Tag: abdulla mohamed

Resolving judicial crisis “a huge challenge” for the Maldives: President Nasheed

Judges in the Maldives were reappointed by the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) at the conclusion of the interim period “in conflict with the constitution”, President Mohamed Nasheed has said during his weekly radio address.

The JSC reappointed the vast majority of sitting judges prior to parliament approving a statute establishing the criteria for serving on the bench, Nasheed said.

The consequence – a judiciary almost identical as the one appointed by the former Ministry of Justice under the previous government, but badged as independent – was “a huge challenge” for the Maldives, he added.

Prior to the reappointments, the President’s Office in May 2010 sent a letter to the JSC expressing concern that a large number of judges lacked both the educational qualifications and ethical conduct required of judges in a democracy.

“While the Act relating to Judges was passed in August 2010, and while the Constitution is very clear that Judges cannot be appointed without this Act, to date the JSC has failed to reappoint Judges,” Nasheed said.

“The Supreme Court Judges were appointed in accordance with the Constitution and law. The High Court bench was appointed in accordance with the Constitution and law. However, it is hard to say that the lower court Judges were appointed as per the Constitution and law,” he contended.

The government has faced critcism from the opposition and weeks of opposition-led protests, some of them violent, after the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) took Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, into custody on January 16.

The government had accused the chief judge of endemic corruption, obstructing police investigations and of links with both the opposition and organised crime. Abdulla Mohamed sought a High Court ruling to prevent his arrest – which was granted – leading police to request the MNDF to take the judge into custody.

The judge was previously under investigation by the JSC – the judicial watchdog body – however he was granted an injunction by the Civil Court which ordere the JSC to halt the investigation.

In his radio address, Nasheed identified four areas of reform under the 2008 constitution: change of regime through multiparty elections, election of a new parliament, introduction of decentralised administration, and election of local councils.

“The major remaining reform envisioned by the Constitution is the establishment of an independent and competent judiciary,” Nasheed said.

The Foreign Ministry has requested a senior international legal delegation from the United Nations Human Rights Commission (OHCHR) to help resolve the current judicial crisis.

Last week, former President’s member on the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, told Minivan News that outside help from an independent and authoritative body such as the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) was desperately needed.

“We need the ICJ to be involved – someone like [former] UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Leandro Despouy. He was here for a fact-finding mission and had a thorough understanding of it, and gives authoritative advice,” she said.

“We need to look for people who understand not only the law in the constitution, but what we are transiting from. Because that is really important. The UN had brought in a former Australian Supreme Court Judge, but he didn’t get any support. There was a lady [from Harvard] but she left in tears as well. There was no support – the JSC voted not to even give her a living allowance. They are unwelcoming to knowledge – to everyone. It is a closed place,” she warned, adding the difficulty was enhanced further because all the documentation was in Dhivehi.

UK MP for Salisbury, John Glen, has meanwhile urged UK Parliament to “urgently make time for a debate on judicial reform in the Republic of the Maldives.”

“Although the judiciary is constitutionally independent, sitting judges are underqualified, often corrupt and hostile to the democratically elected regime,” Glen stated.

Leader of the House of Commons, George Young, responded that Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Alistair Burt, was “in touch with the Maldives President to see whether we can resolve the impasse. The high commission in Colombo is also engaged. We want to help the Maldives to make progress towards democratic reform in the direction that John Glen outlines.”

Several hundred opposition protesters meanwhile gathered last night for the second week running, with police arresting several dozen people and deploying pepper spray after the crowd reportedly began hurling paving stones at officers outside the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) building.

MP Ahmed Nihan of former President Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and recently-resigned SAARC Secretary General Dhiyana Saeed were among those detained by police. Haveeru reported that 17 of the 22 arrested were detained in Dhoonidhoo custodial overnight.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MNDF dismiss High Court order to produce Judge Abdulla Mohamed

The High Court has ordered the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) to produce Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed for the hearing of the case appealed by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), following the Civil Court injunction preventing the JSC from taking action against Judge Abdulla over an ethical issue.

High Court Spokesperson Ameen Faisal told Minivan News that the High Court had ordered the MNDF to produce Judge Abdulla to the court at 4:15pm today, but said the MNDF had dismissed the order. Under the Maldivian Constitution the MNDF is answerable to the President, who serves as Commander-in-Chief.

”At 4:15pm the hearing was to be conducted but the presiding  judge decided that the case could not be conducted in the absence of Judge Abdulla and cancelled the hearing,” Ameen said.

MNDF Spokesperson Major Abdul Raheem told Minivan News that the MNDF had no comment on the matter.

The MNDF was previously ordered to produce Judge Abdulla Mohamed to dispute the legality of his detention, however the MNDF did not respond to any orders.

Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested by the MNDF on the evening of Monday, January 16, in compliance with a police request.

The judge’s whereabouts were not revealed until January 18, and the MNDF has acknowledged receipt but not replied to Supreme Court orders to release the judge.

Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz lately joined the High and Supreme Courts in condemning MNDF’s role in the arrest as unlawful, and requesting that the judge be released.

PG Muizz ordered an investigation by the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM), and will evaluate the situation following the commission’s findings.

Lawyers of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed has requested the Supreme Court not to hear any case related to Judge Abdulla before the court decide on the request made by the lawyers to issue a writ to free the judge.

Former President’s Member of the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, has contended that while the government cannot keep the judge detained indefinitely without conducting an investigation, “releasing him is a threat to security.”

I have heard Vice President Mohamed Waheed Hassan calling for him to be released. Abdulla Mohamed is not under arrest – but his freedom of movement and communication would be a danger at this moment. We are at the point where we really and truly need to get to the bottom of this and act upon the constitution,” she told Minivan News.

“We talking about cleaning up the judiciary, and this is not talking outside the constitution – this is the foundation of the constitution. The constitution is build upon having three separate powers. The judiciary is perhaps the most important power. The other powers come and go, politics change, but the judiciary is the balancing act. When that is out of balance, action is necessary.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC appeals Civil Court injunction against investigation of Abdulla Mohamed

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has said that all complaints filed against  judges are now being investigated, after it appealed the Civil Court’s injunction preventing the commission from taking action against Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed at the High Court on Tuesday.

Former President’s Member on the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, on Tuesday told Minivan News that if the judicial watchdog “can be overruled by a judge sitting in some court somewhere, then it’s dysfunctional. But that’s what has been happening.”

In a press statement issued this week, JSC – which is mandated to appoint and investigate complaints against judges – refuted allegations that it was defunct, claiming it has been “working hard” to finish investigating complaints submitted to the commission.

Out of the 336 complaints submitted so far, 208 have been completed and 38 cases under investigation, the JSC claimed, while commission is working to finish the 128 complaints remaining. Investigation committees had been set up within the commission to “expedite the process”, JSC claims, adding that complaints concerned different judges, not only Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

The statement comes despite the JSC’s abolishing its complaints committee in May 2011. It did not clarify the outcome of any of the complaints it said it had investigated.

The JSC explained in the statement that the commission has been unable to pursue the case against Chief Judge as the Civil Court had ordered the JSC on November 17 to take no action against the judge until the court reached a verdict in the case filed against him.

The JSC requested the High Court to terminate the injunction citing that the commission’s decision cannot be overruled by the civil court.

Abdulla Mohamed filed the suit against the JSC after it completed a report into misconduct allegations against the cheif judge. According to the report, which the JSC has not yet publicly released, the judge violated the Judge’s Code of Conduct by making a politically biased statement in an interview he gave to private broadcaster DhiTV.

The injunction was first appealed by the JSC at the Supreme Court, which ordered it to be submitted to the High court on January 19 – three days after chief judge was detained by the military, after he had opened the court outside normal hours a night ago, to order the immmmediate release of Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, deputy leader of the minority opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) who was arrested after President’s Office requested an investigation into “slanderous” allegations he made that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives.

In this week’s statement JSC reiterates its stance that neither police or Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) have the “constitutional authority” to detain a judge, citing that the commission reserves the right to investigate complaints about judges and submit to the parliament in case a judge has to be removed from the bench under the section 159 of the constitution and Judicial Service Commission Act.

However, the government continues to legally justify the military detention of the judge amid spiralling political tensions.

In a televised statement on MNBC One on Junary 17, Home Minister Hassan Afeef said military assistance was sought for “fear of loss of public order and safety and national security” on account of Judge Abdulla, who has “taken the entire criminal justice system in his fist”.

Afeef listed 14 cases of obstruction of police duty by Judge Abdulla, including withholding warrants for up to four days, ordering police to conduct unlawful investigations and disregarding decisions by higher courts.

Afeef accused the judge of “deliberately” holding up cases involving opposition figures, and barring media from corruption trials.

Afeef said the judge also ordered the release of suspects detained for serious crimes “without a single hearing”, and maintained “suspicious ties” with family members of convicts sentenced for dangerous crimes.

The judge also released a murder suspect “in the name of holding ministers accountable”, who went on to kill another victim.

Afeef also alleged that the judge actively undermined cases against drug trafficking suspects and had allowed them opportunity to “fabricate false evidence after hearings had concluded”.

Judge Abdulla “hijacked the whole court” by deciding that he alone could issue search warrants, Afeef continued, and has arbitrarily suspended court officers.

The chief judge “twisted and interpreted laws so they could not be enforced against certain politicians” and stood accused of “accepting bribes to release convicts.”

However, opposition continues to contend that the judge’s “abduction” by the military and its refusal to release him or present him in court, despite being ordered to do so by the Supreme Court, represents a constitutional violation by the government.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government using constitution on selective basis: Yameen

The government is selectively announcing that the Constitution is in jeopardy, Mulaku MP Abdulla Yameen claimed yesterday during a press conference held by opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).

Yameen, the half brother of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, accused the government of using the Constitution according to its own needs and condemned President Mohamed Nasheed’s remark that the “constitution is at a standstill” as a “serious issue” and must be investigated.

Yameen added that the President does not have the constitutional authority to be involved in or enforce the judicial system.

However speaking yesterday at a rally held by ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), President Mohamed Nasheed said establishing justice and fairness through a modern and competent judiciary was “one of the main reasons MDP came out to change the government.”

Referring to the constitutional stipulation to evaluate sitting judges for reappointment during the two-year interim period, President Nasheed said the judges who were sworn in were not held to the criteria now specified as Parliament had not yet passed a Judges Act at the time.
In spite of this lag, the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) reappointed the judges and conducted the swearing-in ceremony in the face of vocal opposition from former President’s Member of the JSC Aishath Velezinee.
In May 2010, Nasheed said he informed the JSC that its approved criteria was not in alignment with constitutional standards or public expectations. The concerns were ignored, Nasheed said, and the JSC proceeded to reappoint judges from the former government.
When the constitutional interim period elapsed in August, then Supreme Court Chief Justice Abdulla Saeed “declared on his own that he was permanent” and that the interim bench had tenured itself.
Saying he did “what has to be done at the time” as elected head of state, Nasheed said he then ordered the Defence Minister to lock the interim Supreme Court because “the opportunity to institute a judiciary envisioned by the constitution was narrowing.”
Eventually, Nasheed explained, he agreed to a cross-party compromise on enacting the Judges Act and confirming the Supreme Court bench because “in my view, it was essential to institute a Supreme Court.”
After ignoring complaints against the judiciary, the JSC attempted to investigate Judge Abdulla late last year, however the body was blocked by a Civil Court ruling.
“If the general principles of the Maldivian constitution is to be upheld, in my view it is not a judge who would overrule [the civil court decision] but the head of state,” Nasheed observed.
The judge was arrested on Monday, January 14 after attempting to block his own police summons at the High Court.
According to Yameen, the judge was “kidnapped” by Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF), inciting claims that the Maldives had become a military dictatorship.

The Judge is being held at an MNDF training facility in Girifushi, the same island used to base the famous underwater cabinet meeting in 2009.

PPM has asked the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) to provide round the clock surveillance of the judge’s well being while in custody, Haveeru reports.

Meanwhile, President Nasheed explained that the decision to take Judge Abdulla into military custody was not made “with the intention of causing misery or a loss to anyone” or “for the satisfaction of arresting a person.”

The government would “never support or encourage inhumane treatment or anything unlawful,” he said.
“Our only purpose is to establish a court house envisioned by the constitution and hoped for by the people,” he added.

Nasheed also suggested that the democratic transition in South Korea had precedent of military intervention to assist the transition.

PPM announced that peaceful protests against the “abduction” will continue, but urged protestors not to engage in violent or destructive acts, local media reports.

According to local media, PPM yesterday consulted lawyers to file the issue in court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Abuse of Article 285 makes us all complicit in the state of our judiciary

A skewed foundation will not a straight building raise, so goes an old Maldivian saying. The arrest of a Criminal Court judge by the army does not belong in a democratic landscape. We all cry foul – Unconstitutional! Dictatorial! Autocratic! Yes, of course. If the judge being removed was put on the bench constitutionally, our current situation would indeed be beyond the democratic pale.

But the abuse of the Constitution which gave rise to ‘Justice’ Abdulla Mohammed did not occur when he was arrested on 16 January 2012. It happened on August 7, 2010, when Article 285 of the Constitution, which required the judiciary to be cleansed of the unqualified and the criminal by that date was allowed to lapse without so much as a murmur from the general public or the civil society. That was the time when we should have cried foul, when the NGOs, the Human Rights Commission, and learned members of the judiciary should have come out to protest the abuse of our democracy.

But no one did, except for a lone individual who was mocked, ostracised and finally stabbed in the back for her efforts. It was on this day that we began our journey on this crooked path, it was then that we all became complicit in today’s actions – we knowingly allowed criminals, child molesters, fraudsters and mobsters to remain on the benches of our courts. We did this, and now, as we confront the consequences of our (in)actions, we conveniently forget our role in it.

The 2008 Maldivian Constitution must be one of the most abused such documents in the history of democracy. Within the space of three years, it has become the plaything of every Mohammed, Ahmed and Fathimath within arm’s length of political power. When Parliamentarians are taken to court for embezzling millions from the public coffers, it is the Constitution that is cited as containing no stipulation that makes lying or fraud a crime. When opposition leaders malign the executive and the country itself with baseless lies, it is the Constitution that is once again cited; its provision of freedom of expression held up as freedom to defame with impunity. When religious intolerance is exercised to such high levels that living a life free of fear is all but impossible for a Maldivian in the Maldives, it is the Constitution that is once again cited as the source for legitimising such repression.

The Maldivian Constitution does not allow criminals to be judges; it does not give free reign to defamation; and it does not condone religious intolerance. Those who say that ‘Justice’ Abdulla Mohammed has been removed unconstitutionally, read Article 285 and compare what it says against the man’s criminal record and his penchant for victims of sexual offences to re-enact their abuse in court to satisfy his twisted appetites. Those who cite Article 27 of the Constitution as giving freedom to defame, read Article 33, which says that everyone has the right to a good name and protection of their reputation. And those who cite Article 9 of the Constitution as stipulating that every Maldivian citizen must remain a Muslim by law, it would be a worthwhile exercise to re-read it with some due diligence.

Article 9 (d) says that nobody can become a Maldivian citizen unless they are Muslims. The word ‘become’ requires the taking of a deliberate action. Children born to Maldivian parents, which cover well over 99 percent of the population, do not have to become citizens, they are born such. The Constitution also says that nothing can take Maldivian citizenship away from an individual that already possesses the same. Where then is the Constitutional requirement that demands every Maldivian citizen to be a Muslim? And where does all this talk of having to be a Sunni Muslim come from? The Constitution only requires the President, and members of Parliament, the Cabinet and the judiciary to be Sunni Muslims. As far as ordinary citizens go, there is not a word in the Constitution about which sect of Islam a citizen must belong to.

The facts of the matter are that we are a people who have become pawns in a game played by a handful of oligarchs who want to retain political and financial power at any cost. All the talk of fighting for democracy, for ‘Islam’, for the people – it is nothing but a register of words conveniently deployed to build a façade of legitimacy both nationally and internationally.

Just look at the people involved in all these ‘crises’ that have rocked the country in the last two months. There were few among the leaders of the ‘Defending Islam’ protest on 23 December 2010 who did not own a tourist resort or did not have a vested interest in the industry. That these people who make millions of dollars everyday from peddling their products to ‘infidels’ would be so audacious as to call for the purification of Maldivian Muslimness is shocking in itself.

What is more breathtakingly shameless is that among those calling for strengthening Sharia in the Maldives was DQP’s Dr Hassan Saeed who co-authored the book, Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam (2007), which is introduced as ‘a contribution to the thinking that freedom of religion is a fundamental principle of Islam…’

That the co-author of this book would be at a gathering that protested against religious tolerance and rallied people to strengthen Sharia rule in the Maldives is a betrayal not just of the Maldivian people but of the ethics and principles of the wider academic community to which he belongs. It beggars belief that such a figure would stand up in an effort to work people up into a frenzy to support the other side of his own argument, and is now on a crusade to prove an alleged hidden ‘anti-Islamic agenda’ pursued by the current government. There could be no more blatant an example of just how low these ‘political leaders’ of the new Maldivian democracy are willing to stoop to get their backsides onto the executive chair.

If the Maldivian democracy is to be rescued from the clutches of these oligarchs, we the public need to take ownership of our Constitution. Their vested agendas have been made clear: (a) take Maldivians to the depths of religious intolerance which would stop the general public from laying a claim to their rightful share of the tourism industry, hence leaving them in control of the billions that pour in every year; and (b) bring down the current government whatever it takes. Or, to put it in their own words, ‘put President Nasheed behind bars’.

We need to distance ourselves from these political games. It should not matter to us whether it is President Nasheed, Rasheed or Waleed that is in power, as long as we, the people, are able to retain and exercise our will to be governed democratically. And to do that, we need to begin to think for ourselves rather than jump on every malevolent bandwagon that comes our way.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Chief Judge “took entire criminal justice system in his fist”: Afeef

Ministers have sought to give their legal justification for the involvement of the armed forces in the arrest of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, amid spiraling political tensions.

In a televised statement on MNBC One last night, Home Minister Hassan Afeef said military assistance was sought for “fear of loss of public order and safety and national security” on account of Judge Abdulla, who has “taken the entire criminal justice system in his fist”.

Afeef and Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfan said police requested the involvement of the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) in the arrest of Abdulla Mohamed.

Defence Minister Tholhath revealed that police sent a letter to the armed forces on Monday, January 16 “requesting assistance to carry out its legal duty under article 71 of the Police Act, stating that the Criminal Court was not cooperating with police and that as a consequence of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed obstructing police work, the country’s internal security was threatened and police were unable to maintain public order and safety,” he said.

MNDF therefore exercised authority under chapter nine of the constitution and the Armed Forces Act of 2008 to take the judge into custody, he said.

He noted that Article 243 of the constitution charges the military “to defend and protect the Republic and its people”, while article two of the Armed Forces Act states that it must “protect the lawfully elected government of the Republic of the Maldives from any unlawful action that may in any way diminish its stature.”

Moreover, he added, the Armed Forces Act authorises the military to assist law enforcement agencies upon request, during which it would be given “all lawful powers accorded to police.”

“I assure citizens that at this critical moment the country is faced with, the armed forces will do everything it must to restore national interest and defend the lawful government,” he said in conclusion.

Afeef meanwhile listed 14 cases of obstruction of police duty by Judge Abdulla, including withholding warrants for up to four days, ordering police to conduct unlawful investigations and disregarding decisions by higher courts.

Afeef accused the judge of “deliberately” holding up cases involving opposition figures, and barring media from corruption trials.

Afeef said the judge also ordered the release of suspects detained for serious crimes “without a single hearing”, and maintained “suspicious ties” with family members of convicts sentenced for dangerous crimes.

The judge also released a murder suspect “in the name of holding ministers accountable”, who went on to kill another victim.

Afeef also alleged that the judge actively undermined cases against drug trafficking suspects and had allowed them opportunity to “fabricate false evidence after hearings had concluded”.

Judge Abdulla “hijacked the whole court” by deciding that he alone could issue search warrants, Afeef continued, and has arbitrarily suspended court officers.

The chief judge “twisted and interpreted laws so they could not be enforced against certain politicians” and stood accused of “accepting bribes to release convicts.”

Prosectutor General Ahmed Muizz has meanwhile maintained that the MNDF acted illegally, telling local media that he would comply with an order from the Criminal Court to prosecute the Chief of Defence Forces for contempt of court, as well as those officers responsible for arresting the judge.

Muizz has also asked the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the case, stating that he would decide who to charge based on their conclusions.

“The military arrested Abdulla Gazi in violation of the Judges Act. Action will be taken against those involved,” he said.

The first case against Abdulla Mohamed was brought to the President’s Office in 2005 by then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed, now the leader of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP).

That complaint referred to the judge allegedly demanding that the underage victim of a sexual assault reenact her attack in the courtroom. The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) subsequently dropped the inquiry.

However in an open letter to parliament in March 2011, President’s member on the JSC and outspoken whistle-blower Aishath Velezinee claimed that the politically-manipulated JSC was protecting the judge despite the existence of “reasonable proof to show that Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed was systematically committing the atrocity of setting free dangerous criminals and declaring them innocent with complete disregard to the evidence [presented at court].”

The JSC formed a complaints committee to investigate the cases against Judge Abdulla in December 2009, which met 44 times but failed to present an update report every thirty days as required by article 29(b) of the Judicial Service Commission Act and had not presented a single report as of March 2011.

Opposition Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Afrashim Ali spoke in defence of the judge and insisted the complaints could not be investigated, but declined to provide reasons in writing to the commission.

Despite Judge Abdulla having been sentenced for a criminal offence, Speaker Abdulla Shahid pushed for his reappointment and later “bequeathed the Criminal Court to Abdulla Mohamed until 2026” under the Judges Act, which was passed hastily during the constitutional crisis period in July-August 2010.

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) has meanwhile called for the immediate release of the judge, accusing the government of disregard for judicial and constitutional law.

Interim Deputy President of PPM, Abdul Raheem, told local media that the government was seeking the declaration “of a state of emergency”.

“Recent actions suggest [the government] is capable of anything,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police summon Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed for questioning

Police have summoned Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, for questioning at 8.30pm in an “ongoing investigation.”

According to the Criminal Court, the summons was delivered at 12.30pm today. Judge Abdulla had ordered the immediate release of minority opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) Deputy Leader Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed from police custody last night.

A police media official confirmed the summons but could not divulge details of “an ongoing investigation.”

Judge Abdulla’s lawyer and Independent MP for Guraidhoo, Ibrahim Riza, told local daily Haveeru that the chief judge would comply with the summons but was “unaware that police are investigating a case involving him.”

He added that the news “came as a shock” to the judge.

On October 26, Judge Abdulla had ruled that the arrest of Gassan Maumoon – son of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – on suspicion of hurling a wooden block at protesters was unlawful, establishing a precedent that police could not arrest suspects without an arrest warrant “unless the arresting officer observes the offence being committed”.

The contentious ruling led police to release 11 suspects while the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) sought legal clarification on criminal justice procedures.

Ethical misconduct

In 2005, then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed forwarded to the President’s Office concerns about the conduct of Abdulla Mohamed after he allegedly requested that an underage victim of sexual abuse reenact her abuse for the court.

In 2009 following the election of the current government, those documents were sent to the oversight body Judicial Service Commission (JSC), which was requested to launch an investigation into the outstanding complaints as well as alleged obstruction of “high-profile corruption investigations”.

The JSC decided not to proceed with the investigation on July 30, 2009. However in November last year, the JSC completed an investigation into a complaint of ethical misconduct against the judge.

The case was presented to the JSC in January 2010 by former President’s member of the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, after Abdulla Mohamed appeared on private network DhiTV and expressed “biased political views”.

Velezinee observed at the time that it was the first time the JSC had ever completed an investigation into a judge’s misconduct.

“There are many allegations against Abdulla Mohamed, but one is enough,” she said.

“If the JSC decides, all investigation reports, documents and oral statements will be submitted to parliament, which can then decide to remove him with a simple two-thirds majority.”

In October 2011, the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) appealed for assistance from the international community over the “increasingly blatant collusion between politicians loyal to the former autocratic President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, and senior members of the judiciary – most of whom were appointed by Gayoom during his thirty years of power.”

The MDP statement also referred to the corruption trial of Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim, charged with multiple counts of defrauding the former Atolls Ministry, which remains “indefinitely delayed.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Chief Judge of the Criminal Court to sue MDP MP

Chief of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed has decided to sue Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ibrahim ‘Bonda’ Rasheed for defamation following comments he made in parliament yesterday.

Speaking at the parliament meeting yesterday Rasheed referred to Judge Abdulla as the ‘’big thief ‘’ who has hijacked the parliament as well as parliament speaker Abdulla Shahid.

Rasheed also said it is time for citizens to come out and demolish the courts.

‘’The citizens do not have justice, the laws were made to provide justice,’’ he said. ‘’The constitution was made to provide justice, but we don’t have it.’’

He also said the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and Judicial Administration want to depart on trips abroad as soon as they get the money allocated for them in the annual budget.

Today Judge Abdulla Mohamed told Minivan News that he is currently examining the case in order to sue Rasheed.

‘’I don’t have any further comments to make at this time,’’ he said.

Local media reported that the Judge had told local media that comments MP Rasheed made were against Islamic principles.

Newspaper Haveeru reported that Judge Abdulla said everyone’s good name has to be protected and that he was currently examining the case to sue him.

Speaking at the Parliament Rasheed also accused Jumhoory Party leader and MP ‘Burma’ Gasim Ibrahim of funding terrorists, and called for the accounts of persons doing illegal business to be frozen.

Today in a text message, Rasheed accused Judge Abdulla of bringing islanders from his island for the December 23 ‘Defend Islam’ protest while accusing Gasim of sending money in envelopes.

Rasheed also said he has evidence that Judge Abdulla decided to sue him according to Gasim’s order, adding that he has decided to send a case against Gasim to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Reeko Moosa calls on Criminal Court to expedite corruption cases

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairperson and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik has met with Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed and urged him to conclude an ongoing corruption suit against Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim.

Moosa said that the suits had been sitting in the court for almost three years but none of them had yet been concluded, which he said was a concern as cases against particular people took longer than others.

Nazim is facing multiple counts of conspiracy to defraud the former Atolls Ministry. The fraudulent purchases of harbour lights, national flags and mosque sound systems were first flagged in an audit report released in early 2009. During the hearings, police exhibited numerous quotations, agreements, tender documents, receipts, bank statements and forged cheques suggesting that Nazim received over US$400,000 in the alleged scam.

The Criminal Court in August refused to allow journalists to observe a hearing in Nazim’s ongoing corruption trial, in a move condemned by the Maldives Media Council (MMC).

Speaking to the press after yesterday’s meeting, Moosa said that his motivation was to urge Judge Abdulla Mohamed to expedite cases going on in the Criminal Court.

Moosa told the press that Judge Abdulla Mohamed told him that out of all the cases currently against Nazim, one of them will be concluded in a month at the most, according to MDP Official website.

Last Thursday Moosa and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ali Azim went to the Criminal Court and met with the Chief Judge regarding the same matter, a series of meetings that Moosa said would continue.

Local media today reported that Moosa and Azim went to the court to meet the Chief Judge but he was on vacation, and another Judge met with them instead.

Newspaper Haveeru reported Moosa as telling the press that the court had accused him of obstructing its duty.

The Criminal Court recently concluded a case against Moosa, a corruption case against Indpendent MP Abdul Hameed, and a case against MP Azim.

On March 2010, State Prosecutor Abdullah Rabiu said Nazim was managing Director of Namira Engineering and Trading Pvt Ltd when the company’s equipment and staff were used to create fake letterheads and submit proposals on behalf of unregistered companies.

One of the paper companies won a bid worth US$110,000 to provide 15,000 national flags for the former atolls ministry.

If found guilty, the MP for Meemu Atoll Dhiggaru and former vice-president of the opposition People’s Alliance will be ordered to pay Rf1.4 million (US$108,900) to the state and sentenced to between one to six years of imprisonment.

August 2009, Chief Inspector Ismail Atheef said police had uncovered evidence that implicated former Atolls Minister Abdullah Hameed, Eydhafushi MP Ahmed “Redwave” Saleem, former director of finance at the ministry, and Nazim in fraudulent transactions worth over US$260,000 (Mrf 3,446,950).

A hard disk seized during a raid of Nazim’s office in May allegedly contained copies of forged documents and bogus letter heads.

Police further alleged that MP Saleem actively assisted the scam in his then-position as director of finance at the ministry, while Nazim’s wife Zeenath Abdullah had abused her position as a manager of the Bank of Maldives’ Villingili branch to deposit proceeds of the fraudulent conspiracy.

Police said Hameed, brother of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, played a key role in the fraud by handing out bids without public announcements, making advance payments using cheques against the state asset and finance regulations, approving bid documents for unregistered companies and discriminatory treatment of bid applicants.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)