Category: Politics

ADC issue will bankrupt Maldives Airports Company: Finance Minister Jihad

Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad has declared that the Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL) is unable to pay the disputed airport development tax (ADC) without risking bankruptcy.

The ADC was intended to be a US$25 fee charged to outgoing passengers from January this year, as stipulated in the contract signed with Indian infrastructure giant GMR in 2010. The anticipated US$25 million the charge would raise was to go towards the cost of renovating INIA’s infrastructure.

The ADC was to be charged after midnight on January 1, 2012, however the Civil Court blocked the fee on the grounds that it was essentially the same as a pre-existing Airport Services Charge (ASC). Following the court ruling the Nasheed government agreed that the ADC be deducted from its concession fee paid to the government-owned company in charge of the airport, Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL).

On Monday however, new Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad told local newspaper Haveeru that MACL should not and could not cover the development costs.

“The Civil Court ruled against that charge. Hence that amount must not be deducted from the payment to the government which would reduce its income,” Jihad argued. “The Airports Company might face losses if that happens,” he said.

“I don’t believe that GMR can deduct that amount from the payment owed to the government. The estimated US$30 million for this year must be paid. If the payment is not received it would be difficult to run the Airports Company,” he continued.

Speaking to Minivan News, Jihad said the next step was to ask GMR to resolve the issue after the board of MACL was reappointed.

“The new board will write to GMR… It is not for the Finance Ministry to interfere with the running of the [airport] company,” said Jihad.

He also claimed that he did not feel there were any specific provisions in the original deal detailing the collection of the ADC.

In a statement following the court decision, GMR stated that it “has been permitted to collect ADC and Insurance charge under the Concession Agreement signed between GMR-MAHB, Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL) and The Republic of Maldives (acting by and through its Ministry of Finance and Treasury), and as such has set up processes for ADC collection from 1st January 2012 supported by an information campaign to ensure adequate awareness.”

CEO of INIA Andrew Harrison said that the company was unwilling to comment on the “sensitive” issue at this point.

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Dr Abdul Samad Abdulla in assured his Indian counterpart that all existing investment agreements would be honoured.

According to the Indian newspaper, the Hindu, Samad assured Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna that the government’s policy was unchanged, after his counterpart expressed the desire that the Maldives remained friendly to outside investors.

Longstanding opposition

The contentious Civil Court case was filed by the then-opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), now part of the ruling coalition, in a longstanding campaign against Nasheed’s government awarding the airport redevelopment to GMR. DQP leader Dr Hassan Saeed is now President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s special advisor, while DQP Vice-President Dr Mohamed Jameel is the new Home Minister.

The decision to finalise a deal to develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) was agreed under the administration of former President Mohamed Nasheed in 2010. GMR emerged victorious in the bidding process, amid political opposition on largely nationalistic grounds.

Umar Naseer, now the deputy leader of the ruling coalition party the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), previously announced his intention to re-nationalise the airport should his party come to power. Naseer also contended that the airport deal would allow “Israeli flights to come and stop over [in the Maldives] after bombing Arab countries”.

The DQP campaigned vigorously against the deal, producing a pamphlet last December titled “Handing the airport to GMR: The beginning of slavery”, in which it criticised the arrangement with GMR.

In the document, the party argued that deal would allow the Indian company to “colonise” the local economy to the detriment of Maldivians. The DQP also questioned the legality of the deal, taking the issue of the ADC to the civil courts.

The document further alleged that the deal did not make adequate provision for replacing the runway, the condition of which has come under increasing criticism.

Head of the DQP Dr Hassan Saeed today said he was unable to comment on recent developments regarding GMR and the ADC.

The ADC was ruled by the court to be a new tax and was subsequently required to go through the People’s Majlis.

In light of this decision, GMR agreed with the Nasheed government in January that it would deduct the $25 per passenger fee from the concessionary charge paid each quarter to MACL. At the time the government acknowledged the compromise to be a temporary whilt maintaining its commitment to ADC in some form.

Confidence in GMR’s $511 million dollar INIA project appeared to take a hit after the the resignation of President Nasheed in February was accompanied by a five percent drop in GMR’s share prices before bouncing back shortly after.

Dr Waheed has reassured foreign investors that no businesses would be targetted for political reasons, although he did not rule out re-examining “certain deals”.

Attorney General Azima Shukoor announced that she had forwarded some of the previous government’s deals to the Auditor General but said no decision had yet been made on GMR. The government announced the suspension of any new Public Private Partnership schemes last month.

Spokesman for the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Hamid Abdul Ghafoor argued that the new figures in the government were not doing enough to protect foreign investment.

“If they were going to protect the economy, they would be more proactive, rather than simply saying we can’t do it,” said Hamed. “This will seriously impact the the development of the airport. In the meantime, investors lose confidence.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

“My romantic ideas of how to deal with a dictator were wrong”: Nasheed

Allowing former dictator Maumoon Abdul Gayoom to live in peace following the 2008 election was a bad decision, former President Mohamed Nasheed has told Time Magazine.

The Maldives’ experience with the remnants of autocracy should serve as a lesson for other countries in the Arab Spring said Nasheed.

“The lesson is we didn’t deal with Gayoom. That’s the obvious lesson. And my romantic ideas of how to deal with a dictator were wrong. I will agree with that,” Nasheed told Time, in a striking reversal of his magnanimity in 2008.

Nasheed observed that “you can get rid of a dictator, but you can’t get rid of a dictatorship. You can get rid of a person very easily, but the networks, the intricacies, the establishments — you have to flush them. And to do that is not an easy thing. We have to be mindful with other countries going down the same line — for instance, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya. They’ll have good elections, they’ll probably come up with a better leader. But then the dictatorship will always try to come back. And it’s going to be impossible to hold them from coming back from within the system.”

Gayoom stepped down peacefully in 2008 after losing the country’s first multi-party elections election to Nasheed, a former political prisoner who was quickly dubbed ‘South Asia’s Nelson Mandela’ by international media outlets. The peaceful transition from autocracy to democracy was held up as a model for other countries by human rights and democracy organisations, including the Commonwealth and UN.

Nasheed, despite heavy resistance from key supporters, pledged to leave Gayoom in peace, acknowledging his contribution to the development of the tourism industry and encouraging him to assume a role as a respected elder statesman.

“Be magnanimous in times of victory, and courageous in times of defeat. The test of Maldivian democracy will be how we treat our former President,” said Nasheed at the time.

His sentiments were echoed during a state visit from the President of Timor-Leste, Jose Ramos-Horta.

“I prefer to be criticised for being soft on people who committed violence in the past than be criticised for being too harsh or insensitive in putting people in jail,” said Ramos-Horta, during a visit to the Maldives in February 2010.

“Our approach fits our reality, an approach the president of the Maldives and I share – the need for magnanimity. Immediately after our independence in 1999, I said: ‘in victory be magnanimous. Don’t rub the wounds of those who feel they lost. Make them feel they won, also.’”

Exactly two years later Ramos-Horta would become the only world leader to condemn “the obvious coup d’état”, and the “unsettling silence of big powers”.

After the 2008 election Gayoom continued to lead his Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP), but in January 2010 announced his intention to bow out of politics ahead of the DRP congress, anointing Ahmed Thasmeen Ali as his successor and become the party’s ‘Supreme Leader’.

“The Maldives is a young country, and only will progress if youth become involved in politics and leadership,” the 72 year-old said during a live press conference on January 25, 2010.

“I am not young any more. I have spent many years in office, and I want to spend time with my family. I need to give the younger generation the opportunity [to lead the party] – they are capable,” Gayoom said.

A senior government source at the time observed that Gayoom’s announcement was not met with celebration by the country’s leadership.

“There is no jubilation here. It was very hard on some people when Gayoom publicly denied he ever harmed anyone,” the source said.

With Gayoom absent from the DRP, a power struggle quickly erupted between the vigorously uncompromising faction of Umar Naseer, a former policeman, and Thasmeen’s mellower, more conciliatory approach to opposition politics. The struggle came to a head with the expulsion of Naseer from the party in late 2010, a decision that sparked Gayoom’s return to active politics with a dramatic attack on Thasmeen’s leadership in a 12 page open letter.

Backed into a corner by the party’s Supreme Leader, Thasmeen did not respond, while the infighting – occasionally violent – culminated in Gayoom’s faction splitting from the party and forming the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), backed by the People’s Alliance (PA) of his half-brother, MP Abdulla Yameen.

The PPM actively led protests in the lead up to Nasheed’s downfall on February 7, opposing everything from the “idolatrous” SAARC country monuments in Addu to Nasheed’s detention of Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed, an ill-fated last-ditch attempt to reform the judiciary.

Speaking to Time Magazine this week, Nasheed said he had pushed against a “witch hunt” after coming to office: “We didn’t want to purge the military, we didn’t want to purge the police.”

“There were mistakes,” he confessed. “One thing the international community finds it difficult to understand was the arresting of the judge. He asked a child to re-enact a child-abuse case in the court. The whole country was disgusted by it. The very next week, he gives an order for a murderer to be released because the Ministry of Health didn’t have a death certificate. And then [the released man] goes out and murders again. It was like releasing a hit man so he could go out and make another hit. The whole picture was getting very, very clear with gangs, drug dealers and with Gayoom and his cronies,” Nasheed told Time.

The government had begged the international community for assistance after detaining the judge, Nasheed said.

“Unfortunately, I kept on asking everyone – the Commonwealth, the EU, the Indian government – to assist us in reforming the judiciary. But they were very late in coming. And we didn’t get the necessary help from them,” he said.

“Also we were bringing in reforms very rapidly. We were liberalising the outlook of the country very, very rapidly. Especially with Islamic radicalism. Our ideas of moderation, the moderate Islam — there were some small, entrenched sections that reacted strongly against me. I thought they were odd people here and there. But there was a core of radical Islamists who fueled the coup through media and harping on about how un-Islamic I am. I must confess, I’m not the most pious of the people. But I am a strong believer.”

Nasheed predicted that Gayoom would make a move for the presidency “when he thinks it’s in his hand, when he feels the field is skewed enough in his favor.”

“His designs are to have a stronger hold on power. He would avoid an election. I am sure he would avoid the scheduled election in 2013 as well. He’d try to push back the elections as much as they can. He would talk in words that the international community will like. We had elections in 2008, 2009, 2011 that were all free and fair. But suddenly the US government is saying, ‘Oh Gayoom says, there might be a problem with the election commission.’

“This is very strange. At the same time, [Gayoom] will start running things through the military. My fear is that we’re not going back to pre-2008 Maldives. We’re going back to pre-2008 other countries, to Pakistan, perhaps, where the military becomes so strong that they call the shots.”

Nasheed said he was “shocked” at the speed with which the US, India and other countries recognised the new government, especially after “we did so much to encourage internationalism, encourage liberalism, to bring Indian investment — to get rid of anti-India phobia. We tried to have good relations. But when push came to shove, we ended up in the wrong. Somehow we were not the right people to talk to. If you want to be a regional leader, you must be sensible. And consistent. And you should lead. They should protect democracy, and they should be on the side of democrats and human rights.”

Nasheed said they tried to encourage him to form a national unity government, “but my point is, why should we try to unify the dictatorship? The coup is not unifying the country – it’s bringing back the old dictatorship. We didn’t want to have a part in it. We beat them in the elections. It’s wrong to talk about governing with Gayoom because he was rejected by the people.”

The international community had slowly begun realigning itself after realising that the ousted government was refusing to be supressed, and had backed early elections – “they should have been the first to say it, not me,” Nasheed noted.

India in particular “has the means” to push for early elections, Nasheed observed.

When those are held, “I am very, very confident that the people will decide upon us. And the thing is not who wins an election – it’s the fact that you have to have one. It’s the fact that a government is formed through the people.”

Read the full interview in Time Magazine

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP National Council votes to investigate manipulation of party’s constitution

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s Gaumee Majilis (National Council) has passed a resolution to investigate an alleged ‘manipulation’ of its constitution on Tuesday.

In the National Council meeting held on Tuesday, the report of the committee formed within the party to investigate the matter was presented to the meeting by the chair of the committee Mohamed Waheed, who was also the former Minister of State for Health and Family during Nasheed’s administration.

Presenting his report to the council, Waheed stated that the committee found that the constitution had been manipulated as it differed from the original version of the party constitution that had been passed in the Party’s last congress, held on October 2010.

According to Waheed, there were two significant changes brought to the party constitution, both to the advantage of the two senior positions of the party – President and Vice President.

The amendments allegedly included in the constitution involved article 40 concerning about the party (shadow) cabinet. The second involved article 78, concerning the highest authority of the party when in opposition.

Waheed said that the committee had found that two articles were not included in the original version of the party constitution.

The article 40 of the allegedly manipulated constitution states: “The policies set by the Congress shall be executed by the Party Cabinet. The Party Cabinet shall be appointed by the Party President.”

The article 78 of the same document reads: “The President of the Party is the highest position of the party. He shall also be the highest authority in politically representing the party and carrying out the political activities of the party. However, he shall execute his duties within and in accordance with the principles of the party, which includes that his actions be in a democratic and transparent matter. He shall not execute his authorities in contrary to the party principles. The term of the Party President is five years.”

Speaking to Minivan News on Tuesday, Waheed briefly outlined what he described as a scandal.

“I remember very clearly that the version originally passed in the congress did not include a party cabinet, and did not include the phrase that the party president was the highest authority when the party was in opposition,” Waheed said.

“During the congress the powers of the Party President and Vice President were delegated to the Chairperson and the Parliamentary Group leader. But the amendment to remove the post of party president and vice president did not pass, therefore the two positions remained as ceremonial positions since their powers had been delegated.

“But the party constitution has been manipulated and now includes stipulations that were not originally included in the party constitution. For instance, see the powers that are included for the party president in the version available on the party website. It contradicts with the powers of the chairperson,” he said.

Vice President of the Party and MP Alhan Fahmy was the only member in the council who spoke against the report, citing that the findings  presented by the committee were untrue and that no changes had been brought to the party constitution.

He also stressed that the matters involving the party constitution and that the party congress was  the only body vested with the power to bring any changes to it.

Speaking in support of the report, the re-elected Parliamentary Group Leader and MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, said  the valid party constitution the party has to follow should be the one that was passed in the last congress of the party.

He also claimed that the findings in the report were true and that  article 40 and 78 had not been included in the original constitution of the party when it was passed.

There were also calls from some members of the council, including MP Mohamed Shifaz,  for an extraordinary congress, however debate did not materialise in the meeting.

With regard to the submission of the report, two resolutions were passed.

The first resolution was presented by the former Legal Director of the President’s Office Hisaan Hussain, which was passed by majority of 36 votes.

The resolution stated that the MDP shall view the party constitution that was passed during the last Congress as its official constitution and that this be submitted to the Elections Commission as the official constitution of the Maldivian Democratic Party.

The second resolution was presented by the former Minister of Human Resources, Youth and Sports, Hassan Latheef, which passed with a majority of 39 votes.

The resolution stated that the matter of ‘manipulation’ of the party constitution be looked into by the relevant organs of the party, and action taken by the party against those who were found guilty.

Another resolution was forwarded by Waheed, proposing to delay the previously agreed Presidential Primary of the Party in preparation for the ‘potential’ early elections that may take place in 2012.

The resolution also proposed that the election of the vacant positions of Party Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson (Administrative) be held on 16 June 2012.

However, Waheed withdrew the resolution after newly elected MDP Deputy Parliamentary Group (PG) leader MP Ali Waheed suggested that the matter be decided after former president Nasheed concluded his trip to the United States.

MDP also yesterday held its Parliamentary Group elections for this year, electing the current PG Leader MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih for another term while MP Mohamed Aslam and MP Ali Waheed were elected as Deputy Leaders.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MDP calls for suspension of February 8 cases until coup investigation is complete

MP of the ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Ahmed Sameer has called on the Prosecutor General (PG) to suspend criminal charges against those arrested during the February 8 unrest, until an independent inquiry investigated police involvement in the transfer of power the previous day.

In a letter to PG Ahmed Muizz, Sameer raised questions over the police’s ability to conduct independent and impartial investigations into public criminal offenses, alleging elements of the police and military staged a coup d’état to depose President Mohamed Nasheed and were continuing to target and attack MDP MPs and members.

“Whilst atrocities committed by the police remain uninvestigated, any investigation by police cannot be accurate. Hence, if the PG files these charges at court, can the PG be independent and impartial as guaranteed in Article 220 (a) of the constitution?” Sameer said.

Speaking to Minivan News, Sameer said he had met with the PG on Monday and that the PG was receptive to Sameer’s concerns.

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza has accused the MDP of terrorism and said, “The government will not negotiate in releasing those arrested and charged for terrorism, will not let them be considered political prisoners.”

However, Deputy PG Hussein Shameem said no terrorism charges have been filed to date.

“We have submitted 116 cases to the criminal court. The charges we have filed regard obstruction of police duty, assault on police officers on duty, and attempt to assault police officers on duty,” Shameem said. If charges are proved, the accused may be jailed for six months or fined up to Rf 12,000 (US$800).

According to Shameem, police had initially filed 135 cases with the PG relating to the February 8 unrest; these include 42 cases from Haa Alif Atoll Kulhudhufushi, 12 from Shaviyani Atoll Milandhoo, 41 from Fuamulah Island, 24 from Haa Alif Ihavandhoo, 11 from Haa Dhaal Atoll Dhidhoo, and five cases from Haa Alif Atoll Hoarafushi.

Sameer said the eight people from his constituency of Dhidhoo charged with vandalism and closing of the Dhidhoo police station faced false charges.

He said the police had closed the station voluntarily, after the MDP controlled Dhidhoo council raised concerns of possible harm to police if the police continued to stay on duty on the day.

Although Sameer has called for suspension of prosecution until an inquiry, the possibility of an independent investigation now appears remote. The presidential commission charged with looking into the legality and legitimacy of the transfer of power has said it will not conduct a criminal investigation, and has also come under fire from MDP and civil society groups for unilateralism and lack of independence.

At the same time, the state’s independent institutions have also said investigation into the legality and legitimacy of the transfer of power is not within their mandates.

The EU, Commonwealth, MDP and local civil society groups have called for independent and impartial investigation into the alleged coup, with the involvement of international experts.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

ACC investigates awarding of state-owned apartments to judges

Judges occupying state-owned apartments while simultaneously receiving living allowances are currently under investigation following accusations that they are receiving unfair privileges, the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) has confirmed.

“We have received complaints that some judges are living in government flats and taking living allowances. The complaint states that giving flats to only certain judges is giving them unjust privileges,” ACC Deputy Chair Muaviz Rasheed said.

Three judges are living in flats leased to the former Justice Ministry, including Supreme Court Judge Ali Hameed, High Court Judge Ahmed Shareef and Civil Court Judge Abdullah Adheeb, according to local newspaper Haveeru.

Meanwhile, Haveeru also reported that the parliament’s Finance Committee has decided to grant the ownership of those flats to the judges and has forwarded the matter to the floor for a vote.

A Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP belonging to the finance committee confirmed the decision was taken in his absence during a committee meeting last month.

Minivan News could not get details of the decision at the time of press.

The finance committee is headed by MP Ahmed Nazim from the People’s Alliance (PA). the party headed by former President Gayoom’s half brother, Abdulla Yameen.  Multiple counts of fraud against Nazim were recently dismissed by the Criminal Court.

Asked whether the parliament committee can grant ownership of state property to judges, Muaviz responded that “I cannot comment on as it may affect the ongoing investigation.”

However, he added that parliament must follow the laws while deciding the salaries and privileges of independent institutions.

According to the Judges Act article 39(a) judges belonging to the same court shall be granted equal salaries and living allowances. Any discrimination in giving living allowances or benefits to judges is restricted under the same clause.

Under the state’s revised pay structure, judges of Superior courts receive Rf45,000, including a Rf30,000 basic salary and a Rf15,000 living allowance while island courts magistrates are paid Rf20,000, including a Rf16,000 basic salary and a Rf4,000 living allowance.

The Supreme Court Judges meanwhile receive a basic salary of Rf51,000 and a living allowance of Rf20 ,000 and the High Court Judges are paid Rf38,000 as basic salary and Rf15,000 as living allowance.

The revised pay structure endorsed by the parliament in 2010, raised the judiciary’s wages and allowances by 87 percent. According to the wage structure, Rf89 million (US$5.7 million) was included in the budget to cover the salaries and benefits for 244 judges in 2011, compared to the Rf 41 million (US$2.7 million) spent in the previous year.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

IMF predicts dire consequences if deficit reduction fails

The IMF yesterday warned the People’s Majlis that if the country does not reduce its expenditure, it risks running out of reserves and miring the country in poverty.

“The expenditure has not been under control since 2009. It has been rising, and we have been [issuing] warnings since then,” Haveeru reported the Chief of the IMF mission in the Maldives, Jonathan Dunn, as telling parliament.

Previously highlighting “significant policy slippages”, in particular the government’s failure to curtail spending, the IMF felt it necessary to delay the third tranche of funding in 2010. Nasheed’s government contended that it had tried to impose austerity measures, in particular pay cuts for civil servants, but had been blocked by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) and then-opposition majority parliament for political reasons.

Dunn recommended against printing money or obtaining loans from other countries, given the current economic frailty of the Maldives.

His suggestions for expenditure reduction included revising civil servants’ salaries and allowances, increasing the Goods and Services Tax (GST) from 6 percent to 15 percent, re-introducing import duties, and increasing bed tax by 50 percent, from US$8 to $12.

According to the World Bank, a 66 percent increase in salaries and allowances for government employees between 2006 and 2008 was “by far the highest increase in compensation over a three year period to government employees of any country in the world.”

Originally, it was foreseen that the shortfall from import duties was to be covered by Rf2 billion in tourism goods and services tax (T-GST) and Rf 1 billion as general goods and services tax (GST) revenue.

The IMF representative also noted that budget figures they studied did not represent the change in the way lease extensions for resorts were now being received.

The new government recently revised the policy on lease extension payments for resort islands, making the sums payable in instalments rather than lump sums. Former Tourism Minister Mariyam Zulfa has argued that this policy is largely responsible for the current budget deficit, instantly creating a US$135 million hole in the budget for the short-term financial benefit of several influential Maldivian resort owners.

Detailed national income statistics are now published monthly by the Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA). Total revenue collected in March was Rf 648.7 million (US$42.1 million), more than triple the amount received in March 2010.

However, “revenue received [in March 2012] is 37.9 percent lower than the projected revenue, mainly due to the unrealised revenue from Lease Period Extension,” MIRA observed.

Total revenue collected during the first quarter of 2012 represents a 113.9 percent increase on the same period last year. Half of the revenue collected during this period was attributable to the Business Profit Tax (BPT) and GST, introduced during Nasheed’s government.

Head of the Majlis’s Financial Committee, Deputy Speaker and People’s Alliance (PA) MP Ahmed Nazim, met with the IMF last week and said their main concern was that the 2012 budget “may not be realised.”

“The IMF feels there is a big hole in the forecast revenue,” said Nazim.

He also felt the investigation of the expenditure on the Aasandha health insurance scheme to be relevant, as it represents more than 10 percent of the budget.

Although he described the scheme’s future as assured, he expressed grave concerns over the sustainability of the scheme as currently practiced.

“It is a hole in the pocket of the government. It seems odd that half of the population has used it, there is no epidemic, and yet it has used Rf 3 million (US$195,000) a day on medicine,” said Nazim.

Nazim also mentioned the shortfall of over Rf 500 million from the failure to privatise  Maldives Post Ltd, Island Aviation and Maldives In-flight catering.

Tourism Revenues

Due to the country’s reliance on imports, the waning of reserves was described as very dangerous, with the IMF comparing the situation with that of the Seychelles in 2008.

The Seychelles secured a US$26 million Stand-By Arrangement from the IMF after a balance of payments crisis saw the country default on international loans. In exchange, the Seychelles, whose economy also relies heavily on tourism, undertook stringent cuts, including shedding 12.5% of the government workforce.

The Seychelles crisis was partly attributed to a fall in the tourism trade damaging the country’s finances. Concerns have been raised regarding the effect of the current political crisis on the current Maldives’ government, with some figures suggesting numbers were down as a result.

Dunn anticipated that the tourism figures were likely to affect the amount of the GST that would be received, which he argued could not replace the income forfeited by suspending many import duties. Both measures were introduced with cross party support at the start of the year under the previous government.

The Maldives Association of Tourism Industry (MATI) had previously warned that the industry stands to lose as much as US$100 million in the next six months due to widespread media coverage of the country’s political unrest.

More recently, however, the Tourism Ministry declared its confidence that this year’s arrivals will break all previous records. Maldives Association of Travel and Tour Operators (MATATO) yesterday revealed plans to specifically target certain markets with specially assigned staff members to help achieve those aims.

Deputy Minister of Tourism Mohamed Maleeh Jamaal said that the Tourism Ministry did not forecast that the decline would continue.

“The Chinese market is improving. Our [predictions] do not show that the Chinese market will decline to the extent the IMF has said, and we had a positive growth in the last three months,” he said.

Concluding his presentation, Dunn pressed home the harsh reality of the economic climate.

“These are tough steps to take. It requires your [MPs’] cooperation. It is your responsibility as well. This is necessary for the nation. Immediate steps have to be taken. This is the reality, we have to face it.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz was appointed following the change of government on February 7 in what former President Mohamed Nasheed and the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) contends was a police and military-led coup d’état. Riyaz had previously served as Assistant Commissioner but was dismissed by Nasheed’s government in 2009.

Daniel Bosley: Why did you decide to promote so many officers all at once?

Abdulla Riyaz: Well, most of the promotions have been overdue for a long time, and when I took office I looked at the reasons and discussed with the executives, as I have mentioned, that we have been working to restructure the whole organisation which I have done. It has been selected to under directorates which would be able to form some departments, and in the departments there will be several units which will cover the whole country. We have a constitutional responsibility as well as from the police act. We have a lot of responsibilities to protect and serve the people, to keep the peace in society, and to maintain law and order so I thought it is necessary that these arrangements should be made and that is what we have done. All the promotions that we have awarded are based on the promotion regulations.

DB: Is this re-organisation linked to your aim of de-politicising the police force?

AR: Well, there is no politicisation in the police any more. But for the last three years, this organisation has been heavily influenced by politicians. I’m sure all professional journalists, if they have done this analysis or investigation, would find that. Since I have taken office I have looked at some of the issues and have found that some of the promotions have been given just because of political influence. There have been some officers transferred from one police station to others just for the political reasons, so I am here to make sure that I am serving this organisation, also the people of the Maldives, without bias. Today I can say very proudly say that we are working without any political influence, from the President or from the Minister. It is totally, one hundred percent, independently operational now.

DB: So, there have been demotions as well?

AR: No, there hasn’t been any demotion – definitely not so far, and I have no intention to either. If there has been any misconduct, any unlawful act done by any police officer; if they have been found guilty by law or by disciplinary boards, through the due process. If that kind of advise or that kind of verdict comes, I will definitely take those actions [to demote]. I will never hesitate to demote a police officer if they are found guilty of any unlawful act.

DB: There has been a lot of talk about reform and enhanced training; what kind of things do you have in mind for the future?

AR: For the training, our main challenge at the moment is to keep the peace in our society. To do that we have prioritised our operational practice. One of these is drug trafficking; the second is violent crimes, organised crime, counter terrorism, and road discipline – so these are the five main operational priorities that we are going to focus on this year. Most of our resources will go to make sure that we get results in these areas and our training will be focused on that.

We said that we would also want to make sure that we can convince the public and increase the public perception about the trust and confidence in the police, we need to improve that. That is one of the main areas we need. For that we need to assure that the police is not biased, that the police are professional, that we deal without any gender bias or without any political differences of that nature.

So, I am very confident that we will be in a better position to get this [confidence] back. I am pretty confident that we can achieve public trust and confidence. It’s just a couple of months that I have taken office and so far the feedback that I have been getting is very positive, and of course I am open for any comments or suggestions from the members of the public;  from which we will definitely make changes to our programmes or our projects.

So mostly, all our focus will be on that. We are doing a lot of training on professional development; investigations to make sure that, rather than on the number of cases we investigate, we concentrate more on making sure that we have more successful prosecutions. Because we have seen in the past a lot of cases that have not been proven at the court of law. That is a big concern for me, so I am working very closely with the Prosecutor General as well to make sure that our officers are trained professionally to investigate, to interview, trained to collect evidence, analyse it, submit reports and present it at the court of law, and make sure we have successful prosecutions. That is the other main area.

We are also very much concerned about our officers safety – I condemn the acts of some of the people who have attacked the police officers. We have not lost any lives but there have been several serious injuries and we had to take a couple of our officers abroad for treatment. A lot of their assets have been targeted and vandalised on the other atolls, on the islands, while they were serving the public. So, one of our concerns is also to improve their welfare and working conditions, plus their working shifts. We know that some of the officers have been working very hard, very long hours and that we need to improve that. For that reason we needed more officers to be recruited into the organisation, which we are going to do this year. We have been approved for 200 more police officers to be included, so they will be initiated this year. We are also seeing that due to the long shifts and fatigue, that we need to make sure that our officers are dealing with the public professionally.

We are getting some of the reports of complaints about police officers’ dealings and because of that reason we have restructure our professional standards. They are responsible to deal with complaints against the police, also to do counselling for officers, and that kind of program has already been initiated. The counselling program will involve almost all of the police officers in the service. It is professional counselling to make sure that they don’t have worries with their families or whatever issues that they have, if that comes back to us, then our organisation will know what are the things we need to improve. These are the main areas we need to improve.

DB: We have already touched slightly on internal disciplinary procedures – have these been changed in any way?

AR: The internal disciplinary procedures all these years has been that, if there is any complaint against the police, the case has to register at the Professional Standards Directorate (PSD). It had to be registered, somebody had to complain. But I have changed it to act that if we hear information from any sources – it is more pro-active. Then the PSD has the responsibility to do an inquiry, and they will also work very closely with the Human Rights Commission Maldives (HRCM), with the Police Integrity Commission (PIC), with Amnesty International (AI) or other organisations who are dealing with these kinds of areas, so they are very pro-active – more proactive than ever before.

Once they investigate the cases, if they feel that there has been a criminal case, then it will be dealt with by the criminal investigation department, whereas if it is a disciplinary issue, it will go through the disciplinary board. We have a disciplinary board of five or seven members; we have changed the board now. Some commissioned officers have been complained about so it has been restructured so very senior officers will be sitting to deal with the commissioned officers and so that is the procedure. If the board decides that action should be taken then I will definitely endorse it. That is how it is done in terms of disciplinary issues and if there is a call for dismissal then I have to write to the Minister for his authorisation. If it is a criminal case it will go to the prosecutor general who will deal with it in accordance with the law.

DB: Could you comment on recent complaints by Amnesty International regarding the treatment of female detainees?

AR: It’s very unfortunate that it has come up. Normally, these kinds of organisations, before they issue a release, they will ask for our comments. They have never done that; I am very disappointed about that. We have given Amnesty full access every time they asked; it is even now open. We have a very open policy. To be honest with you, even during a demonstration, every time we are working on the street, HRCM or PIC is on the ground to watch us. Normally, if we apprehend someone, before we even know their names, HRCM would have registered it by themselves. So it is in the normal cases.

We are giving them access to our reception, we are giving access to Dhoonidhoo island. In fact, they don’t have to ask to visit, they could just go by boat and say that ‘we are here’, they could make surprise visits – feel free, it’s open. Even Amnesty or Open Society or whatever – please come and visit us and see if there is anything we have been doing systematically to harass or do anything. On that matter, I am very disappointed that Amnesty has released that statement without contacting us for our comments. I don’t see that there has been any investigations done, none of our officers was questioned, interviewed – neither by them nor by the police integrity commission, nor by the human rights commission. I don’t think that’s fair and that’s the reason we had to respond to it [with a statement].

DB: Regarding the investigation of the events of February 7 and 8, what are the roles of the HRCM and the CNI?

AR: I can’t talk on behalf of CNI, obviously, but I think they are investigating an overview, that’s how I feel. They are not doing a criminal investigation. I was interviewed as well and I was told it wasn’t a criminal investigation. So I think we will have to wait for the outcome. I think it’s a very positive move by the government, to have an independent commission to make sure how events took place. The HRCM is perhaps doing a part of the investigation, or the PIC is doing some as well, so let’s wait and see how it comes.

DB: You have already mentioned the public sentiment problems, is there anything you would like to add on that subject?

AR: I can understand that this is not the best time for police, there have been a lot of things [that have happened]. What I would like to convey to the members of the public is that the police institution will remain as an institution. People come and go, the leadership comes and goes; the institution will remain. Even for the politicians or the members of the public who are not comfortable with us, I would want to convince, or give the message, that the institution will remain, so we will have to give that respect to the institution. If there is an issue with the commissioner or if there is an issue with any of the officers, I think we will have to follow the processes; if there is any complaint, deal with it. All these institutions that have to be there within our constitution are already there in place, it’s functioning.

I think that PIC, HRCM, Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) are very independently doing the investigations and we should allow that to happen rather than blaming the institutions for no reason. I don’t think that is going to be healthy, either for them, nor for society, nor for us. I think we have to strengthen the institutions, we have to advocate even the members of the public and the politicians as well. The future political leaders must also make sure we give the space to strengthen the institutions.

I think that this is a great opportunity for the Maldives. Why it is great is because now, at this point of time, I can say the police is very much operationally independent. This is the only time I can happily say that. I can see a lot of smiles from the police officers, I can see that they are not exhausted.  I have been scared with some of the incidents they have gone through during  the last three years – some of the decisions that have come from executive of what to do and what not to do. These things are not here, I don’t get calls from my president. That is why I’m saying that this is a great time and I think that this is a time for our lawmakers to look at how this institution has been politicised, how can we improve for the new leaders; not only the executives but also the commissioners? How strong should the commissioner be to make sure the institution is not politicised?

I think these are the [important] areas and, of course, from all that we have seen about the arrest and detention of the criminal court judge, we can see that the whole thing is coming from the executive’s instructions. So what made the Home Minister and the Commissioner decide to come back and ask for assistance from the police, and the Commissioner to go to Defence, and the Defence Minister asking for the rank and files to make him arrest and all this – we have to look at these things. Do we want this to happen again? No. Do we want change of government like this? No. We are talking about making institutions professional, we are taking about strengthening institutions, we are talking about giving them space to effectively run the main responsibilities for the people.

Police are not there protect the government, police are there to protect the people. We have to differentiate these things, while in my position I have to decide whether my work will be to protect the government or should I use all my legal authority and machinery, the resources that we have, to protect the people. These are the decisions; these are two different things. I think in a democratic society, the policing is always for the people and I am confident that the President has pledged [this], and that was one of the reasons why I accepted to come back to the police. I have my trust and confidence in the president, also in my minister, and even if I get do get any unlawful order, I am confident to say that I will say no and I will  never do that. All the actions, all the decisions that we will take will be based on our legal positions, by ourselves. It will never be influenced by politicians.

DB: Has the precedent been set for police to overthrow government when unlawful orders are issued?

AR: I see February 6 as a day when the police have upheld the constitution and the laws of the land. They have been repeatedly instructed and given unlawful orders for which they have [refused to follow] several times. I see that as a day that they have upheld the law and constitution, I don’t see that they have overthrown the government. I see the whole process went very peacefully. I don’t see it as a coup either. I don’t know how it went inside the chambers of the Presidnt or inside his office, but obviously what I have seen is that he was very voluntarily resigning. I saw his resignation speech as well from close by, so I don’t see that there was any coup. I don’t believe the police force have overthrown the government.

In fact, if you look from minute to minute on the sixth, what they have been asking is for one thing –  not to give unlawful orders, that’s the only thing they had been demanding. That was with a reason. Why were they at the Republic Square? Because the seniors asked them to stay there. So, the events have unfolded the next day and several things have happened, and the President has decided.

Definitely, I was never involved in any coup. I can one hundred percent guarantee that if there is any investigation from any agency, I can one hundred percent say that I am very innocent in that. Whatever role I played, it was based on national interest, nothing else. We never wanted to see any bloodshed, we never wanted to see anything happen wrong there and that was a time when I thought that the nation had asked for my support or my presence. That is how I was there. Unless, if anything is proven in a court of law, I don’t think I can be convinced otherwise.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MDP to take confidence votes on leadership in “coup attempt”, claims MP

A resolution has been submitted to the Gaumee Majlis (National Council) of the Maldivian Democratic Party, demanding confidence votes in the party’s leadership.

The apparent factionalisation follows an attempt by Party President and former Fisheries Minister Dr Ibrahim Didi to introduce a shadow cabinet to the party.

The resolution called for a “confidence assessment” of all the members in the senior leadership of the party, and was forwarded by the party’s Chair of Elections Committee and former head of National Social Protection Agency (NSPA), Ibrahim Waheed.

The resolution submitted proposes that the national council take a confidence vote in the leadership of the party President Dr Ibrahim Didi, Vice President MP Alhan Fahmy, Interim Chairperson MP Moosa Manik and Deputy Chairperson (Finance) Ahmed Mausoom.

In a separate resolution, a motion of no confidence was forwarded against the party’s Secretary General Hassan Shah.

MP Alhan Fahmy has described the resolution as a “coup attempt” to depose him from his position as the party’s vice president following his reform attempts, he  told local newspaper Haveeru.

Fahmy stated that the resolution had been forwarded contrary to the MDP’s constitution.

He also said that he had been elected to the position with a higher number votes than the number of votes that the Party President, Dr Didi, and said he did not believe that such a motion could be forwarded to the national council.

According to article 30, clause (f) of the MDP’s constitution available on its website, the chapter describing the powers of the national council states it is able “to debate and assess the confidence of the President of the Party or the Vice President of the Party or the Chairperson or a Deputy Chairperson, if the members of the party submits a complaint in disapproving their actions.”

Fahmy was not responding to calls at time of press. However the sponsor of the resolution, Mohamed Waheed, said that he had submitted the resolution under the right given from the MDP Constitution.

“I submitted the resolution in accordance with the MDP Constitution. The reason for the submission was that some of the party’s leaders have been issuing statements and interviews against the MDP’s Constitution, after the coup on February 7,” he said.

Responding to MP Fahmy’s claims, Waheed said that Fahmy “should read the MDP constitution thoroughly. The party constitution gives me the right under the article 30. Reforms should be brought in accordance with the party constitution,” he said.

Party constitution manipulated?

Waheed alleged that some officials of the party leadership had manipulated the party’s constitution after it was passed at the party’s congress on October 2010.

“There was a committee selected to draft the party constitution. I was the chair of the committee. The other members were MP Mohamed Aslam, MP Mohamed Rasheed and former state minister of Youth Ministry Mohamed Hussain Rasheed ‘Bigey’,” Waheed said.

Waheed alleged that the version of the party’s constitution on in the party’s website was a ‘manipulated’ version.

“The current version [of the party constitution] that is available on website is not the original version that was passed in the congress.”

“I remember very clearly that the version that was originally passed in the congress did not include a party cabinet, and did not include the phrase that the party president was the highest authority when the party is in opposition,” he continued.

“During the congress the powers of the Party President and Vice President were delegated to the Chairperson and the Parliamentary Group leader. But the amendment to remove the post of party president and vice president did not pass, therefore the two positions remained as ceremonial positions since their powers had been delegated.

“But, the party constitution has now been manipulated and now includes stipulations that were not originally included in the party constitution. For instance, see the powers that are included for the party president in the version available on the party website. It contradictswith the powers of the chairperson,” Waheed added.

MDP President Dr Didi was not responding at time of press.

The MDP National Council is held a meeting at 5:00pm on Tuesday, however Minivan News understands that Waheed’s resolution was not on the agenda.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed is currently in the United States to promote the Island President, and meet with State Department officials. Other senior party figures such as Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail are in India meeting authorities to clarify the events of February 7 and seek support.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Coup investigation not within our mandate”: HRCM, PIC, PG, ACC, MMC

Investigation into the legality and legitimacy of the transfer of power on February 7 is not within Maldives’ independent state institutions’ mandate, the institutions have said.

Instead, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) and the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) will respectively investigate human rights violations and police conduct on February 7.

The Prosecutor General (PG) and the Maldives Media Council claim the two bodies do not have investigative authority, while the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) said no cases have been lodged with the commission regarding the transfer of power.

Following the Commonwealth and EU’s call for an impartial investigation into the alleged coup d’état, President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan appointed a three member Committee of National Inquiry (CNI) to investigate the transfer of power. However, the commission has come under fire from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and civil society groups for unilateralism and lack of independence.

Moreover, the CNI has said it will not conduct a criminal investigation, but will publish a report based on members’ informed opinions in May. The commission’s mandate “specifically indicates that the inquiry will not be a criminal investigation. Any criminal investigation pertaining to the subject of the inquiry will remain the responsibility of the relevant authorities”.

But with the abdication of responsibility by independent state institutions, it now appears no independent commission in the Maldives will investigate the power transfer of February 7.

Ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) spokesperson Hamid Abdul Gafoor expressed “deep disappointment” and said institutions were “not extending themselves enough.”

“When the system breaks down, it is the responsibility of national mechanisms to deal with it. The democratic impulses driving these institutions are dying. This is why we are asking for external involvement and mediation in the inquiry,” he said.

President Mohamed Nasheed stepped down after elements of the police and military mutinied and called for his resignation. Video footage also show the police and military vandalising MDP’s offices and taking over state media Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC) prior to Nasheed’s resignation.

Police cracked down on peaceful demonstrators in Malé the following day on February 8, leading to widespread arson and vandalism of courts, police stations and courts in the atolls.

HRCM

Speaking to Minivan News, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) said the commission will investigate human rights violations on February 6, 7, and 8, and release a comprehensive report by mid-April. However, the commission will not look into the transfer of power.

“We will not be looking into the transfer of power. The transfer of power is out of the commission’s mandate or the capacity in terms of numbers to investigate such a complex matter that involves so many institutions,” said commission member Ahmed Abdul Kareem.

“If HRCM gets involved in this inquiry, then we will not be able to investigate day-to-day cases,” he added.

He also said the best solution was for an impartial state inquiry with the representation of the Majlis and courts.

HRCM is currently investigating former President Mohamed Nasheed’s detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed. The former President, along with former Home Minister Hassan Afeef and Defence Minister Tholath Ibrahim, were last week summoned for questioning by the commission.

In response Gafoor said, “If the HRCM does not understand a coup to be an infringement of an entire public’s human rights, they are not extending themselves at all.”

Police Integrity Commission

President of the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) Shahindha Ismail said the commission would only be investigating the legality of police actions before and after February 7.

“Although the question of a coup has been raised, the PIC does not have the mandate to investigate such a claim. We are investigating police actions before and after February 7—whether they were lawful or unlawful,” she said. The PIC can only address the question of police mutiny once investigations are complete, she added.

Further, the PIC can only investigate the police role, but not that of the military. “There is no oversight body of the military except for the parliament,” she said.

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz previously told local media the police would not be conducting an internal investigation of police conduct during transfer of power, citing concern of investigation “overlap” on the issue between the HRCM and the PIC.

Prosecutor General’s Office

Deputy PG Hussein Shameem said the Prosecutor General was not an investigative body, but could order an investigation if an investigation is not taking place.

“We have not ordered an investigation because we have been informed such an investigation is ongoing,” Shameem said referring to the CNI’s work.

Article 223 (d) of the constitution gives the PG the authority to oversee the legality of preliminary inquiries and investigations into alleged criminal activity. However, with the CNI stating it will not conduct a criminal investigation, the PG office’s role in the CNI inquiry is now unclear.

Maldives Media Council

Minivan News asked the Maldives Media Council (MMC) whether it was investigating the police and military takeover of the Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC) on February 7. Video footage shows some kind of firearm or explosive being used to enter the courtyard, and MNBC staff alleged the police and military intimidated them, and forced some journalists to go home before rebranding the station to its former title under Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

The 15 member MMC is mandated by law to establish and preserve the freedom of media.

MMC President Mohamed Nazeef said the council was not an investigative body, and was waiting on other institutions to complete investigations.

“We are waiting since other institutions, such as the HRCM are investigating this matter. We do not want an overlap. We are not an investigative body and we cannot conduct an in-depth criminal investigation. We can only recommend matters of concern to the police. But if no one is investigating the issue, we will address it,” he said.

“MNBC was state media, controlled and protected by the government. Our concern and focus was more on the media personnel and private independent media organisations,” Nazeef added.

The Anti-Corruption Commission

The Anti-corruption Commission (ACC) said that although the MDP alleged elements of the police and the Maldives National Defense Forces (MNDF) were bribed to revolt against Nasheed, the commission could not investigate the entire military and police force.

“There are allegations that the police and military took bribes during the transfer of power. But there are approximately 5000 police officers. We cannot investigate the entire police force. We would need to conduct a forensic investigation, check their bank accounts and the bank accounts of relatives. But no one, even on a podium, has said with certainty the individual who took bribes. They say all police officers took bribes. I would like whoever is accusing the police to give us more details,” ACC President Hassan Luthfee said.

He also said there had only been two cases submitted regarding the transfer of power. One of them concerned a complaint that MDP demonstrators who laid money at police feet were actually bribing the police. The MDP were protesting against alleged police bribery.

The CNI

The CNI has now asked for witness statements and asked the public to upload statements and videos on their website if witnesses were uncomfortable giving statements in person.

The CNI has collected statements from all political parties except the MDP. But the MDP has refused to cooperate with the committee.

“We do not recognise the CNI. How can the people who instigated a coup investigate the coup? There is no validity in the process. How can we give any weight to it?” Gafoor told Minivan News.

The MDP has raised concerns over the committee’s composition. The CNI is chaired by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Defence Minister Ismail Shafeeu. The MDP has also called for strong international presence on the commission.

The EU, Commonwealth, India, UK and the US have called for an impartial investigation.

Dr Waheed Hassan told local television station Villa TV (VTV) he would resign and reinstate ousted President Nasheed if the CNI established the February 7 transfer of power to be illegitimate.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)