Tag: amnesty

Comment: Political impasse between government and opposition weakens human rights safeguards

The current stand off between the government and the opposition on how to secure the independence of the judiciary is hampering the much needed reform of the country’s criminal justice system.

Neither the government, nor the parliament or the judiciary can take pride in maintaining an outdated justice system that lacks a codified body of laws capable of providing justice equally to all.

Current laws are mainly remnants of acts of parliament passed at the time of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom when the country’s legal system was even less developed and more prone to political influence. Laws also include religious injunctions, regulations passed by ministries, some acts of parliament passed in recent years, and the 2008 Constitution. Even so, these laws cover penal areas only partially. Some are too vaguely formulated to prevent miscarriages of justice.

Most judges have no formal training in law but exercise considerable discretion – often based on their own interpretation of religious law – in deciding what constitutes an offence and the punishment for it.

In such a milieu, judicial decisions could be at risk of the judges’ personal or political preferences especially when these relate to complaints by the government or the opposition. One potential remedy for this problem would be to hold judicial personnel strictly accountable for any misconduct, but the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) appears unable to ensure this type of accountability.

So far, the government and the opposition-dominated parliament have failed to address these shortcomings. They have not even, as a first step, enacted a penal code that can reflect Maldives obligations under the international human rights treaties the country has ratified. A draft penal code intended to do this has remained dormant in parliament for at least four years.

While the government and the opposition blame each other for these failures, people whose rights are being violated are at risk of receiving unfair trials.

Respect for human rights has been further undermined by recent arbitrary arrest of Abdulla Mohamed, the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court.

He was arrested on 16 January. His arrest followed a civil court injunction on 27 November that blocked the JSC’s probe into Judge Abdullah’s alleged judicial misconduct. The Judicial Service Commission began this investigation in 2009 after receiving a complaint from the government. JSC found that judge Abdullah was guilty of violating the Judges’ Code of Conduct for making politically contentious statements on a local TV Channel. At this point, judge Abdullah successfully applied to the Civil Court for an injunction against further investigation or any actions against him. By granting that injunction, the Civil Court exposed the judiciary to further allegations from the government that Judge Abdullah can effectively remain in office with no accountability. The government then instructed the police to investigate the allegations against Judge Abdullah. Police went to arrest him but judge Abdullah refused to go with them, saying they had no warrant of arrest. The government then sent the army, still without a warrant of arrest, and he was taken into army custody on 16 January.

Regardless of the allegations against Judge Abdullah, his continued detention since 16 January remains arbitrary. The Maldives Human Rights Commission has confirmed that he is treated well and is allowed access to his family. Amnesty International is calling on the government to either bring formal criminal charges against him or release him.

Amnesty International has no position on the validity or otherwise of the allegations against judge Abdullah. It is for the judiciary to ensure that a mechanism exists to uphold accountability in any case of alleged judicial misconduct.

Sadly, all sides in the debate about the independence and impartiality of the judiciary tailor their arguments only to their own, narrow political ends. What they are missing is the opportunity to turn the Maldives into a hub of respect for human rights where the government, the parliament and the judiciary work alongside each other to strengthen the rule of law.

Abbas Faiz is South Asia Researcher with Amnesty International.

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)

Prison conditions “unchanged since Gayoom’s time”: detained blogger

Amnesty International has welcomed the release from prison of Maldivian blogger and journalist Ismail ‘Khilath’ Rasheed last Friday, whom the organisation had designated a ‘prisoner of conscience’, but expressed alarm at the government’s failure to prosecute his attackers.

Rasheed was jailed for 24 days in Male’ Custodial following his participation in a ‘silent protest’ on December 10, 2011, International Human Rights Day, calling for religious tolerance.

During the protest at the Artificial Beach he was attacked by several men armed with stones, and was hospitalised with head injuries. He was subsequently arrested on December 14.

“While the release of Ismail Khilath Rasheed is a welcome development, the fact that his attackers have not been investigated points to a serious failure of the government to end impunity for human rights abuses in the country,” said Abbas Faiz, Amnesty International’s Maldives researcher.

“Instead of defending his right to advocate religious tolerance, the government locked Ismail Khilath Rasheed up and have done nothing to bring his attackers to justice – thereby sending a message to the public that crushing a peaceful demonstration is acceptable,” he said.

Amnesty observed that radical religious groups in the Maldives were advocating that “only Sunni Islam is allowed under the constitution”, noting that opposition politicians had sided with these groups “in a political campaign against the President”.

“It is time for the Maldives government to bring to justice all perpetrators of human rights abuses – past and present – including those who attack religious minorities. The first step in this process should be to carry out an independent, impartial and effective investigation of those who used violence against Ismail Khilath Rasheed and other demonstrators on 10 December,” Amnesty declared.

In November 2011 Rasheed’s blog, www.hilath.com, was blocked by the Communications Authority of the Maldives (CAM) on the order of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, on the grounds that it contained “anti-Islamic” material.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has also issued a statement on Rasheed’s release, but expressed concern about the ongoing blocking of his blog on the order of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs.

“The journalist’s unlawful detention is a reminder that it is impossible to establish a totally free press so long as the government subjects itself to religious extremism, as displayed by the Islamic Affairs Ministry,” RSF said.

“Religion is becoming a taboo subject in the Maldives and media workers are under threat of imprisonment every time it is debated.”

“Just like Gayoom’s time”

Despite the Maldives’ international stand on human rights issues, the prisons “remain unchanged since Gayoom’s time”, Rasheed told Minivan News, following his release.

During the police investigation of his involvement with the protest, the blogger was locked for three weeks in a small, three-sided room with 11 other people. Despite the opening there was no airflow, the room was unventilated and the fan in the room was broken, Rasheed said.

The room was so small and crowded it was impossible for 12 people to fully stretch out and sleep properly, and despite provisions requiring inmates be allowed out for at least an hour’s exercise every day, no one was allowed outside during his detention, Rasheed said.

Inmates had to summon the duty officer to be taken to the toilet, which did not flush. There was no shower, and inmates washed themselves by filling a bucket at the water basin, which was also used to flush the toilet. Inmates in other cells with attached toilets were not allowed out at all.

The prisoners had no bedding apart from a small pillow, and slept on the tiles. Every three days they were given a small amount of detergent to wash the floor of the cell.

Rasheed said that the Prosecutor General (PG)’s office visited once during his detention and observed that prisoners were not being properly treated.

“There were no medical facilities, or means of treating heroin addicts going into withdrawal. One of my cellmates had a [withdrawal] fit and we had to put a slipper in his mouth [to stop him swallowing his tongue],” Rasheed said. “I held his hand.”

Most of the cell’s occupants were awaiting prosecution for drug offences, muggings, theft, and for carrying weapons.

“People had been in there for three months and were very frustrated, and were venting that frustration against the government. The Constitution sets limits to people’s detention, but people are in limbo. One guy accused of murder has been in there for 1.5 years, and still his case has not been sent to the PG’s office for prosecution,” Rasheed said.

The blogger was presented to the court following the expiration of the first 24 hour detention period.

“The investigating officer stated that I was the organiser of the protest and should be detained as I was disrupting the religious unity of the Maldives, and was a threat to society,” Rasheed said.

Police also presented Ali Ahsan to the court, developer of the December 23 protest website which had briefly published slogans calling for the murder of “those against Islam”.

Police argued that Ahsan’s release “could endanger Maldivian religious unity and even threaten life” and requested the court grant a 15-day extension of his detention.

Ahsan’s lawyers however argued that the slogans had been uploaded by hackers, and the website developer was released. Rasheed’s detention was extended by 10 days.

After 10 days in custody, Rasheed was again presented to the court.

“The investigating officer told the judge he had reason to believe I had no religion at all, and that I was promoting gay rights, and therefore my case could be concluded only after the Islamic Ministry provided me with counseling to bring me back to Islam,” said Rasheed, who self-identifies as a Sufi Muslim.

The magistrate extended Rasheed’s detention a further 15 days.

On Friday January 6, two days before he was due to be released, Rasheed was told that his case had been sent to the Prosecutor General’s office and that he was free to go.

“The day I was released a different investigating officer said I had been put in prison for my own protection – the same thing my family had been told. He said they had intelligence suggesting that a gang of brainwashed extremists were out to kill me and anybody identified as associated with the protest.”

Rasheed said he now fears for his safety and is unwilling to walk around Male’.

“The majority of Maldivians are not violent people. But I am concerned about a few psychotic elements who believe they will go to heaven if they kill me – people who don’t care if they go to jail for it. Those people I am afraid of, and I will not provoke the country in the future.”

Rasheed’s blog remains blocked, but he says he is unwilling to risk his own safety by resuming blogging anyway.

“The [silent protesters] made their point, which was in no way anti-Islamic,” he said. “Their point was: the majority of people want to eat apples, but a minority want to eat oranges. We said we have no problem with anyone eating apples, but let us eat oranges.

“We said nothing about trying to get people to leave Islam. Everyone should be able to think and practice and follow what they feel personally, and Islam teaches tolerance. Extremists twist this around, and equate it with apostasy – and call for those who leave Islam to be killed.”

Rasheed said he felt that the majority of Maldivians disagreed with extremism, and were generally “a very laid-back, moderate people who want a peaceful life. They are concerned about disruption to families and society, rather than other religions or beliefs.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Don’t marginalise Sri Lanka”: Nasheed to Human Rights Council

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has submitted a report documenting alleged war crimes in the closing days of the Sri Lankan Civil War to the UN Human Rights Council.

The report accuses the Sri Lankan military of killing tens of thousands of civilians through shelling in the closing days of its war with Tamil separatists, and increases the likelihood that the Human Rights Council may be called on to vote for a full international, independent investigation.

Sri Lanka has meanwhile rejected the report’s findings and stated that it opposes an outside investigation. Instead, the government has appointed its own ‘Learnt and Reconciliation Commission’ (LLRC), which is expected to publish its findings on November 15.

Central to the UN’s case is graphic footage of the execution of bound and gagged prisoners, which the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Christof Heyns, described as reflecting “crimes of the highest order — definitive war crimes.”

Heyns analysed the video in consultation with a forensic pathologist, firearms expert and two forensic video analysts, and concluded that the footage was authentic, however the Sri Lankan government has maintained that the video is fake.

It has also stated that civilian casualties were unavoidable during the final offensive, due to the Tamil Tigers’ use of 300,000 people as human shields.

As an outspoken member of the UN Human Rights Council and a vocal proponent of intervention during the Libyan uprising – and also Sri Lanka’s neighbour – the situation is likely to challenge the Maldives diplomatically.

Yesterday, as the international community was ratcheting up the pressure on Sri Lanka, President Mohamed Nasheed called for an “amicable solution”.

“As long as we argue about Sri Lanka, the government is increasingly marginalised and we are losing the government and the country outside the fold of the international community,” Nasheed warned.

“We must understand that a number of very, very bad things happened but we must be able to move forward,” he said.

Current Maldivian Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem has previously described the UN report as “singularly counterproductive”, while during a recent interview with Minivan News, former Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed said he felt the government’s position on Sri Lanka “has been misunderstood”, particularly its comparison with the government’s stance on Libya.

“But I think Naseem’s comments and the government’s position on Sri Lanka have been misunderstood. The Libyan situation is different from the current situation in Sri Lanka. Libya is ongoing – things are happening today on the ground, and we need to try to prevent further abuses tomorrow,” he said at the time.

“In Sri Lanka’s case these are post-conflict issues. What we say is that the most important thing in a post-conflict situation is to find a way forward and not live in the past. This does not mean we are condoning abuses, or saying such things are fine. But Sri Lanka needs to find common ground with the UN Human Rights Council in which both parties can move forward. The government of Sri Lanka needs to be able to enter into dialogue with the international community to achieve speedier reconciliation.

“You can’t have reconciliation and long-lasting peace unless you respect human rights and set up mechanisms to do so. But we should steer clear of politicisation, or the divisions that have kept the flame of terrorism alive in Sri Lanka for so long. We are saying let Sri Lanka find a way forward and achieve reconciliation – we are not saying we don’t care about the past,” Dr Shaheed said.

China and Pakistan have also expressed support for Sri Lanka.

Meanwhile Mahinda Samarasinghe, Sri Lankan President Rajapaksa’s special envoy on human rights, has called for the international community to wait for the findings of Sri Lanka’s own commission in November.

“It is disconcerting to note the haste with which some have sought to usurp the government of Sri Lanka’s prerogative in deciding its domestic process,” Samarasinghe has previously told the Council.

“We firmly believe that our home-grown process is capable of addressing the nuances of our unique situation.”

However several international human rights organisations, including International Crisis Group (ICG), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and Amnesty International (AI) have refused to appear before the LLRC claiming it fails to meet minimum international standards, noting that its members were appointed by the government, it had no mandate to investigate war crimes in the closing days of the conflict, and lacked any mechanism to protect witnesses.

“The LLRC’s mandate, its composition, its procedures, and the human rights environment in which it is operating all conspire to make a safe and satisfactory outcome for victims of human rights violations and their families extremely unlikely,” said Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Asia-Pacific region, Madhu Malhotra, in October 2010.

“Amnesty International is particularly concerned about the lack of any provisions for witness protection and the fact that former officials who have publicly defended the Sri Lankan government against allegations of war crimes serve on the commission.”

Warning: some readers may find the following footage disturbing

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Amnesty International gave imprisoned activists credibility as political refugees: Zuhair

The world’s largest human rights NGO, Amnesty International, celebrated its 50th anniversary over the weekend, marking half a century since a British lawyer named Peter Benenson campaigned for the release of Portugese students sentenced to seven years imprisonment for toasting liberty.

The Nobel Peace Prize-winning organisation counts three million supporters, members and activists in 150 countries and territories all over the world, and produces 400-500 reports on human rights every year.

Amnesty adopted current Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed as a prisoner of conscience in April 1996 after he was sentenced to two years imprisonment on charges relating to his activities as a dissident journalist.

“Amnesty International considered his detention to be politically motivated and was concerned he would not receive a fair trial,” Amnesty said at the time. “Mohamed Nasheed attended several court hearings but the court did not come to a decision. Amnesty International is very concerned that despite release, Mohamed Nasheed’s ‘sedition’ charges have not been withdrawn “

In 2008, Amnesty issued a statement welcoming Nasheed as President of the island nation, and urged him to “make human rights a central part of his presidency.”

“The legacies of human rights abuses such as politically motivated arrests, torture, and unfair trials, will mar the Maldives’ human rights record if legislative reforms are delayed,” Amnesty noted, particularly the draft penal code which remains stalled in the parliament to this day.

“The new government must now end decades-long legacies of abuse of political power with no accountability for human rights violations such as politically motivated arrests, torture, and unfair trials,” Amnesty added, observing that human rights violations appeared to have “decreased significantly” in the last two years of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s 30 year administration.

Nasheed’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said today that Amnesty’s campaigning on behalf of the then political activist was vital in establishing his credibility with embassies and other international organisations, such at the UN’s Refugee Agency, which subsequently issued temporary travel documents to five Maldivian activists.

Amnesty’s campaigning on Nasheed’s behalf became especially invaluable after the office of the then opposition-in-exile in Colombo was raided by the Sri Lankan police, Zuhair explained.

“There was information sent by the Maldivian government that the MDP was storing illegal firearms in Colombo seeking to transfer them to the Maldives,” he said.

“Our office and houses were raided and I was roughly handled in front of my wife and children. The Colombo CID interrogated me about reports that we’d apparently been talking to pilots about doing the job, and at last these were proven to be false.”

Following the raid, four of the five political activists expressed doubt over their continued safety in Colombo and sought asylum in the UK. Of the five, Zuhair elected to remain in Sri Lanka “because I had faith in the Sri Lankan legal system, which was later [justified].”

Nasheed was detained in 2001 days after being elected to parliament, Zuhair noted, “on charges brought against him for petty theft from the demolished home of the former president, Ibrahim Nasir. These were mementos that were being thrown out as garbage, but he was thrown in jail on the pretext. The Minister of Home Affairs later acknowledged that nothing of value had been taken, after we argued in court that a price be fixed to the items.”

Nasheed was detained “on and off” 12 times, Zuhair said, and like many prisoners at the time, fell victim to institutionalised methods of punishment.

“He was handcuffed to his shins, and placed in a pillory (a series of hinged wooden boards locking the head and limbs from movement). He was also handcuffed to a hot generator for 14 days. In one instance, the guards mixed shards of glass into his food,” Zuhair claimed.

The credibility given by Amnesty to Nasheed as political prisoner allowed the opposition to organise outside the Maldives, Zuhair recalled, and pressured the introduction of greater human rights in the country.

“We are very grateful to them,” he said.

Amnesty’s current entry on the Maldives, last updated in May 2010, acknowledges ongoing concerns about parliament’s delay in enacting the draft penal code, and concern over the use of flogging as a punishment.

“An 18-year-old woman received 100 lashes on July 5, 2009 after being accused of having sex with two men outside marriage. Local journalists reported the woman fainted after being flogged and was taken to hospital for treatment,” Amnesty wrote.

“The woman, who was pregnant at the time of sentencing, had her punishment deferred until after the birth of her child. The court ruled the woman’s pregnancy was proof of her guilt. The men involved in the case were acquitted.”

In July 2010, Amnesty chided Nasheed’s government for the extra-judicial detention of opposition People’s Alliance (PA) MP Abdulla Yameen – Gayoom’s half-brother.

“The Maldives Government’s proposed reforms do have the potential to improve human rights protection, but this does not give them the right to arbitrarily detain opponents of those reforms. Instead, the government should seek international assistance to resolve this impasse,” Amnesty said at the time.

“There are fundamental flaws in the Maldives criminal justice system, leading to unfair trials. There is no unified definition of a criminal offence in the Maldivian law, which consists of acts of parliament, Shari’a edicts, and regulations passed by the ministries.”

The Maldives has since ascended to a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. Yet human rights concerns remain in the country about the efficacy of the criminal justice system, the prevalence of human trafficking – resulting in the country being placed on the US State Department’s tier two watch list – and an ongoing “culture of torture” the government has at times acknowledged continues to pervade both the police and prisons system.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)