If there is no election then the [democratic] constitution, presidential and general election law will not be satisfied,” he said.

Despite the vehement criticism from sections of the media, civil society and the JP, the conduct and capability of the EC has been universally lauded by international observers.

After Commonwealth Special Envoy, Sir Donald McKinnon, this weekend joined in calls for the September 28 run-off to go ahead as schedule, the Maldives Foreign Office warned international observers to “help, not hinder” the state’s institutions.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Busting black magic on Guraidhoo

Aishath Moomina, a janitress at Kaafu Atoll Guraidhoo Island School, was attending to her usual early morning sweeping duties on September 3, when she found a kihaa (young coconut) with Arabic inscriptions buried outside the school gates.

Only a few days remained for the first round of presidential polls and ballot booths were to be set up at the school. That very same day, Moomina started to feel uncharacteristically tired and her skin started to burn.

“That’s when I knew it was black magic. This [black magic] happens every time there is an election,” she told Minivan News.

Guraidhoo, located 30 kilometers south of Malé and home to the country’s only home for people with special needs, is now at the centre of an election-related fanditha or black magic controversy. Since the discovery of the kihaa, various items with Qura’nic verses have been found in Guraidhoo School and throughout the island.

As a run-off election scheduled between the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) approaches on September 28, “cursed objects” have popped up in Fuvahmulah, Hithadhoo, Kudahuvadhoo and Velidhoo Islands.

Though the first round of polls went well, Moomina said that several students have had fainting spells, seizures, and have started to exhibit symptoms such as incoherent muttering, fainting, uncontrollable crying and tiredness.

On Sunday (September 22), Minivan News went to Guraidhoo Island to speak to residents on fanditha’s effect on the vote, finding a wide-spread deep belief in the supernatural, which combined with a tense presidential poll, has increased paranoia within the community.

This has spurred a group of men to actively patrol the two schools where polling booths will be placed and conduct a drive to undo the effects of fanditha.

Vote madness

The intense rivalry between political parties is evident on Guraidhoo’s narrow streets. The MDP’s yellow, the PPM’s pink and Jumhooree Party’s red flags fight for space, while political party campaign offices blast campaign songs at ear-drum shattering volume. Many islanders spoke of family members falling out and long-time neighbors refusing to speak to one another due to differences in political ideologies.

“There is a lot of turmoil in the island. People have gone mad for the vote,” said Faristha, a 47-year-old woman who discovered three Qurans buried in the lagoon. She believes the three Qurans buried in Guraidhoo’s lagoons are powerful black magic, as tradition dictates that the Quran only be disposed of in the open ocean or fast-flowing rivers.

“Black magic exists. If you believe in Allah and the prophet, then you must believe in djinns and black magic. The Quran says they exist. No man in their sane mind would throw away the Qurans like that,” she said waving her arms in anger.

Black magic is a crime punishable by death under the Islamic Shariah. While there are no legal sanctions or penalties against black magic in the written laws and regulations, the Maldives Police Services had arrested MDP activists and raided MDP protest camps on suspicion of black magic following the controversial transfer of power of February 2012.

With the proliferation of cursed objects, the Islamic Ministry released a sermon on Friday proclaiming black magic to be among the most evil of sins.

Black magic busters

Hassan Shuzeym, 35, is an artist, a caretaker at Guraidhoo’s Home for People with Special Needs, and now leader of the drive to undo black magic. Sitting at one of Guraidhoo’s newly opened guesthouses, the slim, dark-skinned Shuzeym told us how he organizes a 20-man patrol from dusk til dawn in order to ensure cursed objects are no longer buried at the schools.

A culture of performing black magic to coerce love or for personal gain had always existed on the island, Shuzeym told us over cigarettes and coffee. But black magic to influence votes on a large scale was new, he said.

“This magic is being done to change people’s hearts about their votes. But it’s only affecting the students who study at the school. We want to minimize the harm caused to people from the black magic.”

Shuzeym and his friends dig up objects and perform counter spells to cancel out their magic.

“In places where it is too dangerous to dig them out, we read surahs (chapters) of the Quran and sprinkle water on the area to cancel out their powers,” he said.

When asked how they knew where to look for cursed objects, Shuzeym told us with a mysterious look, “I can only tell you it is not with the help of humans.”

With their black-magic busting work, patrolling and observation teams, Shuzeym is confident the vote would be safe from all external influences.

As we left the guesthouse, we encountered a young MDP supporter who stopped us. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the young man told us he and his friends had performed one of the “black magic acts” that had created a furor in the island.

“I think the coconut is a fake, I believe black magic exists, but that coconut didn’t look real. I think it is by those who oppose us to intimidate us, so we spilled lots of water around all the entrances around both schools, just for a joke. We did not think anyone would take us seriously,” he said.

However, upon discovering water at the entrances, the janitors at Guraidhoo School stopped all students from entering the school premises until the school’s headmaster arrived and permitted them to do so.

“In the end, even if the coconut is fake, it has only been positive. We have more security for the vote,” the young man added.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court continues collecting statements from Jumhooree Party witnesses

The Supreme Court today (September 23) continued taking statements from witnesses produced by the Jumhoree Party (JP), in the party’s ongoing bid to annul the first round of presidential elections over allegations of discrepancies and irregularities in the voting process.

The Supreme Court commenced direct examination and cross examination of witnesses during last Sunday’s hearings, during which three witnesses produced by the JP gave their testimonies to the court.

During the hearing Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz announced that the JP had requested to produce 20 witnesses to give evidence in court to support their case.

Due to a request made by the JP’s lawyers on Sunday, the statements of all witnesses were taken with special arrangements made to ensure their anonymity. The witnesses gave their statements in a separate room and their voices were distorted to protect their identities.

The first witness produced by the JP told the court that his friend working as an election official had informed him that his younger sister – who lived in Malaysia and never went to vote –  had her name on the list in Male’ and which showed that she had voted.

During re-examination, EC Lawyer Husnu Al Suood asked the witness whether he knew which ballot box in which the alleged discrepancy occurred, but he refused to answer and told the judge that he would give the details “in writing” to the court.

When Hisaan Hussain, the lawyer from the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) which has intervened in the case, questioned the witness as to whether he was affiliated with any political party, the witness, despite initial reluctance, said that he supported the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).

The second witness, a female, told the court that she was not able to vote in the elections because EC officials had told her that her National Identity Card (NIC) number did not match with the one that was on the commission’s database. The witness reiterated that despite turning up with an official document from the Department of National Registration, EC officials refused to allow her to vote.

The third witness, a police officer who was on security duty during the time of polling, told the court that he had witnessed elections officials packing up all the paperwork on the ballot counting table – including the original ballot papers – and putting them into a cardboard box, after the officials announced the provisional results of that box.

The police officer said that once the officials had packed the box, they took it away in two taxis. He said that although he had expected them to head to Dharubaaruge, the officials instead went to the secretariat of the commission located in Maafannu.

When the EC lawyer asked the witness what his duty of the day had been, the police officer told the court that he was ordered to follow the EC officials who had left in the taxi, but did not reveal who had given him this order.

When the MDP lawyer questioned the officer as to what distance had he been from the ballot box, the officer said that he was just approximately 15 feet away from the ballot box, 85 feet closer than the 100 foot distance police officers are regulated to maintain from the box.

A fourth witness, a female, told the court that when she contacted the EC to re-register for the run-off election, the EC officials had told her that she had already been registered to vote in Male even though she claimed that she had neither re-registered of voted during the first round of elections. She also contested that the EC official had told her that she had voted in Male.

Another witness told the court that when he had gone to vote, the list which the EC officials working at the ballot box were using showed his name being highlighted as if he had already voted in the election.

However, the witness claimed that following protests and complaints, the officials later allowed him to vote after manually writing down his name and details on the printed list.

During today’s hearing the court was not able to collect statements from two witnesses whose statements had to be collected through telephone.

Each of the two witnesses had appeared in their respective island’s Magistrate Courts to give their witness through telephone. However due to poor reception the court was not able to obtain their statements.

The Chief Justice said that testimonies of the two witnesses would be taken in the next hearing.

After the collection of evidences by witnesses, the JP Lawyer Dr Hassan Saeed requested the Supreme Court give it the party the opportunity to present two new documents of evidence, which included a new list of fraudulent voters and a copy of the leaked police intelligence report currently being circulated around social media.

In response to the request, the judges said that the leaked document could only be accepted after discussing the matter with the other judges. However Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham – who was representing the state, which had also intervened into the case – requested the court for permission to present the original intelligence report to the court, citing that the one that had been leaked on social media had been a part of the original report.

In concluding the hearing today, Chief Justice Faiz said that during the next hearing that the court would try to obtain the statements of the two witnesses, whose statements the court was not able to collect today.

Faiz did not state the date when the next hearing would be scheduled.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: Elections Commission Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek

The Maldives’ Elections Commission (EC) is preparing for the presidential election’s second round run-off amidst the Jumhooree coalition’s refusal to accept its first round defeat, triggering a barrage of judicial, political, media and civil society actions against the commission.

The Jumhooree Party (JP) – in conjunction with the Attorney General (AG) and the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) – has led a Supreme Court case to annul the election, whilst the party’s High Court case against the commission was conducted in tandem. In response to the JP’s vote fraud claims the police barricaded the EC secretariat and searched its garbage, while multiple protests and threats have targeted  the commission and its members and local media has broadcast unsubstantiated information about the commission and electoral process.

The EC has emphatically dismissed allegations of vote rigging as “baseless and unfounded”, highlighting its transparency and extensive preparations – conducted with international support – to ensure a free and fair polling process. International election observers have unanimously commended the first round of polling, calling for losing parties to accept defeat and allow the second round to proceed as scheduled.

With the September 28 run-off less than a week away, Minivan News discusses some of the challenges faced by the commission with Fuwad Thowfeek, Chairperson of the country’s first independent Elections Commission (EC).

Supreme Court case

Leah R Malone: Considering the politicised nature of the Supreme Court – as highlighted by the UN Special Rapporteur for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul – is there a risk the Supreme Court’s order to hand over the EC’s only original copy of the voter list could lead to it being tampered with? Specifically, given the lack of material evidence or witnesses presented against the EC thus far, is there a potential opportunity for names to be added to the original voter list to substantiate the JP’s claims?

Fuwad Thowfeek: Thursday (September 19) the Supreme Court ordered the Elections Commission provide the original voter list, so we’ve been making color copies. EC members sat down and discussed [the situation], the constitution and presidential election laws, as well as met with our legal team. Since it’s a Supreme Court case they can order anything be given, so it’s best to follow that order [and provide the list].

However our legal team advised us to take very accurate color copies of each page before sending the originals. We are keeping the duplicates and in case any changes are made [to the originals] we will very easily be able to recognise them. It is the best solution we have at the moment.

As of about 3:45pm or 4:00pm Friday (September 20) we sent 120 lists to the Supreme Court. 200 will be sent Saturday and the day after the remaining lists. We are sending the original documents as the copies are being made.

LRM: If the Supreme Court rules to annul the presidential election’s first round, what will the Elections Commission do?

FT: That’s a big question because according to the constitution and even elections law there is nothing said [about whether the Supreme Court can take that action]. We have to ask the Supreme Court to give a timetable or something [for the presidential election]. Other than that there’s nothing we can do.

We won’t be able to fulfill the time requirement set forth in the constitution [if the run-off isn’t held on schedule]. 120 days before the end of the current president’s term a presidential election must be held. If there is no election then the [democratic] constitution, presidential and general election law will not be satisfied.

The strangest, funniest thing is that they are still not able to identify a single person who has voted fraudulently. For example, they have not been able to show anyone who is younger than 18 has voted, but they have been claiming many underage people fraudulently voted. If there are many [that voted fraudulently] they should be able to verify and show at least one person. They are also claiming that dead people voted, and when they submitted the list of seven names to the High Court, the court gave us the list to check. So we reviewed the voter registry and voter list, found phone numbers on record for four people and when we spoke with them, the individuals verified they were indeed alive and had voted. We are sure we will be able to find the remaining three people.

The other thing is if a dead person voted, someone should be able to show that this is the person who voted under the deceased’s name. Also, the JP is claiming 50,000 fraudulent votes have been added. The strangest thing is none of these ballots have been identified. No ballot boxes were found to have more votes cast than voters registered. Only one ballot box – located on a resort island – was found to have exactly 100 percent voter turnout. The average voter turnout was 88.44 percent nationwide.

LRM: Has Attorney General Azima Shukoor been in contact with the Elections Commission?

FT: That was another surprise to us actually. She has not been in contact with us and then suddenly appeared in the Supreme Court case. The funniest thing is the AG is supposed to support government institutions, but in this case the AG is speaking against the EC. She is supporting JP without evidence or witnesses, just saying there were errors in the voters list, but is not able to cite what those specific errors are because she has not seen [or requested to see] the list.

When I heard the AG was going to participate in the Supreme Court case, I thought it would be on behalf of the EC and she would tell the court [the vote rigging allegations are] simply not possible and the court cannot give any room to cancel the first round and re-hold it. [However,] when the AG came out and spoke against the EC – just like any political party supporter of JP – we released a press statement stating that the commission regrets this action by the AG. Both the AG and the JP have not provided any evidence or witnesses to support their allegations.

The government has spent over MVR 30 million (US $1,949,310) on the first round, there is no budget remaining [to hold both rounds again]. If it’s difficult for the government to provide the additional budget for the second round, there will be so many difficulties if the [results are annulled and] voting rounds are held again.

[Prior to the Supreme Court case] we hadn’t had much contact with the office of the AG or the AG. Last year after the change of government, in March or April, the EC met with the AG and spoke about changes that were required in the election laws, but nothing has materialised so far. She told us at the time that there were so many laws requiring revision.

Before the end of the last Supreme Court session, the Chief Justice ordered the EC to submit the original copy of the voters’ list. They are probably going to check the list to see whether people below the age of 18 voted. If they want to check for that, it’s fine. We are 100 percent sure they will not find anyone below 18 who voted.

Accessing the voter list

LRM: Following the High Court order for the EC to allow JP access to the voter list – under the guidelines determined by the commission – what were the exact protocol guidelines the EC enacted during the JP representative’s visit? What other political party representatives were present?

FT: Tuesday (September 17) the High Court ordered the EC to show the voter list to political parties. We have only one original [copy of the voters list] and had to make arrangements to follow the High Court’s order to show JP [the list], so we made the arrangements for Thursday (September 19).

This was because the EC needed time to prepare, seek advice from our legal team, and to hold a discussion meeting with our members. At the same time, arrangements for other candidates to see the voter list were also made. We invited all four political parties to send representatives to see the original voter list.

The viewing started at 10:00am. A team from JP came and GIP, but no PPM – even in court they said they did not want to see the voter list. An MDP representative came, but he said he did not want to see it.

We asked the other two – representatives from JP and GIP – what they wanted to see. Then again they wanted more people [from their parties] to come and for the EC to make copies [of the list for them]. But we couldn’t make that arrangement because we have to be very careful with our only copy [of the list], so our own official would show it to one representative at a time. There were arguments from the political party representatives [about these guidelines].

[However,] the lawyer, Dr Hassan Saeed [JP presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim’s running mate and head of JP’s legal team] said that now he does not need to look at the voter list anymore because he would prefer for the EC to hand it over to the Supreme Court.

(JP’s Legal Advisor Mohamed Haleem told Minivan News last week that the party would seek an additional High Court order for unrestricted access to the voter list).

LRM: With the ‘leaked’ police intelligence report – which the AG is citing in the Supreme Court – alleging there were “some opportunities for fraud” and “illegal voting”, the AG arguing for the Supreme Court to order the police to investigate the EC, and the police barricading and searching the EC’s garbage, do you think the police are politicised and acting against the EC?

FT: I don’t think anything will happen. I heard the AG demanded the PG issue an order to the police to investigate some of these allegations, but so far the commission has not been contacted by the police or the PG. But we don’t know anything about this. The AG should have met and spoke with the EC before making such a decision and then advising another institution [to take action].

LRM: What has been the outcome of the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC)’s investigation into Villa TV (VTV) broadcasting programmes to incite hatred and create an uprising against the EC? Have any substantive actions been taken by MBC against VTV?

FT: We don’t know about the [outcome of the] MBC investigation. They said they will be taking actions against those broadcasting untruthful content. We know that VTV has stopped broadcasting the ‘Olhuvaalee Vote Ge Namugai’ (‘fraud in the name of the vote’) programme. But for a very long time they have been showing ‘Fasmanzaru’ (‘five horizons’), where various JP political party members or supporters just talk against the EC or against the election’s first round. Although what they have to say has no substance.

Saturday or Sunday we have to send a complaint letter to MBC. Again I have called MBC’s President Mohamed Shahyb and by phone have spoken to him about ‘Fasmanzaru’ [and the unsubstantiated claims its spreading].

LRM: How will the EC provide more timely information to media during the second round run-off to avoid the confusion created by inaccurate local media reports of polling station figures during the first round?

FT: We have not yet decided. I think we need more frequent refreshing of figures and will try to have more frequent reports from the EC on the 28th. If everything does not go well it may be difficult… we may not be able to go to the Dharubaaruge [convention centre in Male’]. We will try to have better updates through the internet, but will be focusing on communicating directly with the media.

Threats and protests

LRM: The ‘National Movement’ has announced they will raise their voices in protest if the Supreme Court doesn’t rule against the EC. They are calling for the EC to be reformed – with yourself, the Vice Chair Ahmed Fayaz, and commission member Ali Mohamed Manik resigning. Have previous JP protests and planned National Movement protests caused any problems for the EC? Why are they targeting the three of you?

FT: Even JP supporters – except the 20 or 30 people shouting on the streets – have accepted the first round results and are not causing any problems.

Thursday night around 10:30pm 20 or 30 protesters came near the EC Secretariat, shouted for 30 minutes and left. They were demanding my resignation and saying ‘thief of votes’ and that type of thing, they wanted the [first round] results cancelled and a fresh election to be held. Sometimes they ask for myself and the Vice Chair to resign, sometimes different EC members, and sometimes the entire commission.

These are a few unsatisfied people paid by somebody – who has the money – but they know they’re not shouting for any solid thing. They get on a loudspeaker [and protest] after somebody asks or pays them – they are doing it for that reason alone, not based on anything reasonable. If it was a public thing then I’d be more concerned. But this is just a few people and most are not educated. They don’t know what’s going on [with the election] or how the voting process works.

There are five members of the EC and all decisions are made by the five members. [However,] the Vice Chair Fayaz, member Manik, and I are the three members interacting the most with the public, on TV etc  – that’s why they are going against us.

LRM: What kind of threats have been made against EC members and/or staff?

FT: Some of us are getting threats from unknown people. I have received SMS messages saying ‘be careful when you come out on the street, you’ll be stabbed in the stomach’. We [commission members] have security provided by the police and we move around with them.

My wife has been scared. Two times people went near our home shouting [and protesting], but the police protected our home and stopped the people from coming too near.

LRM: Do you think the MPS can provide adequate security for EC members?

FT: Yes, the MPS is fully capable. I’m sure nobody can harm me. They have to look at a distance but can’t touch me. Of that I’m fully confident, I’m not scared. I’m confidant know what I’m doing is right and I have the support of the people and the whole international community – observers and monitors. They’ve seen the electoral process [during the first round], which they have commended, praised, and complemented. I’m very happy and am moving ahead with my duties. My work cannot be stopped by a few people. I have full confidence in myself and am moving ahead.

LRM: The JP, some of their supporters, and the National Movement have claimed the EC, its members and staff are biased toward MDP – will you clarify for the public whether there is any truth in this accusation?

FT: There’s no truth to that, it’s some kind of story that some of the opponents wanted to spread. This commission, all its members and staff, do not belong to any political party or align with any political party.

We have staff who are married to people from different political parties – PPM, MDP, DRP, etc – and police officers. Staff members’ spouses may belong to a political party, but that is their own interest and has nothing to do with the duties of our staff. I have full confidence in our staff, they are very faithful to their duties and this commission and would not do anything unjust. I’m confident in my staff and that none are aligned with the MDP.

If they [a particular politician or political party] don’t get the result they want from a particular institution, they tend to claim that institution is opposition-aligned. The MDP got the best result [Nasheed secured 45.45 percent of the vote], so this time the EC is accused of being MDP aligned. If Yameen won then the EC would be accused of being PPM aligned.

In another instance, right after the change of government [in February 2012] some said the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) was PPM aligned, because most of the decisions made were more likely to the advantage of PPM. That’s just the kind of talk that happens.

Run-off preparations

LRM: What kind of support are local and international partners providing the EC for the second round? Is anything additional needed prior to the run-off scheduled for the 28th?

FT: We are getting a lot of support from international and local partners. The Commonwealth has expressed their satisfaction with the EC’s professionalism and their continued support for the commission. They will be sending another observer team for the run-off. The EU sent different observer teams – from various countries – on the 7th and will most likely send more for the 28th. Observers from Japan, Thailand, India, UK, US, and a Pakistani Elections Commissioner were present during the first round and expressed their interest in observing the second round. They will most likely send more teams for the run-off. I think they will come before the 28th to see the place, visit other islands, and see how ready we are for the second round.

Transparency Maldives sent the observers nationwide and their report praised the electoral process. The HRCM also observed the first round and praised us on our work and confirmed everything during the election went well. The Maldivian Democracy Network also expressed their support and commended the work the EC has done.

LRM: How have EC members, staff, and their families been impacted by the controversy the commission has faced since the first round? How has this impacted run-off election preparations?

FT: Right now there is very heavy work we have left to do before the 28th. We are so busy we are working 24 hours a day and the EC staff works in shifts, half are sent home to sleep when the other half report in.

For example, in addition to the 470 ballot boxes necessary for the first round, the second round will require an additional box be placed in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and two more on tourist resorts that have applied to keep ballot boxes this round.

Everyone of us has to spend so much time in the office. We go early in the morning and stay until late at night, even on weekends, while our families are alone at home. Our families suffer, but they fully support us so we can fulfill our national duty.

It’s a very difficult job but I’m lucky to have the confidence of the people and [political party] leaders – even Gasim’s close people, President Waheed and President Nasheed know me well, and the honorable Yameen and Gayoom know and trust me. Even those who speak against me only speak for political gain or just to control their supporters.

I know what I’m doing is right and everything will be fine for elections to take place the 28th. We are fully ready for the second round. If we are able to hold on until the 28th then we will know the next president of the country.

LRM: Given the barrage of judicial, political, media and civil society actions against the EC, is the electoral environment still conducive to holding a free and fair presidential election on September 28?

FT: I think on the 28th of September the second round will go ahead as we have planned and have been working toward. There has been very little or no change [in the electoral environment] that would require we make any changes to our own program. Compared to last week, this week things have very much improved. I’m very confident things will calm down.

I’ve spoken to different people [representing political parties] and the most interesting thing is even those against us in the Supreme Court, they know there was nothing wrong with the election. Gasim’s employees, senior political party members, are trying to just give him a perspective that they did so much to cover up their failure to get Gasim the required number of votes [to proceed to the run-off]. They know the cases submitted in the High Court and Supreme Court are not going to give them any recount. Nothing will come out in their favour. They just want to go as far as they can go.

A lot of energy has been wasted by everyone – their people, our people, the Supreme Court.

I’m very hopeful the country will be ready for the run-off. We cannot keep this second round [from happening on schedule]. Particularly for the benefit of the country, to maintain the peace and harmony of our home [nation], we have to hold the second round.

If we fail, we will likely face more and more problems as the time passes. It will be in the interest of the government, all political parties, and all thoughtful citizens of the country to hold the run-off. Anybody trying to obstruct the election is unpatriotic.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Parliament resolution to ‘ensure election’ passed with show of hands, amid protest by pro-government MPs

A resolution submitted by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) calling on all state institutions to ensure that the second round of the presidential election is held as scheduled was passed at an extraordinary session of parliament today, amid disorderly protests by MPs of the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and Jumhooree Party (JP).

The resolution was read out by MDP MP Ali Waheed over loud protests and whistle and horn-blowing by pro-government MPs. The special sitting – held during the ongoing recess upon request of 29 MPs – was adjourned shortly thereafter by Speaker Abdulla Shahid due to disorder in the chamber caused by PPM and JP MPs gathered in front of his desk.

When the sitting resumed at 1:00pm to vote on the resolution, PPM and JP MPs were occupying the Speaker’s chair as well as the secretariat desk. The vote was called by Speaker Shahid – surrounded by security guards – standing in front of the chamber well and passed with a show of hands.

According to MP Ali Waheed, the resolution was passed with 37 votes in favour. The MPs occupying the Speaker’s space and secretariat desk appeared not to participate in the vote.


Following the adjournment of the sitting this morning, MDP MPs alleged on social media that MP Ahmed Amir – a member of the Maldives Development Alliance (MDA), which is currently backing PPM presidential candidate MP Abdulla Yameen – poured water on and damaged the parliament sound system.

The MDP resolution adopted by parliament today meanwhile states that the second round run-off scheduled for September 28 should “not be delayed for any reason” and called for all state institutions to cooperate with the Elections Commission (EC) in adherence with constitutionally-stipulated deadlines for the presidential election.

Moreover, the resolution stated that the parliament’s security services or ‘241’ committee would oversee the actions of the police and military with regard to the second round of the presidential election to be held next Saturday.

The resolution was passed while a Supreme Court case initiated by the JP seeking the annulment of the September 7 election is ongoing, with the fifth hearing taking place today.

Chaos in the chamber

Today’s sitting took place after two previous attempts yesterday was disrupted by PPM and JP MPs who blew on whistles and a vuvuzela and gathered in front of the Speaker’s desk.

Yesterday’s sitting in the morning was adjourned after Speaker Shahid’s microphone was vandalised during the disruption.

The sitting resumed at 9:00pm but could not proceed due to similar disorder caused by PPM and JP MPs protesting in front of the Speaker’s desk.

Videos meanwhile emerged on social media showing PPM MP Abdul Raheem Abdulla using obscene language against Speaker Shahid and insulting his mother during the morning session.

Following the cancellation of the 9:00pm session, the MDP-aligned Raajje TV showed video of JP MP Ilham Ahmed, also the party’s deputy leader, take out what appeared to be pliers from his pocket and cut a cable.

Local media reported that PPM MP Abdul Raheem Abdulla and JP MP Shifaq Mufeed were injured in scuffles that broke out between pro-government and MDP MPs at last night’s sitting. The former was reportedly treated at ADK hospital last night.

Despite their apparent injuries both MPs were seen actively protesting at this morning’s session.

Speaking at a press conference last night, PPM vice presidential candidate Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed contended that the MDP was attempting to “cover up irregularities of the first round” of the presidential election on through the parliament.

PPM MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abubakur told press outside parliament today that the party believed MDP’s resolution was unlawful as it involved an ongoing court case, and suggested that the Supreme Court would rule that it was unconstitutional.

Both Dr Jameel and MP Abdul Azeez alleged that the first round of the polls was rigged in the MDP’s favour, claiming that the 95,224 votes (45.45 percent) its candidate former President Mohamed Nasheed received included fraudulent votes.

Meanwhile, in a letter to MPs published on the parliament website following the incidents last night, Speaker Shahid wrote that yesterday’s attempts to proceed with the sitting were unsuccessful due to “numerous acts in violation of the People’s Majlis’ regulations.”

“In particular, the sitting could not proceed because [computer] systems, cameras and cables in the Majlis chamber were damaged with sharp objects on a number of occasions,” the Speaker’s letter stated, expressing concern with the actions of MPs.

The Speaker added that “assault, damaging Majlis property, and intimidating Majlis staff” was “unacceptable” conduct as the parliament was an institution where disputes should be peacefully resolved through discussion and dialogue.

Meanwhile, a car in the garage of Speaker Shahid’s residence was set on fire in the early hours of Monday morning. Local media reported that the car belonged to Shahid’s brother.

Shahid told newspaper Haveeru that CCTV footage showed a man with his face covered pour petrol and set the car alight, describing it as “an act of intimidation” intended to incite political unrest.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Jumhooree Party submits three witness statements to Sunday’s Supreme Court hearing

The Supreme Court panel of seven judges has heard three witness statements submitted by the Jumhooree Coalition during Sunday’s hearing, in the party’s ongoing bid to annul the first round of polling in which it narrowly missed a place in the run-off.

The court stated that the identities of all three witnesses were to be protected and therefore only their voices – altered to make identification difficult – were heard in the court room.

The first witness – a male voice – stated that upon going to the polling station on September 7, election officials informed him that he had already cast his vote, and that his name had been marked as such on the voters registry.

He then claimed that after discussion with the election officials at the said booth, he had been allowed to cast his vote, despite the list showing he had previously voted.

The second witness – female – said that she had been unable to cast her vote as the elections officials at the polling station she had attended had said her name was not on the voters list.

When the JP’s lawyer and presidential running mate Dr Hassan Saeed asked the witness if she had registered to vote, and why or why not, she responded that she had not and that it was because she had figured “I too will need to go where everyone else at home went”.

Hassan then asked “You are saying it is because you intended to vote from the area of your permanent address?”, prompting a “yes” from the witness.

Hassan then asked if she had taken a valid national identity card which had all the text on it clearly visible, and if the elections officials had checked it.

The witness said that she had taken one, but alleged officials had not looked at it.

Questions were also asked of the second witness by Judge Adam Mohamed.

Adam Mohamed asked if the elections officials had offered her any reassurance that she would later be allowed to vote, to which she replied in the negative.

The judge then asked if the officials had then just asked her to go home, to which the witness replied that she had of her own accord gone home, as her name was not on the voters’ list.

The third and final witness in the hearing was a man who claimed to have worked as a senior election official in charge of a ballot box. The location of the box was not revealed, to protect his identity.

Dr Saeed asked him about the time voting started and if the netbook and Ballot Progress Reporting System (BPRS) queue system provided by the Elections Commission was working.

The witness said that voting started at approximately 7:30am. He said that although the netbook was in perfect working condition, as was the BPRS, the officials at the station had some trouble working it as they did not understand how. He said they then had started the voting process using the hard copy of the voters’ list as instructed during their training.

He stated that they had already released 10 queue numbers for voting before they were able to get the BPRS queue system working.

According to the witness, he had instructed another official to start entering these 10 numbers at about 10:00am when the queues had calmed down, during which process they discovered that five of the 10 people appeared on the system as having already voted.

He however assured that no person whose name was not on the voting list had cast a vote at the station he had been watching over.

The Elections Commission’s lawyer, former Attorney General Husnu Suood, asked the witness if these five persons were people who had come from another island, which the witness confirmed as true.

He then asked if it was possible to say they had cast their votes on another island and then come to the witnesses’ island in an attempt to cast their vote.

The witness stated that this was impossible, as they had been among the first in queue when voting began.

Dr Saeed again questioned the witness, asking if the official knew the island of origin of the five alleged double-voters, and how much time it would have taken them to travel to their permanent residences on a speed boat from the official’s island.

The official said the people came from an island outside his atoll, and that it would take at least an hour and a half to reach there, even by speedboat.

Dr Saeed then asked if there was any other island with ballot boxes and which was the closest.

The witness said the closest one was 10 minutes away by speedboat, and that he believed that “in times as technologically advanced as this, it is possible that these five persons had removed the ink mark indicating having voted and gone to a nearby polling centre and recast a vote.”

Husnu Suood at this point intervened, asking the judges to make the witness’s statements be based on facts, and not inclusive of opinions.

The judge overruled the objection, stating that witness statements were an account of what they believed to have happened.

The last question was posed by Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) lawyer Ahmed Zaneen Adam, who asked if the EC had asked officials to make voters remain in the polling area for 30 seconds after the ink mark was drawn on their fingers.

The witness responded that they had been told so, and had worked under these instructions.

Judges then told Zaneen that he could not question the witness beyond the scope of his statement.

Although the judges panel stated that all parties would be given an opportunity to speak after the witness statements, the court session ended directly after the statements were delivered.

Another hearing in the case began today (Monday September 23) at 11:00am and was ongoing at time of press.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)