Category: Politics

Executive Oversight Committee summons former intelligence heads

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee has summoned the former intelligence heads of both the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) and the Maldives Police Service (MPS) as part of an inquiry into the controversial transfer of power in February 2012.

Brigadier General Ahmed Nilam and former Superintendent Mohamed ‘MC’ Hameed were separately summoned today to attend the closed door meetings.

Nilam was summoned first at 12:00pm, with Hameed addressing the committee at 1:00pm.

According to local media, chair of the committee, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed, said that the decision had been taken to hold the meeting behind closed doors to ensure any potentially sensitive intelligence information remained confidential.

The select committee last month agreed, with bipartisan support, to summon Nilam, Hameed and former SAARC Secretary General Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed.

The committee at the time decided that all three individuals would be summoned to parliament separately on January 9.  According to the local media, Saeed was to be summoned at 11:00am today, but requested that her hearing be postponed over personal issues.

Saeed is being summoned over a personal memoir released to the media last month.  The contents of the memoir included allegations that certain figures behind protests leading to the controversial transfer of power on February 7 had also planned to assassinate former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Failure to come to an understanding over issuance of a legal order

Meanwhile, the committee today failed to reach an agreement over issuing a legal order requiring President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik to provide evidence gathered by the Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI).

The CNI was charged to review the circumstances behind the change of government, concluding that the transfer of power took place constitutionally despite the MDP’s claims of a coup d’état.

The parliamentary committee had called for a vote amongst its members over whether to issue a legal order to obtain statements given to CNI by senior Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) figures and officials of the former government.  However, the vote failed to secure a required committee majority of 6 members to be passed.

Although backed by all five MDP members on the committee, the vote was short of a sixth and decisive supporter with government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Ahmed Nihan Hassan Manik voting against the motion. His fellow party member MP Ahmed Shareef abstained from the vote.

The statements that the committee had intended to obtain from the government included the accounts given to the CNI of former Defense Minister Tholthath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, former Home Minister Hassan Afeef and former Chief of Defense Force retired Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel.  The testimonies of former Male’ Area Commander retired Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and former Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh would also have been requested among others.

The committee had previously sent a letter to President Waheed requesting for him to provide it members with the stated documents.  The request was denied.

Some sitting members of the committee at the time expressed their dismay with the president’s response, arguing that the only option left for the committee was to issue a legal order.

However, in order to issue a legal order, the matter should be approved by an absolute majority of at least six committee members.

Following the failure to obtain a legal order today, MDP Spokesperson MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor questioned the government’s decision not to supply the information.

“There is absolutely no way as per the constitution where the executive can hide its actions from the parliament. The constitution has given the parliament immense powers in terms of government accountability to the extent that the government cannot even take a loan without parliament’s consent,” he said.

Ghafoor added that while the MDP held a parliamentary majority, it was aiming to conduct the inquiry with bipartisan support.

“We don’t want to make this a political issue. This is a national issue. We are trying to confirm the legitimacy of an installed government. Party politics is not what we are interested in,” he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Foreign Ministry launches Blue Ribbon Campaign Against Human Trafficking

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has today inaugurated an initiative targeted at raising awareness of the issue of human trafficking in the Maldives.

The Maldives has come under strong criticism internationally in recent years over its record in trying to prevent people trafficking, with the country appearing on the US State Department’s Tier Two Watch List for Human Trafficking three years in a row.

Speaking at the inauguration of the Blue Ribbon Campaign Against Human Trafficking, Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr Abdul Samad Abdulla stated that the initiative formed part of a larger plan to try addressing human trafficking in the Maldives.

This strategy is expected to include activities to try and raise awareness among students and the business community. The tourism industry, which employs the largest number of foreign staff in the country, was identified as another key focus of the initiative.

“We have been conducting a lot of work to deal with the issue, though it may be generally a little known fact,” Samad said. “Our intention now is to work together with local media outlets and create more awareness about the issue. I would like to request media for strong cooperation in this initiative.”

The Foreign Ministry also announced that it had signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) today with multiple local media outlets in the country to conduct the Blue Ribbon Campaign.

The MOU states that the media outlets will produce and broadcast programmes aimed at disseminating information on the issue of human trafficking.

The media outlets signed up to the scheme will also be required to report widely on related cases, providing airtime to create awareness on how to combat the issue, as well as reports on measures taken by the government in its fight against the issue.

The media outlets which signed the MOU today are MBC, Haveeru, VMedia Group, RaajjeTV, Miadhu Daily, Channel News Maldives, Sun Magazine, Sun FM, Sun Online, DhiFM and DhiFM Plus.

However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it would not be answering any questions from media today on its work and other issues affecting human trafficking during today’s press conference.

The ministry itself defines human trafficking as “taking undue advantage of a person through employing him, transferring him from place to place, taking guardianship of him, depriving him of making decisions on personal matters, assuming control over him through threats or abuse of power; or to create dependence, kidnap, or deceive him through any other means and take undue advantage of a person’s weaknesses and to conduct any of these activities in a manner that includes exchange of money from or to oneself.”

Under the new scheme, individuals held responsible for human trafficking offences in future would be officers in government offices mandated to oversee the issue, and yet fail to do so, as well as companies and other groups found to be involved in illegal practices.

Employers who force employees to work with no respect or regard to protecting human rights and persons who obstruct the taking of legal action against people who commit human trafficking offences will also be held responsible, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Late last month, Indian authorities told Minivan News that tightened restrictions on providing medical visas to Maldivians was a “signal” for the country’s government to address a number of concerns about the nation’s treatment of migrant workers.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court schedules hearings against key parliamentary decisions for next week

The Supreme Court will hear two separate cases filed against decisions taken within parliament next week.

According to the Supreme Court’s official website, a case lodged by former Civil Services Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan against parliament’s decision to impeach him over allegations of sexual harassment is scheduled for January 14.

A separate case will then be held two days later on January 16 concerning the Majlis’ decision to hold no-confidence votes against President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and other senior government figures through a secret ballot.

The two cases have been criticised within the People’s Majlis, with some MPs claiming the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction to look into matters approved by parliament.

Right to justice

Speaking to Minivan News today, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor accused the Supreme Court of being grossly negligent in carrying out its duties as the country has switched from an autocratic system of governance to a democratic one in 2008.

Ghafoor contended that the Supreme Court’s conduct had been contrary to keeping the powers of the state both independent and separate.

“Due to this negligence, it has allowed incompetent, insincere judges to take over all the ranks of the judiciary, disregarding the article 285 of the constitution. Now, the validity of both Supreme Court and High Court is limited and restricted due to its failure to establish a proper legitimate judiciary,” he said.

“We don’t see justice being served, to be honest, the people of this country have lost their right to justice. I don’t see true justice being established in the country, not as long as they are here.”

The Henveiru South constituency MP also accused the Supreme Court of failing to specify its reasons behind decisions taken on constitutional matters.

“They are failing to grasp the intentions of the constitutional assembly that drafted the constitution. Why are they failing to refer to the meeting minutes of the assembly to understand their intentions as a tool to interpret the constitution? This is what happens when you don’t have a competent judiciary, they fail to grasp the spirit of the constitution,” he claimed.

The Supreme Court last month issued two separate injunctions ordering parliament to  withhold selection of a CSC president to replace Fahmy and to halt scheduling impeachment votes against President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed.

The Supreme Court in both injunctions claimed that it needed to review the legality of the concerned issues in line with “necessary constitutional and legal principles” that had to be followed.

Exclusive cognizance

Responding to the injunctions issued by the Supreme Court, Independent MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed has said in a personal press video that the powers stated in article 88 of the constitution were given to parliament to execute its duties. Nasheed added that the powers outlined in the article should not be restricted by the country’s courts.

“The article 88 (b) of the constitution is a power given to the parliament to execute its duties. It should not be confused with the recently passed privileges bill. What article 88(b) states that no court of law can question the decisions reached by the parliament,” he said.

“The Article 88(b) of the constitution states – ‘Unless otherwise specified in this Constitution, the validity of any proceedings in the People’s Majlis (Parliament) shall not be questioned in any court of law.’  It is for a reason that this clause was included in the constitution. This is a principle adopted by parliaments across the world. I don’t know the Arabic word for that, but in English it is known as ‘Exclusive Cognizance,’” he explained.

Nasheed contended that article 88 (b) outlined powers that should be exclusive to parliament and all courts of law should respect the legislature.  He claimed that a failure to respect parliament could mean every decision reached in the Majlis would be challenged.

“For example, even in a football game, though a team may be very upset by a decision of the referee, the play continues. They don’t go to court and seek an injunction so that match would be halted until a court decides on the matter. Neither is the decision overruled. The game continues,” Nasheed argued.

“What is happening right now could mean that if a player is shown a red card or a yellow card, the team who is unhappy about the referee would stop playing and go to court and seek an injunction to hold the play until the court reaches a verdict. Imagine what will happen if such practice takes hold.”

Parliament decisions

Former CSC Chair Fahmy was impeached from parliament in June last year over allegations of sexual harassment against an employee. The decision was reached after a debate on the report, which was produced by Parliament’s Committee on Independent Institutions.

Following much debate in parliament, Nasheed stated that the Committee on Independent Institutions had mandate over the CSC and it did not need to conduct a criminal investigation to remove Fahmy from his post.

“What we applied are widely accepted civil standards. Based on our findings, 7 out of the 10 committee members decided that it was more likely that Fahmy had committed this act than that he did not. And that is enough to remove him from his post,” Nasheed said.

The subsequent no-confidence vote to remove Fahmy passed by a majority of 38 to 32 votes. However, Fahmy filed a case at Supreme Court contending that he was removed from his position unlawfully.

Back in October meanwhile, the MDP proposed a no-confidence motion against President Waheed claiming that the police and the military had “brutalised” its supporters on February 8 under direct orders from the president himself.

The MDP also alleged that President Waheed had destroyed the sensitive economy of the nation and adversely impacted investor confidence in the Maldives.

Other reasons, the MDP alleged, included the failure of President Waheed’s administration to curb gang violence in the country, as well as his government taking a loan worth MVR 300 million (US$19.5 million) from the Bank of Maldives (BML) without prior approval from parliament – a violation of Public Finance Act and Public Finance Regulation.

The MDP subsequently proposed the amendment to parliamentary regulation which would pave the way for a secret ballot in the vote to impeach President Waheed. However, the first attempt, despite approval from parliament’s General Affairs Committee was defeated in parliament by 39 to 34 votes.

Parliament last month passed the amendment when it was again re-submitted and approved with a 41 to 34 majority. The approval was backed by two government aligned parties, the Jumhoree Party (JP) and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).

The amendment was also later challenged in the Supreme Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PG asks High Court to void dismissal of Deputy Speaker Nazim’s corruption cases

The Prosecutor General (PG’s) Office today requested that the High Court void a previous Criminal Court dismissal of four corruption cases against People’s Alliance (PA) MP and Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim.

Nazim had been cleared by the Criminal Court of all four corruption charges against him on February 23, 2012. The decision was taken 16 days after the controversial transfer of power on February 7, with the court ruling that Nazim’s “acts were not enough to criminalize him.”

All four cases concerned public procurement tenders of the former Atolls Ministry, which were alleged to have been secured through fraudulent documents and paper companies.

The state prosecutor during today’s hearing claimed that the Criminal Court had acted in contradiction to the procedures normally applied in criminal cases.

The prosecutor also alleged that in passing the ruling to dismiss the cases, the Criminal Court had failed to consider any of the evidence provided by the state.

During today’s appeal hearing, the PG’s Office stated that the dismissal of the cases had breached the constitutional decree of equal treatment to all citizens. Concerns were also raised that the Criminal Court had acted against the norms of procedure in similar cases by ruling that two counts of fraud cases against Nazim could not be prosecuted.

Considering these grounds, the state asked the High Court to rule void the Criminal Court’s dismissal of the four cases, and to order the court to rule on the cases anew.

Nazim dismissed the state’s allegations in court today, local media reported. Speaking on his behalf, his lawyer alleged that the state’s appeal case was “based around a lie”.

Nazim’s lawyer responded to the state’s allegation that the Criminal Court had not followed procedures by claiming that the court had presented the state with an opportunity to present their case during hearings.

The defendant’s lawyer also alleged that the witnesses named by the state had not been presented in court as they were not believed to be fair or impartial witnesses.

Last month, Nazim slammed PG Ahmed Muizzu in parliament, stating that he had failed to either come to a decision on or forward to court some 72 percent of cases submitted to his office by the Maldives Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

The criticisms levelled by Nazim were dismissed at the time by the PG himself, who said that the claims were inaccurate.

PG Ahmed Muizzu and MP Ahmed Nazim were not responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Union links New Zealand consul to Maldives resort worker dispute

The New Zealand Government risks being held in “international disrepute” over the alleged involvement of one of its honorary consuls in an ongoing employment dispute with a Maldives resort, a letter from the Service and Food Workers Union (SFWU) has warned.

The letter addressed to New Zealand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Murray McCully has alleged that the country’s Honorary Consul in the Maldives, Ahmed Saleem, was “involved” in an employment dispute with 29 former resort workers from Conrad Rangali Island resort in the Maldives.

In June 2011, 29 staff members working at the Conrad resort alleged they had been dismissed from their posts following a strike held by workers in March that year. However, the resort operator denied the allegations, maintaining that the staff had been made redundant and at the time due to renovations and lower occupancies as a result of the low season.

Conrad Rangali Island resort has previously stated that affected staff had all been provided with “generous” financial support packages as part of their redundancies.

According to the letter sent this month by the SFWU’s National Secretary John Ryall, 22 of the workers made redundant at the resort later challenged their dismissal at a local employment tribunal. The trade union said the tribunal had ruled the employees’ termination had been “unfair” and ordered the resort to reinstate the staff.

The letter alleged that the Conrad Rangali Island resort, supported by resort owners Crown Company, refused to comply with the tribunal order. However, the resort group has maintained that the case was presently being heard at the Maldives High Court.

The letter also alleges that Saleem, through his dual position as New Zealand’s Honorary Consul in the Maldives and as one of the directors of Crown Company, “advertised” his business as being located as the same address as the consulate.

“We urge you to inform Mr Saleem that having the New Zealand government connected in any way with defying a court reinstatement order for workers who were merely standing up for their basic rights is unacceptable and will bring our country into disrepute internationally,” the statement read.

“We urge you to inform Mr Saleem If he wants to continue as a New Zealand Government representative that he needs to ensure that the court ruling is immediately adhered to, that the Crown Company – appointed management recognise the Tourism Employees Association of Maldives (TEAM) union and that good faith negotiations commence to resolve the outstanding issue,” the letter reads.

Minivan News was waiting for a response from the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Saleem at time of press.

Seaborne protest

On Friday (January 4), Tourism Employees Association of Maldives (TEAM) held a seaborne protest near the beaches of Conrad Rangali Island Resort over the resort’s alleged refusal to comply with the tribunal order.

TEAM Secretary General Mauroof Zakir told Minivan News that the aim of the protest was to make guests aware of the allegations raised by former staff members, as well as the employment tribunal verdict calling for their reappointment.

“We went by boat to show our banners to the tourists on the beach [at the resort]. There were a lot of guests there who saw what we had written, however after two hours the police came,” he said.

“Even though we close to the island, we did not cross the line that dictates what the resorts property is. Even though we said this, the Police said they would arrest us if we stayed any longer.”

A spokesperson for Conrad Rangali Island Resort told Minivan News yesterday (January 8 ) that the case is currently under appeal at the High Court.

“Conrad Maldives Rangali Island is aware that there are petitions for the reinstatement of employees made redundant in 2011. The case is under appeal at the High Court of the Maldives and the final verdict is still pending.

“We would like to remind the media that the resort is not required to reinstate the previous employees while the High Court considers the appeal,” the spokesperson added.

Industrial action

TEAM has claimed that its seaborne protest was the beginning of a wider movement that would focus on workers from other resorts alleged to have been mistreated by management.

Mauroof stated that members of TEAM intend to picket at the airport and that letters have already been sent to President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and other senior government officials to inform them of an industrial strike.

“I have already been receiving mail form many resort workers as they all want to go on strike right now. But we have to go by regulations, especially in accordance to the new bill outlining the rules for protest,” Maroouf said.

Under the new ‘Freedom of Assembly Bill’ recently passed by parliament, demonstrations outside a number of public places, including resorts and airports will be outlawed.

The regulation also states that although demonstrators do not need to seek authorization ahead of a gathering, police must be then notified of any pre-planned demonstrations before they commence.

Palm Beach Island Resort protests

On Saturday (January 6), local media reported that room boys from Palm Beach Island Resort had gone on strike over alleged delays to salary increments.

A resort employee told local newspaper Haveeru that the striking room boys had also demanded for the head of the Human Resources Department to be sacked over mistreatment of staff.

“There are room boys who have worked here for seven years. However, even they are yet to receive a salary increment. It has been months since a pay raise had been promised,” a resort employee was quoted as saying.

According to Haveeru, the Italian management of the resort pays their room boys MVR2,500 as a basic salary while an estimated US$80 to US$90 as service charge.

Palm Beach resort was not available for comment when contacted by Minivan News at time of press.

Speaking at a photo exhibition celebrating 40 years of tourism on Sunday (January 6) Tourism Minister Ahmed Ahdeeb said that the ministry had been informed about the recent protests.

“We have engaged with both the resort and the striking staff to take a middle position where we can calm the situation. In the future, other disputes will be addressed and we intend to look into them,” he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government submits sexual harassment bill to Majlis

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Rozaina Adam has submitted a bill to parliament on behalf of the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik aiming to define and outlaw sexual harassment across Maldivian society.

The decision forms part of a wider government strategy to submit twelve separate bills to the Majlis after an amendment to parliament regulations was approved in October.  The amendment to the People’s Majlis’ Rules of Procedure enabled the current government to submit bills to the legislature despite President Waheed’s Gaumee Ittihad Party (GIP) having no elected representatives in parliament.

DRP MP Rozaina Adam was not responding to calls at time of press.

The government has stated that the objective of the sexual harassment bill is to ensure gender discrimination is made illegal at workplaces, educational institutes, and other service providers such as hospitals.

The bill defines sexual harassment as “any sexual act committed against, or towards, a person without their consent”.  It states that a sexual act is defined as words which are spoken, or written, a sound that is made, a picture or a drawing that is shown, a physical action or gesture that is made, or any other action which could be perceived, believed or known by the recipient to be done with a sexual intention.

Details are also included on the specific actions by employers, employees and service providers which would be outlawed should the bill be passed.

Employers are also required to refrain from implying through actions or words that acceptance of sexual advances is a guarantee of securing advancement at work or additional opportunities.

The bill also governs institutions mandated with taking care of persons, including children, the elderly and persons with special needs. The bill specifically prohibits sexual harassment against any persons under the care of such institutions.

As per the bill, each organisation must have a committee mandated with oversight of the issue of sexual harassment.  The committee should consist of ten members, of which the majority is to be female. The bill also defines the procedures the committee must follow when handling complaints.

The bill is yet to be scheduled for debate on the parliament floor and comes after CSC President Mohamed Fahmy was voted out of his post on November 20, 2012 under allegations of sexual harassment against an employee.

The Supreme Court has since ordered the parliament to halt appointing a new member to his post, until the court comes to a ruling on whether Fahmy’s rights had been infringed upon through his dismissal.

Meanwhile, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Abdulla Yaamin has submitted a motion to Parliament’s Independent Commissions Oversight Committee, asking it to investigate allegations of sexual harassment against a member of the Elections Commission.

The full bill submitted to the Majlis can be read here.  (Dhivehi)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MP Ali Waheed seeks temporary injunction after Criminal Court rejects appeal

Deputy Parliamentary Group Leader of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed has today appealed a Criminal Court decision to reject procedural points raised during previous hearings of a case against him.

Lawyers representing the Thoddoo constituency MP argued during a High Court appeal hearing today that charges against him for obstructing police officers in their duty had previously been dismissed and, as a procedural point, could not therefore be legally resubmitted.

Ali Waheed is charged with obstruction of police duty during an anti-government protest he participated in while of member of the then opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).  Waheed, who defected to then-ruling MDP in May 2011, was charged for breaching article 75 of Maldives Police Services Act.

Appeal

During today’s High Court appeal hearing, Waheed’s lawyer, former Attorney General Husnu al Suood, repeated his argument that the state could not resubmit the same criminal charges for a second time without any changes.

He contended that the decision of the prosecutor general (PG) to pursue the case contradicted article 223 of the constitution, which prescribes the powers of his office.

Responding to the argument, Assistant Public Prosecutor Hussain Nashid claimed that the charges had only been dropped “temporarily” in a bid to respect the “fairness” of criminal trials.

Nashid also argued that the prosecutor general had the discretionary power to decide on the procedures as to how criminal charges can be filed.

Meanwhile, Ali Waheed’s lawyer requested the High Court bench issue a temporary injunction to withhold the ongoing case at Criminal Court until the High Court decides on the matter.

In response to the request, chair of the sitting judges bench Judge Yoosuf Hussain said that the court would decide on whether to issue the requested injunction by the end of the day.

Discretion

Speaking to Minivan News today, prominent criminal lawyer Abdulla Haseen said he believed that the prosecutor general legally had the power to resubmit criminal cases after withdrawing them.  However, Haseen contended that any such decision should be “fair and just, without any political influences”.

“I do not believe that the constitution limits the power of PG to resubmit criminal cases again. But it should be done in a fair and just way without any political influences,” he said

Even though Haseen declined to comment on the ongoing court case, he stressed that the PG should ensure cases being sent to trial were done so in a way that was fair and just, especially when focusing on political figures.  Haseen stressed such a decision was vital in order to maintain the credibility and impartiality of prosecutions.

“We don’t usually see the PG resubmitting cases like this but it does not mean he cannot. However exercise of his discretion should always be impartial. When Ali Waheed’s case was withdrawn, it reflected political motives as much as it did when he decided to resubmit the case. PG is an independent constitutional body and should not be subject to political influence,” he explained.

The Prosecutor General’s Office was not responding to calls at time of press.

Case history

The case was first sent to the PG’s Office after an investigation by the police in March 2010.

By November that year, state prosecutors had dropped the charges against Ali Waheed on the grounds of a “lack of fairness”, stating that police had failed to submit a case relating to MDP activists entering the Civil Services Commission (CSC) office and harassing its staff.

The case against Ali Waheed was once filed again by the PG last year following the controversial transfer of power that brought President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik’s government into office.

Following the decision, Ali Waheed’s defence lawyer Suood argued during a Criminal Court hearing that the state cannot file the same criminal charges once they had been dropped on an earlier occasion.

Ali Waheed’s procedural points were dismissed by the sitting criminal court judge Abdulla Didi, stating that the PG could re-file a case.

During previous Criminal Court hearings, Waheed stated that he was unclear about the charges pressed against him. He added that he was not someone who would ever confront police with arms and questioned whether it was only him and Mahloof that were there during the protests.

State prosecutors responded that they had decided to prosecute Ali Waheed and fellow MP Ahmed Mahloof because they had been able to obtain sufficient evidence to support charges against the two politicians.

Along with MP Ali Waheed, former DRP MP Ahmed Mahloof is also facing the same charges.

Both Waheed and Mahloof were elected to parliament under the ticket of DRP. However, following the split of the DRP into two factions, both Waheed and Mahloof chose to leave their former party and head in two different directions.

Mahloof joined the newly formed Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), the party formed by the DRP members who supported former President Gayoom as opposed to the party’s current leader, MP Ahmed Thasmeen Ali. Ali Waheed meanwhile joined the MDP.

During the first hearing of the trail against him, Mahloof requested that the judge carry out the trial separately stating that although he and Waheed were once in the same party, times had changed and the pair now followed different political beliefs and parties.

The request was dismissed at the time by the presiding Judge Abdulla Didi, who stated that the state had levied one charge against both him and his parliamentary colleague. Judge Didi said differing political beliefs was immaterial to the case that was being heard.

Concerns

Following the filing of the case against Waheed for the second time, the MDP at the time raised concerns stating that the case had lost its meaning because of the delay in prosecution.

In a statement, the MDP claimed that “without considering the legal principle ‘justice delayed is justice denied’,  we would like to bring to notice that the state is prosecuting meaningless cases while more important cases remain unprosecuted, while others have already been dismissed,” read the statement.

It further described the prosecution of its members at the time as a “series of attempts to hurt” the party after the fall of the previous MDP-led government.  The MDP contends that former President Mohamed Nasheed was removed from office under “duress” following a mutiny by sections of the police and military on February 7, 2012.

Waheed, previously speaking to local media after the hearing, stated that he would not be threatened by such cases that the current government was pressing against him, and said he would “face the charges with courage”. He also asked the PG to prosecute him for even “slightest” wrong he had committed.

“This prosecution is not just a prosecution levied against me, this is a prosecution that is levied against the 50,000 members of MDP and the majority of the citizens of Thoddu constituency,” he said.

Ali Waheed told the press at the time that such unpleasant inducements by the government to pressure him to join them would not work and claimed that he would not leave the MDP to support an illegitimate government.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Club Faru resort to be closed within two months: Tourism Minister

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb has revealed that the Club Faru resort is to be closed down within two months after the government took over the property this weekend.

On Saturday (January 5), the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture said it had assumed control of Club Faru after the resort’s operators were said to have failed to hand over the property following the expiry of their lease agreement.

Adheeb told Minivan News that the resort would be closed as part of the government’s plans to begin the second phase of “reclaiming” Hulhumale’ this year.

“The resort is to be operated by a government company for two months and it will then be closed down and reclaimed,” he said.  “It was a seven year lease that expired on November 15. Now the government has decided to reclaim that part of Hulhumale’,” he said today.

The proposed closure has been described as “interesting” by the former secretary general of the Maldives Association of Tourism Industry (MATI), who expressed hope that the government would treat all resort operators equally going forward.

Adheeb today maintained that his ministry would not favour certain resort operators over others in terms of their treatment.

According to the tourism minister, the government offered other companies the chance to temporarily manage Club Faru after the first phase of reclaiming Hulhumale’ was completed.

However, Adheeb claimed that after the expiry of a seven-year lease on November 15, 2012, the resort’s operators had gone to court on two separate occasions to try and extend their lease.  He added that the operators had been unsuccessful on both attempts to obtain an injunction against the government.

Despite the lease termination deadline expiring last year and the subsequent takeover on Saturday, Club Faru’s website – when accessed at the time of press – displayed a pop-up sign dismissing rumours that the resort will be closed or temporarily shut down for renovation between November 1 to April 31.

“Attention!!! Against different phrased rumours that seem to circulate in the internet and in certain travel agencies: Fihalhohi and/or Club Faru will neither be closed nor will there be any renovation from November 1 to April 31 that could lead to disturbance. This info is valid for Fihalhohi and Club Faru. Both Islands continue as is,” the pop-up statement reads.

Management at Club Faru resort were not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Speaking to local media, Adheeb claimed that the handover had gone “smoothly” when he visited the resort yesterday (January 5).

“Everything went quite smoothly. The Finance Ministry’s financial controller, tourism’s permanent secretary, and legal officials of the ministry along with me came to the resort and took over,” he said.

“We will oversee the operations of the island as the [tourism] ministry has reclaimed ownership of this resort,” Adheeb told local newspaper Haveeru.

Local media reports have claimed that the government had assumed ownership of the island property while tourists were still holidaying at the resort.

According to Adheeb, an Italian company called Club Med had originally invested in the resort. However, after Club Faru was designated part of the Hulhumale’ reclamation plan seven years ago, Club Med was given another island as compensation.

Local media reported that the government leased the island for a period of five years on November 16 1995, after a delay in the second phase of reclaiming Hulhumale’. Following the expiry of the five year lease, it was then extended on an annual basis.

All resort operators treated the same: Adheeb

When contacted today, Former Secretary General of MATI ‘Sim’ Mohamed Ibrahim described the Club Faru handover as “interesting”, adding that no operators should be favoured when it comes to breaching legal contracts.

“While it is important that legal contracts are kept to and enforced, it is also important that individual resort operators are treated the same and not differently.  It appears that Club Faru has taken precedence over others, especially as Hulhumale’ is earmarked for development,” Sim told Minivan News.

Responding to the comments, Adheeb said that the tourism ministry did not favour any resort operator over another.

While there are no other resorts in the Maldives where an operating licence has been cancelled, Adheeb claimed that when dealing with rent payments, each resort will always have to pay or face a termination notice.

The tourism minister claimed that when he first took up his position following February’s controversial transfer of power, there were 12 resorts found to be not paying rent at the time. However, through flexibility on the interest rates, he maintained there were now “no resorts not paying rent”.

“We are not tolerating resorts who do not pay rent, any operating resort has to pay. Those who are not paying already have the termination notice. This culture has to go, by the end of this year all resorts will be paying and it will become a more stable industry,” Adheeb said.

At a press conference held on December 31, 2012, Adheeb said that resort operator Yacht Tours had been sent termination notices for both Alidhoo and Kudarah resorts, with a seven day period for handover.

He added that while the ministry had come to a payment system agreement with a number of other companies, Yacht Tours had sent no official written communication in regard to the payment of outstanding rents.

Following the termination notice, Yacht Tours, a company owned by opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Abdulla Jabir, said it will take the government to court over the dispute.  The company has alleged that the Tourism Ministry had failed to responded to correspondence it had sent on the matter of rent payments.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

MDA interim leader promises pre-school construction during party membership drive

Maldivian Development Alliance (MDA) interim Leader and tourism magnate MP Ahmed ‘Sun Travel’ Shiyam has pledged during a campaign to boost his party’s membership that he will build pre-schools on the islands of Landhoo and Fodhdhoo in Noonu Atoll.

Shiyam’s Sun Online news service reported today that he had promised that the foundations for at least one of the pre-school buildings was expected to be laid during the year.

Addressing the pledge today, a senior MDA member told Minivan News that all funding for the proposed school buildings would be provided by Shiyam himself in a “personal capacity”, adding that the decision was not politically motivated, but rather a service to the public.

Shiyam’s campaigning for the recently formed MDA follows the passing of a new bill in parliament requiring political parties in the country to have a minimum of 10,000 registered members.

Should the bill be signed into law, parties without the sufficient number of members would be given three months to meet the target or face being dissolved.

During campaigning yesterday, Shiyam said that despite Fodhdhoo being small in terms of population, all islands – regardless of their size – were entitled to fundamental rights.

“You are like any other people. You as well deserve the fundamental rights that the rest of the people enjoy. I will do whatever I can to ensure that fact stays that way,” he was reported as saying.

During a rally held later the same day on Landhoo Island, Shiyam said that the development of the nation required educated young people to come forth, adding that the country had fallen into a grave state due to a lack of honest political leaders.

“Those who come to power need to have a very strong understanding of the public sentiments and should have the quality to respect the views of the people. Leaders who lie and deceive should never come in front of the people,” he claimed.

“Immense Support”

Speaking to Minivan News today, MDA Deputy Leader Ali Mauroof claimed that the party was “receiving immense support” from Noonu Atoll and expressed confidence in reaching the 10,000 member limit as stipulated in the newly passed political parties bill.

“Noonu Atoll is the native Atoll of both me and our leader [Shiyam], so we are receiving immense support from the islands. You would know about this support if you see our Sun Online [news service]. We believe we could get 90 percent of the entire population of the Atoll,” he said.

Asked about the immediate aims of the MDA, Mauroof said that the party’s first target was to attain 10,000 members.  He claimed the MDA’s longer-term strategy was to become the “largest political party” in the country.

Mauroof also criticised the recently passed political parties’ bill, dismissing it as an attempt to “destroy” smaller political parties.

“The reality is that in a democracy, you would not see bills made to destroy smaller political parties. There are democracies which allow hundreds of political parties. That is what democracy is,” he said.

Mauroof also claimed that Shiyam’s pledge to build two pre-schools in Noonu Atoll had been made in a “personal capacity” rather than directly through the MDA.

“Our leader was the one who advocated for providing pre-schooling facilities in the islands. It was his proposed bill on pre-schools that were passed into legislation by the parliament and currently being enforced. This is not something new too. Our leader has built pre-schools in Dhaalu Atoll as well,” he explained.

He added that Shiyam was building pre-schools not as a “political motive” but as a social responsibility to “contribute to society”.

“We did not condition anyone to join the party. We did not give any reward or pay anybody to join the party. People are joining us willingly and voluntarily. Even the pre-schools are not built under the name of MDA,” he added.

“Not a cult-party”: MDA

Deputy Leader Mauroof also claimed that the MDA would display the “best internal democracy within the party” by adhering to democratic and transparent principles and best practices, adding that there would be no grounds to call them a “cult party”.

“We have our own party charter. Everything will be done in accordance with the party charter. This party will host the best internal democracy within the party. We would not have spiritual leaders,” he said.

Mauroof added that all decisions by the MDA were expected to be made by the party’s council, which he claimed would ultimately decide on its future political alignment.

“We are not enemies of any political party. We can work with any party for interests of the country. However, the decision to field or support a candidate in the upcoming presidential elections and making coalitions would be decided by the party’s council at the most appropriate time,” he added.

Mauroof added that their policies would reflect the needs of the people and their betterment.

“We will be a party that will work on strengthening democracy, bringing development and prosperity to the country,” he added.

Formation

MDA was officially given the permission to establish itself as a political party on June last year by the elections commission. The party officially held its inaugural convention on December 10, 2012.  It was at this convention where the party elected Shiyam as its interim leader along with appointing other key leadership positions.

The tourism magnate was elected interim leader with 335 votes out of 362 ballots cast.

According to Shiyam’s Sun Online news website, 362 members attended the meeting at Traders Hotel, which was authorised to proceed by the Elections Commission after it had verified the attendance registry.

Under the regulations governing political parties’ which is still in force, at least 300 members are required to attend an inaugural convention of a newly-formed political party, while 3,000 signatures are needed to form the party.

The MDA becomes the 16th political party to be registered in the Maldives since 2005.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)