Tag: civil court

Civil Court freezes accounts, holds passport of DRP Leader Thasmeen

The Civil Court has issued a court order today freezing the bank accounts and holding the passport of Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali over a case filed by Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim to recover an unpaid debt of MVR 1.92 million (US$124,513).

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Nazim filed the case requesting enforcement of a Civil Court verdict in April 2011 – upheld by the High Court in April 2013 – ordering the recently appointed running mate of President Dr Mohamed Waheed to settle the debt.

A Civil Court media official explained to Minivan News that freezing accounts and holding passports were the normal procedure to follow in cases of decreed debt.

The media official confirmed that the Civil Court has issued the court order to both freeze Thasmeen’s bank accounts and hold his passport following today’s hearing.

Thasmeen’s lawyer reportedly said that his client was preparing to appeal the High Court ruling at the Supreme Court. The judge however replied that the civil case would proceed until such a time when the Supreme Court decides to hear the appeal.

MP Nazim sued Thasmeen in March 2011 to recover MVR 1.92 million (US$124,513) unpaid from a loan worth MVR 2.55 million (US$200,000). After the Civil Court ruled in favour of Nazim, Thasmeen appealed the judgment at the High Court in June 2011.

At the time the case was filed at the Civil Court, Thasmeen’s DRP was in a formal coalition with the minority opposition People’s Alliance (PA) led by Nazim and current PPM presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen.

The DRP-PA coalition agreement was severed in July 2011 amidst internal strife within the then-main opposition party, which saw a breakaway faction loyal to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom leaving the party to form PPM in October 2011.

Following an acrimonious war of words between then-DRP ‘Honorary Leader’ Gayoom and his successor Thasmeen, the former president withdrew his endorsement of the DRP presidential candidate in March 2011.

Meanwhile, at the final hearing of the Civil Court case in April 2011, Thasmeen’s lawyer reportedly claimed that Nazim agreed to sell Shaviyani Kabalifaru, which was leased for development as a resort in 2005, to raise funds to cover the MVR 2.55 million loan.

Thasmeen’s lawyer denied that an agreement was made between the pair to pay back the loan in a month, claiming that Nazim failed to find a buyer for Kabalifaru as agreed upon in November 2008.

The lawyer also denied Nazim’s claim that the loan was taken to pay back Thasmeen’s debts at the Bank of Maldives.

However, Nazim’s lawyer, Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem – currently President Waheed’s member on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) – disputed both claims, demanding documentation to prove that Thasmeen gave power of attorney to Nazim to sell the resort.

At a previous hearing, Nazim’s lawyer had produced a document with Thasmeen’s signature, prompting Judge Hathif Hilmy to observe that the purported loan agreement had a reference number and that it was therefore reasonable to expect Thasmeen to be aware of the details of the amount in question.

Article 73(c) of the constitution states, “A person shall be disqualified from election as, a member of the People’s Majlis, or a member of the People’s Majlis immediately becomes disqualified, if he has a decreed debt which is not being paid as provided in the judgment.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court issues injunction blocking JSC from further action against Chief High Court Judge

The Civil Court has issued a temporary injunction ordering its own watchdog body, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), not to take any further action against Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef until it rules on a case concerning his suspension.

The new injunction issued by the Civil Court orders the JSC not to take any action against Chief Judge Shareef that would undermine his rights. The order will take effect until proceedings in the case filed by Chief Judge Shareef conclude.

Chief Judge Shareef’s lawyers originally requested the Civil Court invalidate JSC’s suspension but the court there was no reason to issue such an injunction.

In May the JSC ‘indefinitely suspended’ the Chief Judge over a complaint filed against the judge last year.

During a press conference held by the commission to announce its decision, JSC Chair and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla insisted that the disciplinary action had no relation to the ongoing High Court case filed by former President Mohamed Nasheed contesting the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court bench, appointed by the JSC.

According to Justice Adam Mohamed, the suspension was a “precautionary” measure while investigation of the complaint was proceeding.

“There are no legal grounds to stop looking into a complaint submitted [to the commission] or halt proceedings,” he said.

Shortly after the suspension, attorneys representing the High Court Chief Judge led by former Attorney General and President of Maldives Bar Association Husnu Al Suood filed a lawsuit at the Civil Court challenging the suspension.

Suood said Chief Judge Shareef had been suspended in contradiction of existing laws, and the decision undermined the independence a judge requires in executing his legal duties.

He said the Chief Judge’s team of counsels will plead in court that the decision by the JSC was an attempt to unduly exercise influence over judges. He also added that once the case is registered at the Civil Court, a request will be made at the Supreme Court to take over the case, as has been the previous practice.

“That is not a small thing when you get a suspension after one year. Suspending a country’s Chief High Court Judge  is not a small thing,” Suood told local media.

He also said the JSC’s passing a motion to suspend the judge with a vote of just three members – two of whom represented the executive – led to presumption that the vote had been influenced.

According to local media reports, the call for an indefinite suspension of the Chief Judge was proposed to the JSC by the incumbent Attorney General Aishath Bisham – who is yet to receive parliament’s consent following her appointment – and was passed by the vote of three members out of the 10-member commission.

“There is reason to believe this decision had political motives behind it,” Suood claimed at the time.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court takes over Civil Court case on legitimacy of transfer of power

The Supreme Court has taken over a case filed at the Civil Court by dismissed Human Rights Minister Dhiyana Saeed, who had requested a ruling declaring that the transfer of power on February 7, 2012 was illegitimate.

The Supreme Court ordered the lower court last week to suspend its proceedings and send over the case files before 3:00pm on Thursday (May 23). The court order (Dhivehi) stated that the apex court would determine whether the Civil Court had jurisdiction to hear the case.

The court order was issued following a request by the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) for the Supreme Court to decide on the question of jurisdiction.

At the first hearing of the Civil Court case, the AGO requested proceedings be halted pending a ruling from the Supreme Court. However, the judge decided to proceed with the hearing in the absence of a court order by the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court order was revealed today by the recently launched official twitter account of the Civil Court.

Dhiyana Saeed – also former SAARC Secretary General and former President Mohamed Nasheed’s first Attorney General – had first submitted the case to the High Court, which however decided that it was outside the appeal court’s jurisdiction.

The case was filed at the Civil Court earlier this month.

The defendant in Dhiyana’s lawsuit was Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid, who recently defected from the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) to the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and is currently campaigning for former President Nasheed.

Nasheed resigned in the wake of a violent mutiny by Special Operations (SO) police officers, who assaulted government supporters, ransacked the ruling party Haruge (meeting hall), protested at the Republic Square, clashed with the military, vandalised the police headquarters and stormed the state broadcaster on the morning of February 7.

Saeed’s lawsuit noted that Shahid was the state official with the authority under article 121 of the constitution to declare the office of the president vacant, should an incumbent president resign or vacate the office.

“It was the Speaker of Parliament who declared the office of president vacant, be it had he done it knowingly, mistakenly or unknowingly,” Saeed told newspaper Haveeru. “This doesn’t mean Shahid committed a criminal offense. It also does not mean that he partook in the events or that he made the decision [maliciously].”

She contended that Speaker Shahid had failed to look into the circumstances surrounding Nasheed’s resignation before accepting the letter.

Saeed told Minivan News that she and her co-counsels “stopped short of asking for Nasheed’s reinstatement,” adding that she did not have “the locus standi to ask for a particular relief.”

“If the ruling comes in our favour, it might be possible for Nasheed to institute a second proceeding for reinstatement. As far as this case is concerned, our interest is in the rule of law and invoking constitutional process to uphold the legal order as stipulated by the constitution,” Saeed explained at the time.

Supreme Court intervention

Meanwhile, in her report to the United Nations Human Rights Council following a visit to the Maldives, UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers Gabriela Knaul observed that it was “troublesome that some of the Supreme Court’s interventions are perceived as arbitrary and as serving the judges’ own personal interests.”

“Moreover, the Supreme Court is said to have taken away cases directly from the superior courts before they were adjudicated, without explaining which criteria or procedures were applied,” Knaul wrote.

The Supreme Court has on a number of occasions issued writs of mandamus taking over cases from lower courts. In November 2012, the Supreme Court instructed the High Court to suspend proceedings on an appeal by former President Nasheed concerning the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

At the same time, the apex court ordered the Civil Court to send over all files on a case submitted by a lawyer, Ismail Visham, disputing the legal status of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The Supreme Court also intervened in litigation concerning a border control project awarded to Malaysian mobile security firm Nexbis.

Transfer of power

Following her dismissal from the cabinet by President Dr Mohamed Waheed last year, Saeed released a personal memoir alleging that Nasheed’s political rivals had conspired to assassinate him.

Saeed alleged that the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7 was the result of a premeditated and well-orchestrated plan, and questioned the findings of the Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI), which concluded that Nasheed had resigned voluntarily.

In January 2013, parliament’s Government Oversight Committee commenced a review of the CoNI report and heard testimony from six of the highest-ranking officers of the security services at the time of the transfer of power.

Following its inquiry, Committee Chair MP Ali Waheed claimed that the report produced by CoNI was “flawed” based on the findings of the committee.

The CoNI report lacked “key information [senior police and military officers] had given” while “others claimed their information was wrongly presented,” the MDP MP said at the time.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court rejects Umar Naseer’s request to overturn dismissal from PPM

The Civil Court has ruled that it has no reason to issue an injunction to halt a decision made by the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM)’s disciplinary committee regarding Umar Naseer, and have rejected his request.

The Civil Court ruling stated that Umar Naseer has the opportunity to appeal the decision of the disciplinary committee with the party’s own appeal committee.

The court referred to Umar’s accusations that the party’s disciplinary committee was under the influence of certain figures within the party, and said that he was not able to prove these accusations.

The Civil Court said that unless this was proved otherwise the court had to consider that the disciplinary committee and appeal committee of the PPM were functioning as stated in the party’s charter.

The ruling was issued today by Civil Court Judge Aisha Shujoon.

Although the court ruling on the request for injunction came today, Umar Naseer has been already dismissed from the party.

In April, Umar Naseer submitted a case to the Civil Court seeking a ruling that he was dismissed from the party against the party’s regulations.

In May, Naseer resubmitted the case at the Civil Court to try and invalidate the outcome of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) primary vote.

Umar, who contested the PPM presidential primary against the party’s Parliamentary Group Leader and eventual winner MP Abdulla Yameen, has since been removed from the party after accusing his rival of rigging the vote to secure his victory.

The previous case seeking to invalidate the PPM primary was submitted by party member Rahma Moosa, who alleged that thousands of voters were not officially registered with the PPM at the time they cast votes on their preferred party candidate.

Rahma Moosa reportedly filed the case claiming that 8,915 people who were not officially registered as members of PPM had been allowed to vote in the primary. She contended that the move contravened the Political Party Act and compromised the rights of all general members of the party.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Haveeru shareholders sue chairman for failure to pay share of profits since 1983

Two shareholders of the Maldives’ largest print and online newspaper, Haveeru, have sued the company’s Chairman Mohamed Zahir Hussain alleging he had run the company on his own behalf and failed to pay their shares as stated in a 1983 agreement when the company was first established.

The first hearing into the case was held today in the Civil Court. A lawyer representing two of the shareholders told the court that there had been an agreement made on April 1, 1983 at the establishment of the publication stating that the profits would be share equally among Chairman Zahir Hussain, Ibrahim Rasheed, Abdulla Farooq and Mohamed Naeem.

According to local media, the lawyer told the court that Zahir has been running the company without the involvement of the other three shareholders and in such a way that the other three were not receiving any of the profits.

The suit requests, the court order Zahir pay the amount owed since 1983 to the other shareholders.

The lawyer also requested the court issue an injunction preventing the sale of Haveeru to another party before the case reaches a conclusion, on the understanding it would harm the interests of the other shareholders.

The court has said that it will decide on the request for injunction during the next hearing. Haveeru was represented by former Attorney General Husnu Suood.

Minivan News understands that Haveeru has been placed for sale by its chairman and is soliciting bidders.

The Maldives’ second oldest newspaper, Miadhu News, and its assets were meanwhile bought in April by presidential candidate and Jumhoree Party (JP) Leader and MP Gasim Ibrahim.  Resort tycoon Gasim is also a member of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) and owner of private broadcaster VTV.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Umar Naseer resubmits case to invalidate outcome of PPM primary

Umar Naseer has resubmitted a case at the Civil Court to try and invalidate the outcome of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) primary vote – days after the same court dismissed a similar legal claim on a technicality.

A spokesperson for the Civil Court confirmed that Naseer yesterday (May 5) submitted the case under his own name after a judge dismissed the matter on the grounds that the party member who originally filed the case had not herself been one of the candidates competing in the vote.

Naseer, who contested the PPM presidential primary against the party’s Parliamentary Group Leader and eventual winner MP Abdullah Yameen, has since been removed from the party after accusing his rival of corrupt practices to secure his victory.

All allegations of vote corruption during the primary have been denied by Yameen and senior PPM figures.

According to a Civil Court spokesperson, the case resubmitted today by Naseer was believed to be “almost exactly the same” as the one filed by a PPM member on April 18 with the exception of a few “small changes”. The court official said that Umar Naseer was also believed to have requested an interim order along with the case, though no further details were available at time of press on the nature of the request.

As Naseer’s case has yet to be registered officially at the court, the spokesperson said that no date had as yet been scheduled for when a hearing into the matter would be taking place.

A separate case has also previously been filed by Naseer at the Civil Court contesting his dismissal form the party whilst legal action was being undertaken.

Naseer has previously said he does not provide any information or interviews to Minivan News.

PPM MPs Abdulla Yameen and Ahmed Mahloof were not responding to calls at time of press.

Earlier case

The previous case seeking to invalidate the PPM primary was submitted by party member Rahma Moosa, who alleged that thousands of voters were not officially registered with the PPM at the time they cast votes on their preferred party candidate.

Moosa reportedly filed the case claiming that 8,915 people who were not officially registered as members of PPM had been allowed to vote in the primary.  She contended that the move contravened the Political Party Act and compromised the rights of all general members of the party.

Divisions between certain PPM supporters have appeared following March’s primary, after Naseer accused his MP Yameen of having controlled all of the party’s organs, including the council and election committee, and had “rigged” the vote in his favour by ballot stuffing, falsifying the count.

Having previously denied the accusations, current senior representatives for the PPM have pledged to move past the dispute, with local media reporting that a rally scheduled to be held Friday (May 3) to announce MP Yameen’s running mate for the presidential elections was postponed as a result of adverse weather.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court orders police to return all seized assets of accused drug lord

The Civil Court has ordered police to return all the assets seized from Adam Naseer that were confiscated during an investigation of his activities in 2010.

After the Criminal Court acquitted Naseer, the Civil Court ruled that there were no legal grounds for police to withhold the assets and ordered them returned in one month.

The Civil Court ordered police to return all the cash, three HSBC gold visa card, one HSCB silver card, one mobile phone SIM card, two HP laptops, a paper with the HSBC card’s pin code written on it, one CD, three papers containing information about Dhiraagu, a prepaid SIM card’s guide book, one Fujitsu laptop, his passport, one car and motorbike registration,  one speedboat registration and two cheque books.

Police searched Naseer’s home in Addu Atoll on June 30, 2009, where they found over MVR 6 million (US$461,500) in cash and a tin containing drugs outside his house. Police subsequently alleged that he was one of the top six drug lords in the Maldives.

However the Criminal Court acquitted Naseer on the grounds that the state had not been able to convince it that the money found inside his house was earned through drug trafficking, or that the tin containing money outside his house belonged to him. The state appealed the case at the High Court, which upheld the lower court’s verdict.

In May 2010 Naseer sued police seeking the return of the money.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court dismisses case to invalidate outcome of PPM primary

The Civil Court has dismissed a case seeking to invalidate the outcome of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) primary vote in March, that saw MP Abdulla Yameen selected as its presidential candidate for September’s elections.

A Civil Court spokesperson confirmed to Minivan News that during Thursday’s hearing the presiding judge rejected the case, which was filed last month by a PPM member.

The member who filed the case alleged that thousands of voters were not officially registered with the PPM at the time they cast votes on their preferred party candidate. Further details on the case were not available to the court official at time of press.

Sun Online reported that the case was rejected on the grounds that the PPM member, Rahma Moosa, was not one of the candidates and therefore could not claim infringement of her rights.

Umar Naseer told the online publication that he would file the case in his own name on Sunday (May 5).

Confirmation of the trial’s rejection was announced as local media reported that a rally scheduled to be held Friday (May 3) to announce MP Yameen’s running mate for the presidential elections had been postponed as a result of adverse weather.

MP Yameen, half brother of PPM founder and former Maldives President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was not responding to calls at time of press. PPM MP Ahmed Nihan meanwhile had his phone switched off when contacted this afternoon.

Divisions

Divisions between PPM supporters appeared following March’s primary, when Umar Naseer – the only candidate to stand against Yameen during the contest – accused his opponent had controlled all of the party’s organs, including the council and election committee, and had “rigged” the vote in his favour by ballot stuffing, falsifying the count.

The allegations have been rejected by Yameen and the wider PPM, while Naseer found himself dismissed from the party late last month after he refused to respond – either verbally or in writing – during a seven day period provided by the PPM’s disciplinary hearing to retract the allegations.

Amidst the formation of divisions in the party at the time, PPM member Rahma Moosa lodged a case on April 18 at the Civil Court challenging the results of the party’s presidential primary.

Moosa reportedly filed the case claiming that 8,915 people who were not officially registered as members of PPM had been allowed to vote in the primary.

She contended that the move contravened the Political Party Act and compromised the rights of all general members of the party.

Coalition talks

The PPM, as the country’s second largest party in terms of parliamentary representation, last month said it would not rule out forming a coalition with President Dr Mohamed Waheed or any other fellow government-aligned parties ahead of the presidential elections.

PPM MP Ahmed Nihan told Minivan News at the time that the party had already engaged in talks over the possibility of forming a power sharing agreement with other parties in the government of President Waheed, although no final decision had yet been taken.

Nihan said that rival political parties needed to reassess their views on power sharing after thousands of people attended a gathering held by the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) on April 19 to announce the signing of Parliamentary Speaker Abdulla Shahid.

Nihan’s comments were echoed at the same time by current Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed – who is speculated in local media to be among the leading candidates to stand as the PPM presidential candidate’s running mate during the elections.

Dr Jameel told Minivan News last month that a changed political landscape since the country’s first multi-party elections in 2008, necessitated a willingness to share power more than ever.

“We have to recognise that the PPM and the [opposition] Maldivian Demoratic Party (MDP) are the two major political forces in the country capable of winning elections. Hence, if the governing coalition desires to forge an alliance, it cannot realistically exclude the PPM from any such move. Whether a coalition, inclusive of the PPM can be realised prior to the elections is possible or not, we cannot alienate major political parties in an election,” he said at the time.

“Therefore, the role of smaller parties attempting to win an election of this scale without the inclusion of major political parties is in my opinion, a risky business,” Dr Jameel added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Umar Naseer contests dismissal from PPM in Civil Court

Umar Naseer, who lost the presidential primaries of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) to Abdulla Yameen, has submitted a case to the Civil Court seeking a ruling that he was dismissed from the party against the party’s regulations.

Ahmed ‘Maaz’ Saleem, a PPM member who served as Naseer’s campaign manager,  stated that the case also concerned irregularities in the primaries. He reportedly told local media that they did not believe that Naseer’s allegations the primaries were rigged were enough ground for him to be dismissed from a political party in a modern democratic system.

Saleem further claimed that Naseer’s dismissal breached the fundamental regulations of the party itself.

“It’s against democratic principles to dismiss every person who expresses a dissenting view on party matters,” Saleem said.

Saleem went on to criticise other internal issues of PPM, stating that even the party’s Disciplinary Committee consisted of members who remained “under the control of” PPM’s presidential candidate Yameen.

Saleem further stated that a large number of PPM members are still supporting Naseer, and that they would back his claims that the primaries had been rigged through ballot-stuffing, falsifying vote counts and other such actions.

Saleem said that problems had risen in PPM after “a group of corrupt people from some organisation called the PA which does not even have 3000 members” joined the party.

The PA (People’s Alliance) was headed by Abdulla Yameen until the Dhiivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) split and formed the PPM. Yameen then joined PPM, leaving PA to be headed by Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim.

Unfair disciplinary action

Naseer’s close political ally Saleem added that the party had failed to take action against MPs Shifaq Mufeed and Ali Arif, who had strongly criticised the current government and President Mohamed Waheed Hassan in parliament, despite the party’s council having ruled it would not publicly criticise the government as they were part of its coalition.

“President Maumoon himself expressed concern about this action of the MPs,” Saleem was quoted as saying in local media.

“The decision to not criticise this government was made in a council meeting chaired by President Maumoon himself. And then these MPs acted against this decision right in front of MP Abdul Azeez Jamaal (Chair of PPM’s Disciplinary Committee). And even then, the committee did not even look into the matter. Tell me then, where is the justice in them taking action against Umar Naseer?”

Cases against PPM primaries

Saleem further said that “it is not a sensible line of action” to dismiss Naseer for alleging the primaries had been rigged, while there is an ongoing case in the Civil Court submitted by a general member of PPM regarding vote rigging in the primaries.

Earlier this month, member of PPM Rahma Moosa has lodged a case in the Civil Court challenging the results of the party’s presidential primary.

The case was filed claiming that 8,915 people who were not officially registered as members of PPM had been allowed to vote in the primary.

Moosa alleged that the move breached the Political Party Act and compromised the rights of all general members of the party.

PPM Spokesperson Ahmed Mahloof’s phone was switched off at the time of press.

Umar Naseer was not responding to calls. Earlier this month his secretary stated that, as a rule, he would not conduct interviews with Minivan News.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)