Tag: commission

‘Al Andalus’ speech did not violate broadcasting code of ethics: Broadcasting Commission

The Broadcasting Commission has ruled that the Maldives Broadcasting Corporation (MBC)’s televising of a sermon by Jamiyyathul Salaf preacher Sheikh Adam Shameem Ibrahim did not violate any regulations.

The MBC’s chairman Ibrahim Umar Manik along with members of the Broadcasting Commission were summoned before Parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee, following complaints by MPs of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) that the sermon infringed the rights of the party’s presidential candidate.

“We definitely do not consider [televising the sermon] as anti-campaigning against a particular candidate using religion. [But] around 11:35pm, because his talk was changing a little, we stopped the live [broadcasting],” Manik told the committee.

In a brief statement the Broadcasting Commission declared today that the state broadcaster had not violated the broadcasting code of ethics by airing the sermon.

In the sermon, titled ‘Al Andalus’, Sheikh Shameem drew comparisons between the Maldives and factors he claimed led to the collapse of the medieval Islamic state that occupied much of Spain, Portugal, Andorra and southern France.

“In the struggle among political parties to come to power, we are seeing dangerous parallels with the real reasons why Andalus fell: seeking help from non-Muslim leaders, bringing in their power and companies to our country. It is not prohibited to have non-Muslim labourers, but if we let any non-Muslim entities exert their power, even in business, over Muslims in our land, that is the end of us,” Shameem said.

“Some people tell us that despite supporting a certain politician, their faith cannot be changed, although they say they know [the politician] does not believe in Allah. I am very happy that there are people with such strong faith among us. It is indeed an extraordinary man who can hold onto his faith while being with a kafir, an infidel who commits sinful acts and uses intoxicating substances.

“However, he used to say there will be no way any other religion can be practised here, but his tune has changed. Today he says that despite churches being built, his faith will personally not change. That people of other religions should also be able to live here freely and be granted rights as Islam is a peaceful, just and caring religion. This is very true, but what he wants is a horrible result. He wants to challenge Allah about the justice in our religion.

“This country will have a dark future if we allow the police and army to be exposed to the training sessions given by non-Muslims, outright kafirs, in the guise of professional development. The kafirs will then have an opportunity to make the police and army hate Islam,” he preached.

Read the translation of the sermon

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

US encourages all parties to accept first round results

The US has hailed the results of the first round of the presidential election in the Maldives as a “victory for the democratic process”.

In a statement, Deputy Spokesperson for the US State Department Marie Harf noted that the results had been “widely hailed as a success” by the Commonwealth, United Nations, and local Maldivian observers.

The comment comes as Jumhooree Party candidate Gasim Ibrahim, who placed third with 24.07 percent and narrowly missed a place in the run-off, contests a case in the Supreme Court seeking annulment of the results, alleging electoral irregularities.

The JP was supported in the ongoing court case by the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), while Attorney General Azima Shukoor also intervened and criticised the conduct of the Elections Commission.

“As the country prepares for the second round on September 28, the United States and the international community again stand ready to assist Maldivians as they exercise their fundamental right to choose their own government,” declared the US State Department.

“For this final round to be as successful as the previous round, all political parties must respect the democratic process and continue to allow for a free, fair and peaceful vote to take place. We encourage all parties and all presidential candidates to respect the results and work together for a peaceful transition for the benefit of the Maldivian people,” the statement concluded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

CNI report leaves Maldives with “awkward”, “comical” precedent: Nasheed

Additional reporting by Mariyath Mohamed

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has said he accepts the report produced by the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) subject to the reservations of his member on the Commonwealth-backed commission, Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed.

The CNI found that there was no coup on February 7, that Nasheed did not resign under duress, and that police and military officers did not mutiny.

Saeed resigned from the commission the evening prior to report’s publication, expressing concern that the CNI had experienced the withholding of evidence, non-cooperation from crucial witnesses, non-examination of witnesses, witnesses being intimidated or obstructed, testimonies and evidence that was not reviewed.  Concern was also expressed over the organisation by the CNI secretariat.

“I believe the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) will consider the reservations about the CNI’s work that Saeed has noted, and that these issues will also be included in the CMAG report,” Nasheed said, at a press conference this afternoon.

The former President observed that the CNI’s report had effectively set a legal precedent under Maldivian law for the overthrow of an elected government through police or mob action.

This, he said, left the Maldives “in a very awkward, and in many ways, very comical” situation, “where toppling the government by brute force is taken to be a reasonable course of action. All you have to do find is a narrative for that course of action.”

“The pronouncement on the transfer of power was a political announcement – not based on findings or facts. This political pronouncement is based in my view on what would be best for the country from now on, not on exactly what happened that day,” Nasheed said.

“I see the report as a document that tries to map a way forward. The commission was of the view that reinstating my 2008 government would be so messy that it would be best to move forward with another election. So the report has tried so hard to come out with this view through a proper narrative. You will have read the narrative and will understand that at times it is comical, but still, it is a narrative.

“I still am of the view that the commission report has established a precedent which in many ways is not very alien to our past practices. Usually if a mob comes to the palace and stands there for a lengthy amount of time, and if other locals are connected to the mob, the king has very little room to maneuver,” Nasheed said.

“We seem to have been unable to get away from this very feudal system of governance. We were hoping the new constitution would be enlightened enough to give us a system whereby governments would change simply through the ballot box, but it now looks like it was not so simple. I think it will take time before we are able to settle down to more democratic forms.

“My message to the international community is when you recommend issues, situations, solutions programmes and projects to other societies and people, it is so very important to understand the detailed intricacies of the local conditions.

“We still hope elections will be held early, and we will go to elections with a programme, as we always have, and we believe that we will win that election in the first round very handsomely. We have no doubt about that.”

Nasheed noted that all major coalition-aligned parties had signalled their acceptance of the report and its recommendations, including former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) Leader Thasmeen Ali, “and my former vice president Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik”, and emphasised that one of the major recommendations in the report that they had agreed to was for action taken against unlawful acts committed by the security forces.

“We call for a criminal investigation, and they must then be tried in court and be sentenced as due,” he said.

“We are not surprised, this was one outcome the MDP had predicted. If the report suggested there was no duress [in the resignation] but that there were wrongdoings by the police and military, then all these wrongdoings must be addressed immediately within a period of one month, with the international community’s support in doing so,” Nasheed added.

During his speech at the report’s release on Thursday, President Mohamed Waheed did not reveal the CNI’s fourth finding – that there were “acts of police brutality on February 6, 7 and 8 that must be investigated and pursued further by relevant authorities”.

Referring to the CNI report’s conclusion that the controversial February 7 change of power was “constitutional”, Nasheed said that if this were the case, then he believed that parties who were not included in the victorious 2008 coalition had no right to participate in the current unity government, specifically Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and the DRP.

Nasheed called for his impending trial at Hulhumale Court – a move recently upheld by the High Court – to be expedited, and also expressed concern at the arbitrary arrest of his supporters for calling police and public officials ‘baghees’ (traitors).

“It is always their hard work that brings things to realisation, that impresses upon everyone the gravity of issues, and if you have a look at who was arrested last night, you can see that the core of them are the intelligentsia of this country,” Nasheed said.

“They are young, highly qualified and they have an opinion. If you want to keep arresting people with an opinion, that says very little about your democratic credentials.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP calls for independent commission to probe death of Lance Corporal Haleem

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) parliamentary group has alleged that there were “hidden factors” in the murder of policeman Lance Corporal Adam Haleem last week, and called for an independent commission to probe the matter, reports Haveeru.

The party alleged that President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik had sought to implicate the MDP in the murder, while at the same time the alleged killer had been photographed in the company of Jumhoree Party (JP) leader Gasim Ibrahim and the party’s Deputy Leader, Abdulla Jabir.

“It was noticed that former Vice President Waheed speaking on behalf of the illegitimate December 23 coalition had tried to pin the blame on a specific party during an interview with DhiTV via phone,” the party said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Commission has interviewed 224 witnesses: CNI

The Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) told reporters today that it has interviewed 224 witnesses in its ongoing investigation to determine whether President Mohamed Nasheed resigned “under duress” on February 7.

The commission aims to complete interviews of remaining 60 witnesses by the end of July and hopes to publish its report by August 31, commission member Dr Ibrahim Yasir Ahmed said.

The CNI was recently reconstituted to include a foreign judge and a member to represent former President Nasheed after the Commonwealth raised concern’s over the body’s impartiality during its first iteration.

Nasheed’s representative to the CNI, Ahmed Saeed, said the commission had received overwhelming support from all sectors of society, including security forces, former government officials and civilians.

However, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) and the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) had not responded to requests to share information, Saeed said.

Dr Fawas said Raajje TV was the only television station that had not shared video footage with the commission so far.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Inquiring into the Inquiry

The Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), established under a Presidential decree by Dr Waheed, has been at the centre of much controversy since its inception. The establishment of an inquiry commission after a national crisis can often be seen as a quick win mechanism to demonstrate that the state is addressing people’s demands for answers and justice in lieu of a well functioning judicial system, or it can be a farce.

Waheed, as per usual, went down the farce route. Not so quick nor keen to address issues of legitimacy surrounding his accession to power, but in an effort to subdue national and international pressure (and mainly because of the fact that it wasn’t an early election he was giving into, but a well-staged inquiry) he went ahead with it.

However, if Waheed’s primary motive was to try and placate those ‘questioning’ his position and to stop the MDP from calling for an early election, he has failed. This is due to the individuals he chose to appoint, the terms of reference he assigned, and his coup coalition’s bullheadedness in defending the impartiality of this obviously partial commission. Most of all he failed to note that even those who don’t have the courage to call a coup a coup, – but don’t have anything to lose if it is so concluded – still want to get to the bottom of what happened on 7th February 2012.

Easier said than done, I suppose, when your authority depends solely on the conclusion of the events that took place on a day preceded by a police/military mutiny. While the political bigwigs of the country wheel and deal over the CNI, we must remember that the probable findings of this commission could have huge ramifications for many individuals in involved in this political crisis. The question arises- are we ever going to know what happened on 7/2?

Firstly, for a commission to inquire about a sequence of events as contentious as the ‘questionable transfer of power’, its existence, members and mandate are going to invite controversy. So why shoot it in the foot before it had even got started by appointing Ismail Shafeeu? MDP, CMAG, the wider international community and even ‘Thinvana Adu’ requested Waheed’s administration to ensure that the commission was impartial, and credible. Impartiality, I take to mean as having firstly no political affiliation or as having equal representation by all parties concerned, and secondly, credibility.

The CNI met neither one of these requirements for the almost three months that it was in operation. Time is no doubt crucial to an inquiry of this nature and while it is of an essence to the MDP, it is in the best interests of the Waheed regime for the inquiry to be delayed for as long as possible.

104 days of coup later, you have to wonder, what made Waheed change his mind over the CNI? If they don’t believe the CMAG has any right to a) put Maldives on the agenda or b) any grounds to make these recommendations, why bow down to them? Were some harsh facts made clear to him on his official visit to India? Either way, the gates of the CNI, no matter how reluctantly, have opened, albeit an inch or two. This has resulted in the appointment of a foreign judge as co chair, Nasheed being ‘permitted’ to propose a member to the Commission, and changes to the mandate of the CNI being strengthened, allowing it to summon individuals, accept statements, videos, photos, and most importantly request telecommunication and financial records. These agreements and the resumption of the all-party talks have been hailed as a thaw in national coup politics, and to be fair it is progress, but how much of it is sincere? I know. It’s a naive question, but humour me.

With regards to Nasheed’s representative to the CNI, the public is aware that he has proposed nine names, all of which have been rejected by Waheed’s regime for being too politicised. Nasheed has now been given two weeks to propose an individual to the CNI, who has not served in a political position in the past two years, must not have taken a public stand on the transfer of power, and must be of good behaviour and integrity.

The Commonwealth states that these conditions must apply to all members of the CNI, including ones previously appointed. I wonder what the parameters are for determining good behaviour and integrity, and who in Waheed’s regime decides whether these characteristics are up to par in any individual that Nasheed proposes. Are Waheed and Coup really not going to budge on the case of Ismail Shafeeu – whose stint as Maumoon’s former Defence Minister surely places his ‘integrity’ in question? Forgive me, I forgot this approval of Commission members scenario is a one way street. Coup coalition gets to say the yay and the nay, but MDP do it and they are seen as the uncompromising troublemakers.

Also of confusion is the fact that Waheed earlier stated that he had no role in changes to the composition of the CNI. His Commission members then contradicted this by turning the responsibility back to him. Then we have the fact that Waheed stated that the Prosecutor General is responsible for the Commission, yet all the negotiations and public statements have been given by Attorney General Azima Shukoor, and Home Minister Mohamed Jameel. Speaking of which, who is this all-elusive lawyer to be appointed to the CNI, if Nasheed’s nomination doesn’t meet with the coup coalition’s high approval?

There are also pressing concerns over the amendments to the CNI’s mandate and terms of reference. Although it has not yet been made clear whether the concluding report will still be the opinions of the CNI’s members, or whether the findings can lead to criminal cases, the ability of the Commission to now request phone records and financial statements give it more bite. I wonder how the CNI is ensuring the securing of this information. Are legal requirements going to be placed upon service providers, Dhiraagu and Wataniya, for their cooperation with the CNI? Are all banks operating in the country – notorious for their non-cooperation with the police over previous investigations into alleged corruption – now going to hand over their clients’ financial records without a fuss? And what about the intelligence departments of the Police and the MNDF? How does the CNI confirm that information relevant to the dates of interest to the Commission, obtained by these services has not been destroyed? Or what about officers under oath, who’ve signed confidentiality contracts? Does a summons from the CNI, waive them of the restrictions as applied by these documents? I also cannot get my head around how many of those who will be called upon to give evidence will be doing so without any suspension to their current duties as either law enforcement officers, government officials or civil servants.

Questions, questions, questions, my head is milling with them, and I wait with bated breath to find out Nasheed’s nomination. This individual who is going to have to be the incarnation of all things apolitical and integral in the world. Does such a Maldivian even exist? Someone very special to me who claims that Male’ is the cesspool of humanity would say, probably not. On the other hand, is there a point to all the analysis on the mandate and the members of the CNI? Surely, the findings have already been concluded. Hasn’t the unique Dr Hassan Saeed already alluded to them? There are three possible conclusions – coup/illegal transfer or power, legal transfer of power, or the middle.

I cannot imagine the CNI will conclude it is a coup, considering the fact that there are three members appointed by the coup boss himself on the Commission. Also think about the responsibilities of the international community if it is declared a coup. They’re not going to want the fuss of the Maldives, when they still have Syria, the Eurozone and the Olympics on their plate. Let alone the mess of where Indian High Commissioner Mulay comes into it. It also cannot be concluded as an entirely legal transfer of power, due to the blurry lines around mutinying politicised officers, resignations under duress, opposition politicians celebrating in the Police HQ, hijacking of state media and so on. The politically-easiest conclusion must therefore be the middle.

What will be of further interest is what happens next? What will the conclusions lead to? Criminal cases, blanket amnesties, an exit clause for Waheed, constitutional amendments and of course election dates? No doubt there will be an awful lot of political wrangling over the next few days with regards to the Commission. Political actors on both sides have specific interests. Waheed & Coup will want to seem democratic and budge on certain measures, whereas MDP will want to demonstrate that they are compromising and coming to the table, in order to drive home the importance of early elections. I hope that in the midst of this, civil society groups which claim to be the alternative, ‘third voice’ persist in emphasising that although political stability is important, a CNI that allows for the greatest level of truth and justice is far more essential to the future of the Maldives.

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)

Maldives Broadcasting Commission seeking to prevent Raajje TV broadcasting outside Male’

The Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) has stated that transmission of the signal of local TV station Raajje TV is against the Maldives Broadcasting Act (No. 16/2010) and that those who are involved in such transmissions should stop it on immediate effect.

Raajje TV faced heavy criticism from opposition parties during Nasheed’s administration, who are currently involved with the new president Dr Waheed’s National Unity government. The opposition alleged that Raajje TV was biased and was working in favour of former president Nasheed and his Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). The station has actively covered MDP protests and rallies, and in several cases aired incorrect reports of fatalities which police later cited as a factor in the subsequent and widespread destruction of police property.

However the TV station’s audience seems to have rapidly risen following the fall of Nasheed’s government and takeover of the state broadcaster, MNBC, rebranded as TVM. Many people are apparently now viewing the channel through satellite.

A person from Addu City, Hithadhoo under the condition of anonymity, said “Here a lot of people are depending on Raajje TV for information. Many believe that TVM (the state broadcasting TV station) is biased and not showing what is really going on in Male’. There is only one house where Raajje TV can be seen in Hithadhoo and everyone gathers there to see the news.”

During the protests held by the ’23 December’ coalition against then president Mohamed Nasheed, some reporters from the TV station were attacked and some of them sustained injuries.

According to the media release issued from the commission, Raajje TV – which is run under a company Media Ring Pvt Ltd -was given the license to broadcast the channel via cable TV only to the capital Male’ city region and any broadcast out of the authorised boundary is illegal under the broadcasting act article 22 clause (a).

The article 22 clause (a) states “Any party who gives broadcasting service in the Maldives should be given under a license issued from the Maldives Broadcasting Commission, adhering to the conditions and stipulations stated under the license.”

The commission further stated that they have been receiving complaints about the transmission of the channel outside its licensed region.

“When the commission inquired Raajje TV regarding the complaints, the TV station has confirmed the commission that it has not been broadcasting the channel outside its licensed boundaries.” The media release read.

When contacted with Raajje TV Chief Executive officer Mohamed Rafeeq, he confirmed that Raajje TV was not involved in such transmissions. “Raajje TV is not broadcasting its signal out of its licensed boundary but since we broadcast the signal through satellite, it is possible that reception of the channel could be possible through satellite TV.”

He further went on to say “We can’t do much about that kind of signal reception but we do believe that everyone has the right to information under the constitution. The media release could be because of political pressures especially given the current vibrant situation in Male.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: What do you call a lawless State?

On Tuesday the Maldives appointed a Supreme Court bench in one of the few displays of cross-party cooperation seen in parliament since the ratification of the 2008 Constitution.

But Raadhafathi, a Maldivian national currently working on a project to strengthen the justice sector of the Maldives, and with experience training judges and inspecting courts all over the country, claims the road to an experienced, impartial and capable judiciary will be long and arduous.

The Maldives is in a state of transition. A new Constitution, a new Supreme Court, a new President, multi-party systems and many other factors creating a crucial period for the judiciary as well as for the country as a whole.

I am writing this to highlight the justice sector of Maldives.

Since independence the Maldives has acceded or ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Convention Against Torture (CAT), Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The Maldives was officially awarded a seat in the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in May 2010.

The Constitution adopted in 2008 provides for independence of the judiciary, creates new individual liberties, establishes judicial review and gives certain responsibilities relating to the judiciary to the Judicial Services Commission (JSC). These developments present challenges as well as opportunities for the judiciary.

The dynamic reforms of the past two years require that the judiciary transforms itself to ensure that it has the capacity to address the issues brought before it in the coming years. The Maldives is geographically unique in that it is comprised of 20 Atolls containing nearly 1200 islands, out of which 200 are inhabited. This presents numerous governmental challenges which judiciaries in other countries do not face.

During the past five months I have:

  • Been involved in the training of 18 Judges from the Malé courts and 23 Magistrates from the Island Courts on Human Rights and the Constitution;
  • Interviewed NGO’s, Human Rights Commission of the Maldives, Migrant Workers, Bangladesh Embassy, Indian High Commission, Department of Immigration and private lawyers.
  • Visited all the police stations, prisons and detention facilities in the Malé surrounds;
  • Interviewed prisoners and prison staff
  • Visited and interviewed drug rehabilitation facilities
  • Visited all the courts in Malé and interviewed judges and court staff including the [interim] Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
  • Visited Southern and Northern Atolls Courts and interviewed Magistrates, Atoll police commanders, Investigation officers, court staff, prosecutors and court users in the community.

It is evident there is an urgent need to increase the capacity of judges and the court staff to handle the number and complexity of the cases brought to the judiciary, in particular protecting rights enshrined in the Constitution. In addition, Human Rights is a new concept in Maldives and very few people poses the necessary skills and knowledge.

Major features and problems of the legal and judicial system operating in the Maldives

There are total of 208 judges/magistrates in Maldives. Although rights are defined and independent institutions exist to ensure rights are protected, the weakness of the current legal framework lies with the lack of trained professionals in the justice sector, in particular judges, magistrates, prosecutors and police.

98 percent of the legal profession in Maldives (including prosecutors, lawyers, judges, magistrates) are less than qualified to be in the legal profession. Most judges and magistrates have only completed secondary education, and they are not required to be lawyers.

Very few have completed undergraduate or post graduate degree from a western country. Most degrees are from Egypt or Saudi Arabia, and they are usually from unrelated fields. Some have received a Diploma in Sha’riah Law from Institutions established in Malé.

There is no common denominator in judicial training and experience. Some have learned in Arabic, some in Dhivehi, a few in English (the majority of the Judges I have met do not speak English to a serious degree).

The average age of judges at present is 28-32 years.

This situation gives rise to many problems such as reconciling Shari’ah law and the codified common law, as well as the attitudes of judges trained in the Shari’ah law and lawyers trained in common law traditions of the Commonwealth. In addition, the lack of laws governing legal procedure exacerbates the situation further, ensuring there is no consistency in their judgments or conduct of cases.

The judicial system is in considerable chaos. There are no Rules of Court, instead certain rules and regulations are found in more informal publications called ‘Court Circulars’.

In criminal cases, there is no formal onus of proof, and Judges can and do conduct cases any way they want. Every Judge does his or her cases differently and unpredictably.

State attorneys can appear in private legal cases and can be and are members of the Majlis. These arrangements are a direct breach of the separation of powers doctrine. This again demonstrates a failure to appreciate how a democracy and the separation of powers are intended to operate.

The right to a fair trial is a cornerstone of democratic societies. How a person is treated when accused of a crime provides a concrete demonstration of how far a state respects human rights. Unfortunately in the Maldives:

  • Courts assume guilt based on the prosecution case before the ‘trial’
  • A Russian national who only speaks Russian is provided an English Interpreter
  • Prosecution did not provide the documents filed to the accused. Prosecution stated “providing a copy to the accused is not included in the budget.”
  • If a woman submits an application for a divorce, the courts treat the woman with disrespect and 99 percent of the time, they are not granted a divorce regardless of evidence produced – even in domestic violence cases.
  • Prosecution takes too long to file a case, particularly in the islands.
  • Legal profession lacks basic advocacy skills
  • Majority of the legal profession are not competent. They are independent by law but not in practice. As for impartiality – the island courts in particular – this is not exercised due to the small community they live in. Island prosecutors often discuss matters with the magistrates. The prosecution is also allowed to go and spend time with the court staff, while the accused is waits outside in the waiting room.
  • Most judges do not know that public can attend hearings. Hence often those who attend are sent away. The other issue is lack of space in the tiny court rooms.
  • Accused not given an opportunity to cross-examine

Despite all this, the JSC, the independent body responsible for the judiciary, approved all judges to be appointed without term (tenure to retire at 70). If the JSC were to continue the way they have been conducting themselves, there is no hope to strengthen the judiciary of Maldives nor to protect rights enshrined in the Constitution.

The transitional period (Chapter 14 of the Constitution) ended on 7 August 2010.  While the Supreme Court has been appointed, unfortunately the judiciary remains in a state of disarray.

No one (including the executive, parliament and judiciary) knows the meaning of the term ‘separation of powers’, ‘what the law is’ nor even what ‘Human Rights’ means.

No one obeys or respects the legal system, and the Maldives legal system is oppressive and unjust. The entire situation contravenes basic tenets of the rule of law and requires urgent change. The concepts of enforceable natural justice, procedural regularity and due process are not known in Maldivian courts.

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)