Tag: civil court

High Court rules MIRA has authority to confiscate documents

The High Court has ruled that the Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA) has the authority to seize documents during investigations of tax evasion or fraud carried out under an order by the tax appeal tribunal.

The High Court on Thursday (August 21) overturned a Civil Court ruling to the contrary in a case lodged by a company called Treasure Biz International Pvt Ltd after MIRA sent in auditors and confiscated documents from the company’s offices in December 2012.

The Civil Court in May 2013 ordered MIRA to hand over the documents and electronic equipment to the company within seven days.

A three-judge High Court panel, however, ruled (Dhivehi) that taxation laws empower MIRA officers enforcing a search order by the tax appeal tribunal to confiscate relevant documents or financial records. A specific order would not be required for seizing documents, the judges noted.

In May this year, Fuad Zahir, managing director of Treasure Biz, set up a trade union to advocate for the rights of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

MIRA has meanwhile filed tax evasion charges against Treasure Biz.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Joint venture company registered to develop Fushidhiggaru

A joint venture company (JVC) formed between the government and Prime Capital Maldives Pvt Ltd to develop a special tourist zone in the Kaafu Fushidhiggaru lagoon has been registered by the economic development ministry in accordance with a Civil Court judgment, reports newspaper Haveeru.

Registrar of Companies Mariyam Visam told the local daily today that the ministry registered the JVC within the seven-day period stipulated by the Civil Court verdict, which also ordered the government to sign a master lease agreement within five days of registration, “and [to] make all arrangements undertaken by the government in accordance with the agreement”.

In September 2013, Prime Capital sued the government after the ministry refused to register the JSC citing lack of authorisation from then-President Dr Mohamed Waheed as required by law.

The agreement was signed between Prime Capital and the Maldivian government on January 18, 2013 to lease the Fushidhiggaru lagoon for a 50-year period to a JVC with a 25 percent stake for the government.

According to local media, the government was to receive 30 percent of the profits from the tourism venture in the lagoon south of the capital Malé.

Prime Capital is reported to be a Singaporean company.

Following media reports last year suggesting that the JVC agreement was signed secretively, both Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad and Tourism Minister Ahmed Adeeb initially denied the existence of an agreement to lease the lagoon.

Less than two weeks before the first round of last year’s presidential election on September 7, Jumhooree Coalition campaigner Umar Naseer – now home minister – leaked documents to the media purported to be an agreement to sell the lagoon.

Naseer alleged at the time that the economic development ministry stopped the project as the cabinet had not officially approved it.

Moreover, the agreement was signed without seeking legal advice from the attorney general, he claimed.

Adeeb denied the existence of an “official” lease agreement and dismissed the allegations as a “political assassination” attempt in the days preceding the presidential election.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Attorney General’s Office postpones JSC lawyer election following Supreme Court order

The Attorney General’s (AG) Office has postponed an election for a lawyer to represent the legal community on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) following a Supreme Court order.

The AG office announced the postponement on Thursday night (August 14) after the Supreme Court struck down section 11(a) of the regulations enacted for conducting the polls, which states that polling mechanisms would be established on inhabited islands with at least five registered voters.

The Supreme Court issued an order (Dhivehi) on Thursday afternoon annulling the clause and declared that all licensed lawyers eligible to vote in the elections – including magistrates of island courts – should be able to do so anywhere in the country without registering.

Following the apex court order, the AG office explained in a press statement that it has repealed the procedural regulations as the “essence” of the annulled clause was ensuring “secrecy of the ballot”, which could not be assured after it was struck down.

The election had been scheduled for August 21. The AG office said it would announce a new polling date later.

The election had previously been delayed after Gaaf Dhaal Fiyori Magistrate Abdul Razzak Mohamed filed a case at the Civil Court seeking annulment of section 11(a).

After issuing a stay order postponing the election pending a judgment, the Civil Court ruled in late July that annulling the requirement would violate the secrecy of the ballot.

Judge Ali Rasheed Hussain noted that allowing voting mechanisms on islands where only one lawyer casts a ballot would compromise secrecy.

Speaking to Minivan News at the time, former Deputy Prosecutor General Hussein Shameem – among the four candidates for the seat – welcomed the Civil Court verdict.

“The verdict yesterday proves the Fiyori magistrate had no case. He has caused an undue delay to the process. An election involves the rights of a group of people, not just one individual. I hope the courts consider this in the future and that there are no more delays,” he said.

In addition to Shameem, the other candidates are Anas Abdul Sattar, Mohamed Faisal, and Latheefa Qasim.

Lawyer Mohamed Fareed, however, withdrew his candidacy on July 10, expressing concern over judicial interference in the election following the Supreme Court’s ruling allowing all licensed lawyers, including sitting MPs and judges, to vote in the election.

“The belief that an election in the Maldives may proceed without Supreme Court interference is against the facts, reality. This is the reality now,” he said at a press conference.

Had voting mechanisms been set up on every island, magistrates would have been forced to vote for the judiciary-backed candidate Latheefa Qasim, he suggested.

Latheefa is a public relations staff at the Department of Judicial Administration and had served on the JSC for a year as former President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s appointee to the commission.

Former Attorney General Husnu Suood meanwhile accused the ruling Progressive Party of the Maldives of attempting to fix the composition of the new JSC.

Although he was skeptical of reform through the commission, Suood urged lawyers to back Shameem in order to ensure transparency within the JSC.

“If there is a single effective candidate, I believe they can give us information and work to make the JSC more transparent. There is a huge difference between one person being there and none being there,” he said.

In July, parliament voted for PPM MP Ibrahim Riza to represent the People’s Majlis on JSC.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court banishes lease holder of uninhabited island over non-payment of rent

The Civil Court yesterday banished the lease holder of Gaaf Alif Funadhoo for two months and 15 days for non-payment of rent for the island leased for agriculture.

The Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA) had sought execution of a previous Civil Court judgment ordering Ahmed Abdul Azeez, of Galolhu Aima, to pay outstanding rent and fines worth MVR1.7 million (US$110,246). The court had also ordered that Azeez be placed under house arrest for a month.

As MIRA had sought execution of the judgment for a second time due to non-payment, the court noted in the verdict (Dhivehi) that banishment was stipulated by the regulations for such cases of decreed debt.

However, according to local media, banishment sentences are no longer enforced.

MIRA has reportedly filed cases seeking MVR41.7 million (US$2.7 million) in unpaid taxes.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Court overrules government on lagoon development joint venture

The Civil Court has ruled in favour of Prime Capital Maldives Pvt Ltd in a contract dispute with the government over a joint venture agreement to develop a special tourism zone in Kaafu Atoll Fushidhiggaru lagoon.

In September, Prime Capital sued the government after the Ministry of Economic Development refused to register the joint venture company (JVC) citing lack of authorisation from the president as required by law.

In a verdict (Dhivehi) delivered on July 15, Civil Court Judge Ali Naseer ordered the government to register the JVC within a seven-day period, sign a master lease agreement within five days of registration, “and [to] make all arrangements undertaken by the government in accordance with the agreement”.

An agreement was signed between Prime Capital and the Maldivian government on January 18, 2013 – under the administration of former President Dr Mohamed Waheed – to lease the Fushidhiggaru lagoon for a 50-year period to a JVC with a 25 percent stake for the government.

According to local media, the government was to receive 30 percent of the profits from the tourism venture in the lagoon south of the capital Malé.

Prime Capital is reported to be a Singaporean company.

Denials

Following media reports last year suggesting that the JVC agreement was signed secretively, both Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad and Tourism Minister Ahmed Adeeb initially denied the existence of an agreement to lease the lagoon.

Less than two weeks before the first round of last year’s presidential election on September 7, Jumhooree Coalition campaigner Umar Naseer – now Home Minister – leaked documents to the media purported to be an agreement to sell the lagoon.

Naseer was campaigning for candidate Gasim Ibrahim, while Adeeb was deputy leader of the Progressive Party of Maldives whose candidate – now President Abdulla Yameen – was facing severe criticism from the Jumhooree campaign.

Yameen eventually won the race with Gasim’s endorsement in a run-off with former President Mohamed Nasheed.

The documents leaked by Naseer showed that Finance Minister Jihad had signed the agreement on behalf of the government while Adeeb – also Tourism Minister under President Waheed – had signed as a witness on behalf of Prime Capital.

Naseer alleged at the time that the economic development ministry stopped the project as the cabinet had not officially approved it.

Moreover, the agreement was signed without seeking legal advice from the attorney general, he claimed.

Adeeb denied the existence of an “official” lease agreement and dismissed the allegations as a “political assassination” attempt in the days preceding the presidential election.

He did say, however, that the Waheed administration was in talks with a foreign company as the previous administration had decided to lease the lagoon.

The Anti-Corruption Commission was meanwhile asked to investigate the deal.

Adeeb also suggested that Naseer was upset after the government refused to lease a lagoon called “Gaafalhu” for his whale submarine business.

In its lawsuit, Prime Capital had reportedly submitted a letter signed by Tourism Ministry Deputy Director Hassan Zameel sent to the economic development ministry requesting approval of the JVC registration.

The Civil Court ruled that registering a joint venture with a government stake was the legal responsibility of the government and ordered the relevant ministries to fulfil all contractual obligations.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Court rules in favour of Medianet in World Cup rebroadcasting dispute

The Civil Court has ruled yesterday that the Maldives Broadcasting Commission’s (MBC) order for cable TV service provider Medianet to cease airing FIFA World Cup matches on any channels except state broadcaster Television Maldives (TVM) and Villa TV (VTV) was unlawful.

Medianet had sued the commission after MBC ordered the company to halt rebroadcasting matches on channels Sony Six, Sony Six HD and Sony Pix pending an inquiry, insisting that only TVM and VTV were authorised to broadcast matches.

In its verdict, the Civil Court reportedly ruled that the commission had not followed due process and was not authorised to issue such an order under broadcasting laws and regulations.

The court’s decision came ahead of the World Cup final match last night. MBC members have since told local media that the commission was seeking legal advice before deciding whether to appeal the verdict at the High Court.

Following Medianet’s refusal to comply with the commission’s first order, MBC had issued a second order instructing the company to comply “without any conditions”. Both orders were annulled by the Civil Court ruling yesterday.

Medianet had also refused to comply with instructions from the commission to broadcast matches shown on TVM and VTV in high definition.

Medianet is currently the only cable television service provider in the Maldives.

Lobbying group

At a press conference following the verdict yesterday, Medianet Director Ahmed Nashid – opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP for Komandoo – contended that the commission could no longer be considered an independent institution.

A recently formed lobbying group comprised of private broadcasters was exerting undue influence over the MBC, he alleged, adding that the group had “hijacked” the commission.

The commission ordered Medianet to cease airing World Cup matches on channels except TVM and VTV a day after a meeting between the lobby group and MBC members, he noted.

Nashid further accused the MBC of participating in the lobby group’s alleged efforts to defame Medianet.

Claiming financial losses caused by the dispute, Nashid also said the company was considering suing MBC members for damages.

The lobby group meanwhile released a press statement yesterday accusing the MBC’s legal counsel of not adequately defending the commission’s stance.

The commission’s lawyer had conceded in court that the matter was under investigation and that due process was not followed, the lobby group said.

Moreover, the lawyer had not attempted to prove that Medianet deliberately misled the commission, the statement added.

Medianet had not sought authorisation in accordance with FIFA rules for rebroadcasting matches, the lobby group insisted.

MBC had maintained that Medianet’s agreement with Indian broadcaster Sony MSM was not made in accordance with Maldivian broadcasting law and that the company’s decision to charge an MVR100 fee for viewing matches on channels 100 and 100 plus was also illegal.

The FIFA World Cup was a “listed event” and Medianet had not sought authorisation to broadcast matches, MBC had said.

Moreover, the commission noted that only TVM and VTV had obtained rights to broadcast the event.

However, Nashid explained yesterday that the company had signed an agreement with Sony Six to broadcast the channel’s content for two years.

He stressed that the agreement was not limited to airing World Cup matches.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court upholds Civil Court ruling against Meridian Services

The Maldivian High Court has upheld the Civil Court ruling that the State Trading Organization (STO) had not acted against the law in limiting the credit amount of fuel released to Meridian Services, and decreasing the duration within which the company needs to pay back the owed money to STO.

Meridian Services had appealed the case at the High Court alleging that the Civil Court sentence was against legal principles.

The case was presided over by High Court judges Abdulla Hameed, Abdul Rauf Ibrahim, and Shuaib Hussain Zakariya.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court upholds reinstatement of police inspector dismissed after rape allegations

The Supreme Court has today upheld the High Court ruling to reinstate Chief Inspector Hussain Risheef Thoha who had been dismissed after being accused of raping a woman inside a police car.

The ruling stated that, although the victim had alleged that a group of police officers attacked her, she did not state that Risheef participated in the rape.

Commenting on today’s ruling today, Maldivian Democratic Party MP and lawyer Imthiyaz ‘Inthi’ Fahmy expressed concern the court would ask for the reinstatement of an officer after its disciplinary board had decided that there was enough evidence to link him with a rape case.

”These are not just ordinary citizens, these are senior police officers accused of a serious crime,” Inthi said. ”This is very dangerous and serious.”

Risheef had called the officers who were inside the car, said the Supreme Court today, stating that this did not prove he had participated in the attack.

The ruling noted that there was no record of a phone call in which Risheed instructed officers to rape the victim.

The court ruling stated that Risheed had gone to the area where the girl had been left after the incident, and had given her a t-shirt to cover herself up.

Again, this does not prove that Risheef had participated in the act, said the court, noting that helping a person in that situation to cover up is how it should be done in Islamic principles.

The court also criticised the police disciplinary board for taking action against Risheef based on the allegations, saying that this was against Islamic principles and international best practice.

The case

In August 2011, a woman filed a case at police headquarters alleging she was sexually abused by a group of police officers, including Risheef.

Thoha later appealed his dismissal by the police disciplinary board at the Civil Court, which ruled that the decision had been lawful and that there was enough evidence to dismiss Risheef from duty.

The Civil Court noted at the time that Risheef’s call records showed he had contacted the other accused officers several times, and in turn had been contacted by them.

The ruling also said that the girl was thrown out of the car naked near the chief inspector’s house in Maafannu, and that Thoha had admitted to being in the area a few minutes later.

In August 2012, the High Court overruled the decision made by the Civil Court and ordered that police reinstate Risheef at the rank of chief inspector.

In September 2012, the High Court upheld a Civil Court ruling to reinstate Police Lance Corporal Ali Nasheed to active duty, who had been dismissed in relation to the same incident.

Recently, police said that they would only accept dismissed officers in a situation where the Supreme Court ordered the reinstatement of their position in the police.

Lawyer Inthi said that such issues makes the people lose confidence with the police force.

”This shows that issues like this are not taken seriously,” he said. ”The disciplinary board is a board that has the authority to dismiss police officers if they find that there was enough evidence to believe that a police officer is guilty of a crime.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MACL can sue former chairman over GMR airport charge decision, says Civil Court

The Civil Court has ruled the Maldives Airports Company (MACL) can sue its former chairman for allowing the disputed Airport Development Charge (ADC) to be deducted from Indian infrastructure giant GMR’s concession payments during it’s ill-fated agreement.

MACL alleges ‘Kuda Bandhey’ Ibrahim Saleem’s decision to be an act of ‘Ultra Vires’ – meaning that Saleem had acted beyond his permitted authority.

The ruling came following a procedural issue taken by Saleem said he was being wrongfully charged claiming the lawsuit was filed in violation to Article 18 (c) of the Contract Act and Article 74 Company Act.

The Contract Act states a clause requiring a party to refer to arbitration any dispute arising from the contract shall be valid, while the Company Act says the court has a right to issue orders holding personally liable the directors of the company to commit an offense in the name of the company.

But the Civil Court ruling stated that the Company Act does not prohibit the company chairman from being sued personally.

The airports company sued Saleem after he signed a letter sent to GMR on January 5 2012 stating that the ADC and the insurance surcharge fee had been deducted from GMR’s concession payments.

In late 2011, the then-opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) had filed a successful Civil Court case blocking GMR from charging US$25 charge for outgoing passengers – stipulated in its agreement with the government – on the grounds that it was a tax not authorised by parliament.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s administration subsequently chose to honour the original contract, instructing GMR to deduct the ADC revenues from the concession fees due to the state-owned MACL while it sought to appeal the Civil Court ruling.

However, with the Nasheed’s controversial resignation coming just one month later, the opposition soon inherited the contractual problem.

Dr Mohamed Waheed’s government then received a succession of bills from the airport developer throughout 2012, despite its insistence that the January 5 letter from MACL outlining the new arrangement was no longer valid.

In December 2012, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) filed a case with the Prosecutor General’s Office over Saleem’s decision to allow GMR to deduct the ADC from concession fees owed to the state.

As part of the filed case (Dhivehi), the ACC was seeking reimbursement of MVR 353.8 million (US$22.9 million) from Saleem and former Finance Minister Mohamed Shihab over the alleged misuse of authority it claimed had led to significant financial loses for the state.

These losses were used as justification for the contract’s eventual termination in December 2012, for which GMR is currently seeking compensation via a Singapore court of arbitration.

According to the case filed by the ACC, former Finance Minister Shihab stands accused of misusing his ministerial authority to benefit a third party by allowing GMR to deduct the charges between October 2011 and September 2012.

The ACC has also accused Saleem violating the company’s rules. According to the ACC’s case, normal procedure for MACL would be to have the company’s board of directors pass a resolution allowing for consent to be given to deduct the ADC.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)