Tag: Commonwealth

CHOGM criticised for weak stance on human rights

The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) 2011, which ended Sunday, was hailed by Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard as a “major contribution” towards building “a more purposeful, relevant and valuable Commonwealth.”

However, critics argue that steps taken failed to herald bold progress.

Speaking after the closing ceremony in Perth, Gillard told media, “I believe we have made a major contribution to ensuring the Commonwealth is an institution that is well positioned for the future. We have set the direction for a more purposeful, relevant and valuable Commonwealth.”

An official conference communique shows resolutions to develop climate change policies and support related innovative technologies.

In 2010, Gillard was heavily criticised by her own electorate for a proposed carbon tax. President Mohamed Nasheed expressed his support for her “brave steps”, and recommended that other countries follow her example.

Leaders also agreed to promote universal health care, equality in gender and education, and to address security issues including piracy, human trafficking, arms trade and cyber crime.

British Prime Minister David Cameron also announced a proposal to reform the rules of succession to the monarchy, allowing the first child of the royal family to assume the throne regardless of gender.

However, CHOGM has been criticised for avoiding significant human rights reforms.

A proposal submitted by the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) panel, which was appointed at the last CHOGM to propose modernisation measures, criticised the association for losing relevancy with modern global trends.

The proposal criticised the Commonwealth’s inability to censure member countries that violate human rights or democratic norms. This oversight has been widely criticised as CHOGM members did not reconsider the earlier decision to hold CHOGM 2013 in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka is currently facing war crimes allegations for acts committed by its military during the 2009 civil war with the Tamil Tigers. Sri Lanka’s own internal investigation has been rejected by numerous international human rights groups including Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) on the grounds that it does not meet international standards.

Previously, a Commonwealth member would be expelled or suspended for such violations after the event.

Sri Lankan representatives were reported as being “incensed” when the matter was raised by Canadian and Australian officials.

In 106 “urgent” recommendations, the EPG advocated for the adoption of a Charter of the Commonwealth; the creation of a new commissioner on the rule of law, democracy and human rights to track persistent human rights abuses and allegations of political repression by Commonwealth member states; recommendations for the repeal of laws against homosexuality, currently existing in 41 Commonwealth states, and a ban on forced marriage.

EPG proposals were neither endorsed nor published by the Commonwealth member states. Pressure to publish the proposals from the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada was resisted by India, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, South Africa and Namibia.

CHOGM’s failure to act on the EPG proposal was considered a “disgrace” by former British Foreign Secretary Sir Malcom Rifkind.

“The Commonwealth faces a very significant problem,” he said. “It’s not a problem of hostility or antagonism, it’s more of a problem of indifference. Its purpose is being questioned, its relevance is being questioned and part of that is because its commitment to enforce the values for which it stands is becoming ambiguous in the eyes of many member states.”

EPG Chair and former Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi allegedly told delegates at the start of the summit that the meeting would be considered a “failure” if the reforms were not adopted.

Two-thirds of the 106 recommendations have been sent to “study groups” for review.

The Commonwealth includes 54 nations, the largest block being formed by Africa with 19 regional states.

Before concluding this year’s meeting, CHOGM welcomed Malaysia’s offer to host the 2019 session.

Officials at the Presidents Office and the Human Rights Commission were unavailable at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Sri Lanka will host CHOGM 2013 in spite of war crime allegations

Commonwealth Heads of Government have decided not to reassess Sri Lanka’s suitability to host the 2013 meeting (CHOGM), in spite of current international allegations of human rights violations during its civil war.

“This decision runs contrary to the association’s fundamental values of human rights and democracy, and has pushed the Commonwealth to the lowest point in its history,” read a press release.

In 2009, the Commonwealth deferred Sri Lanka’s request to host CHOGM for two years starting in 2011.

As meeting host, Sri Lanka will automatically become chair of the association.

A press release from the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative said the decision indicated “that [the Commonwealth] is no longer capable of landmark human rights stances, as demonstrated by its historic activism against Apartheid.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Government can only be as good as its opposition,” says Commonwealth Deputy Secretary-General

The Maldives “throws up all the challenges of consolidating a transition to multi-party democracy,” Commonwealth Deputy Secretary-General Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba observed this morning at the opening of the Commonwealth’s regional workshop on parliamentary cooperation.

The aim of the workshop, she said, was to help create a constructive partnership between government and opposition parties in each participating country.

“While they may be political adversaries, they share a common national responsibility and obligation of nation-building and advancing the prospects of real development – human, political, social and economic — of the people of their respective countries,” she said.

“This can only be achieved if the political system works constructively for the welfare of all, not if it creates or exacerbates ruptures in society.”

Government and opposition have to see themselves as partners, Masire-Mwamba said.

“Government must acknowledge that there needs to be democratic space for the opposition to function and to enable other viewpoints to exist. Indeed it is often said that government can only be as good as its opposition – thus the role of opposition is a very real one in holding governments accountable and ensuring they deliver.

“On the other hand, oppositions also need to be constructive, using the democratic space provided responsibly to raise legitimate dissent where this is required, without becoming needlessly disruptive,” she suggested.

The Maldives’ consolidation of its hard-won democracy has been “long and bumpy”, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid noted, also speaking at the opening of the workshop.

“The state has spent the better part of the last three years struggling to demarcates the roles prescribed under the new constitution. It has been three years of exceptional experience for all of us,” he said at the launch of the event, which will run until June 15 at Traders Hotel in Male’.

“The perception of political parties injected a new paradigm into Maldivian politics. There is no simple formula to build a healthy rapport between political parties. The concept of a government with a legitimate opposition in the political spectrum was one that was hard to grasp for many,” Shahid said.

“We have had situations where some thought that the new democracy in the Maldives was too much for the very small and widely spread out society. We have instances in which some questioned whether democracy and the party system was te best form of governance for us. We have had instances when almost all hope was lost.

“It is to the credit of the leadership and the people of this nation that we have been able to sort out these challenges and resolve many of the encounters we have come across.”

The workshop is jointly organised by the Commonwealth Secretariat and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA), and hosted by the People’s Majlis in the Maldives.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Commonwealth holding cross-party workshops in Maldives

Deputy Secretary General of the Commonwealth Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba is visiting the Maldives for a workshop to be held on government and opposition cooperation.

The regional Commonwealth workshop on ‘Government and the Opposition – Roles, Rights and Responsibilities’ will be held in the capital Malé from June 13-15.

Masire-Mwamba visited President Mohamed Nasheed who discussed the progress the country was making towards consolidating democracy, and said that his government is open to advice and suggestions about how this could be enhanced.

Masire-Mwamba also visited Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem, who said the Commonwealth could help to raise greater awareness of the challenges faced by small island developing states, and their particular vulnerability to global economic and environmental pressures.

Masire-Mwamba also held talks with the Speaker of the People’s Majlis, Abdulla Shahid, who is hosting the regional workshop, and said it would provide a platform for the cross-fertilisation of ideas and the exchange of experiences across the Asian members of the Commonwealth. In her meeting with the opposition leader, Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, Masire-Mwamba discussed the consolidation of political and democratic reforms in Maldives, and the role that an effective Opposition can play in a robust democracy.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Every person injured in protests leaves behind a trial of bitterness

The last few days have seen bitter times in the republic island of the Maldives. The cost of living has risen heavily, causing thousands to come out on the streets in protest. Street protests are not new to the Maldives; only this time around, the anger is directed against a democratically-elected government rather than a dictatorial regime. This means that irrespective of whether the protests are lawful or not, the police response needs to be lawful.

But the police treatment of demonstrators under the new government has been well below mark. Although MPS is unarmed, excesses committed by police officers, through means such as tear gas, police baton, arbitrary arrests and detention, has been a recurring matter of concern. In October 2010, the Maldives police were alleged to have reacted with excessive force against journalists covering the demonstrations by the main opposition party, the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP). In the ongoing ‘cost of living’ protests, the police were alleged to have arrested over 300 people (though the majority were released subsequently) whereas over 75 people were reportedly injured in the span of 10 days of protest.

Notwithstanding the veracity of such claims, it is clear that crowd control is going to remain a challenge for the police. What then are the principles governing public order management?

The starting point for policing public protest is the presumption in favour of facilitating peaceful assembly (Article 21, ICCPR). Public protest is an important democratic activity and peaceful intentions should be presumed unless there is compelling evidence that those organizing or participating in a particular event will themselves use, advocate or incite violence. This places both positive and negative duties on the police (Keeping the Peace: Manual of Guidance, UK).

The negative duty means that the police must not prevent, restrict, or hinder peaceful assembly except to the extent allowed by law. Positive duty entails safeguarding the right to peaceful assembly. In case of a threat of disruption or disorder, the law allows police officers to use force but only when other ‘non-violent means have been tried and proved ineffective’. In other words, force must be used as a last resort.

Once the decision of using force has been taken, the guiding principle is the minimum use of force. This means that any use of force must be reasonable in the circumstances. But what does reasonable mean? As per international law and best practices, reasonable has come to mean the following:

One, the use of force must be proportionate to the lawful objective to be achieved and to the ‘seriousness of the offence’. In any public gathering or protests, the lawful objective is only to minimize chance of violence and not to disperse the crowd.

Second, the use of force by the police must be lawful: necessary for a purpose permitted by law such as self-defense, defense of another, to prevent crime, to protect life, or unlawful action. For this, it is important for the police rules or regulations of any country to provide guidelines on specific circumstances under which the police may carry firearms, warnings to be given before firearms are to be discharged, reporting system whenever officials use firearms in the performance of their duty etc. Such guidelines are important by way of minimizing arbitrariness in police action.

There is little information on whether the MPS has formulated such rules on crowd control. Notably, this is a theme missing in the otherwise comprehensive Strategic Plan 2007-2011 of the Maldives Police Service.

Whenever use of force is necessary, it is the duty of the police to respect and protect human life, minimise damage and injury, provide assistance and aid to those injured and ensure that a relative or close friend of the injured or affected person is notified at the earliest possible opportunity.

Following these guidelines on the ground, however, can be difficult. Determining the import of terms such as ‘seriousness of offence,’ ‘ineffectiveness of non-violent means,’ or even the time of intervention are all, ultimately, matter of discretion. Much depends on the judgment and understanding of the officer on ground. These difficulties are real, but it is precisely to address such challenges that post-incident accountability assumes significance.

For this, the police are required to follow safeguards at the time of use of force such as identify themselves as police, give a clear warning of their intent to use force firearms, and allow enough time for the warning to be observed unless it places the police at risk or creates risk of death or serious harm to others. The use of firearms mandates additional safeguards such as submission of an incident report to the competent authorities (UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, Article 3). Although firearms have not been used in the Maldives in a long time, such safeguards are of equal value even in other forms of force used such as tear gas in this instance. Moreover, to avoid and reduce arbitrariness of officers while in action, the decision to use force must be taken by senior office, adequately trained into making sound judgments.

Often, the police complain that such measures are difficult to follow and situations generally can turn so quickly that not enough room is left for following the standard. However it is exactly these kind of situations for which the police need to equip and train themselves. Training in fact needs to orient police officers to the basic requirement of minimial force and minimal damage rather than the obvious tendency of grave harm. The accountability for actions cannot be avoided and in fact the police should be more open to scrutiny which alone will help build its capability of managing public disorder; and also boost its public image as a force willing to work within the confines of law.

It is, therefore, crucial that the government/MPS conducts an inquiry into the protests to determine whether these guidelines were followed. Every person injured in protests leaves behind a trial of bitterness. This is hardly conducive to gaining trust and confidence of the people, something that the MPS is striving hard to achieve (as is reflected in their Strategic Plans). Officers will do well to remember that their actions in these formative years of democracy in the island will most likely set the tone for its relationship with the community. As such, the development of a comprehensive system for managing public order that accords with international standards is a priority. Legislation that governs the management of public order by the police, and builds a co-operative relationship between the police and the public, is needed.

Navaz Kotwal and Devyani Srivastava work with the Access to Justice Programme, part of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.

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)

Comment: Maldives on path to Right to Information Act

Three years after conducting elections, the Maldives is on a path to participatory democracy by trying to finalise the Right to Information Bill, with the Bill under review by the Majlis Committee on Social Affairs. The Bill was drafted with inputs from civil society.

It’s a challenge for Maldives to implement Right to Information as a part of functional and participatory democracy. In general, both politicians and bureaucrats in Maldives accept that despite experiencing higher levels of human development compared to its neighbors in the South Asia region, the Maldives wasn’t an open society under 30-year long President Mamoon Abdul Gayoom’s administration. In a paradigm shift, the current President Mohamed Nasheed after being elected in the October 2008 general elections acknowledged that the previous administration was characterised by several examples of corruption and human rights abuses. Furthermore, the Maldives media was completely under the control of the government with little freedom for free and unbiased reporting until 2003. The right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the then Constitution wasn’t in practice.

Earlier, the exercise of democratic reform initiated by Gayoom’s regime in its final years had given some meaning to the idea of freedom of expression. Censorship of the media was reduced considerably by the year 2006 which can be attributed to pressure from civil society and the opposition parties. However information from government bodies was disseminated by their public relations officers on a need to know basis only. The old Constitution did not contain any reference to the people’s right to information.

As part of the process of initiating democratic reform in 2007, the then Minister for Information and Legal Reforms drafted a Bill on the right to information. This Bill was closely modeled on the access laws of the Common Wealth countries such as United Kingdom and Canada. Article XIX an international resource organization on freedom of expression and access to information assisted the Government with drafting this Bill. The Bill could not pass muster in the People’s Majlis as it fell short of majority support by one vote.

Despite this debacle the Minister for Information and Legal Reforms took the initiative of converting the Bill into a set of regulations applicable to the executive only. The regulations were notified by Presidential decree on 03 May 2008 on the occasion of World Press Freedom Day. The objectives of the regulations were to: provide Maldivians with the right to access information held by government administrative specify the situations and conditions under which information shall not be disclosed.

The Government gave itself a lead time of eight months to prepare for the implementation of the regulations which were to become fully operational in January 2009. Under the regulations there was a provision to appoint an Information Commissioner to guide its implementation and adjudicate over access disputes. However by May 2008 the Civil Service Commission was created in order to shoulder the responsibility of recruiting and overseeing the civil service. The erstwhile Presidential function of recruiting people to the civil service was transferred to this Commission. The then Government took this step bowing to pressure from the opposition parties ahead of the Presidential elections. It is said that these procedural difficulties came in the way of the appointment of the Information Commissioner forthwith.

The new Constitution enacted in 2008 after the October 2008 elections guarantees not only the right to freedom of speech and expression but also the freedom to seek receive and impart information. Subsequently in November 2009 the Attorney General of Maldives tabled the Right to Information Bill 2009 in the People’s Majlis. This Bill is closely modeled on the existing RTI Regulations.

Challenges to Implementing RTI in the Maldives

Legislature challenge: As Maldives is presently undergoing a process of democratic consolidation the legislative agenda of the People’s Majlis is heavy and the law makers they will serve their purpose well if they acquaint with law-making and drafting legislatures. The RTI Bill is one of the important pieces of legislation waiting the approval of the Majlis.

Executive challenge: A large majority of the members of the bureaucracy continue to be unaware of the RTI Regulations. Further, the systematic challenges are compounded by the fact that government is going through a process of large scale restructuring, ministries and departments are being abolished and their duties and responsibilities reassigned to others. Instances of loss or misplacement of documents of the abolished offices during this transitional process are not rare. The existing departments will have difficulties when people start asking for information about the activities of the abolished offices. The communications system within executive is an obstacle in the infantry stages of the implementation of the RTI law.

The Maldives is currently engaged in the process of democratic consolidation and restructuring of government. Despite this onerous task the Government has placed transparency high on its agenda. The introduction of the RTI Bill in the People’s Majlis is the first step in fulfilling the MDP alliance’s electoral promise of transparency in the administration. Still the bill needs several major changes for it to be matched up to international standards. The bureaucracy also needs to be more efficient to provide people with access to information in real time. Mass awareness raising programmes must be initiated to educate Maldivian about their right to information and its responsible use. In this way, advocacy in the Maldives can be both top-down and down-top.

Meanwhile, civil society has also pitched in with effective changes to be made in the Maldives Right to Information Bill for effective implementation of the RTI. The recommendations on the bill made by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative would like to point out the following changes that are applicable at various places throughout the RTI Bill:

Gender sensitive language must be used: It is common practice in both developed and developing countries to use gender-sensitive language in the drafting of legislation.

Replace ‘records’ with ‘information’: The RTI Bill purports to provide access to people to the ‘records’ held by public authorities. However as the title of the Bill suggests it is a law intending to provide for the right to access ‘information’ and not merely ‘records’ which is a sub-category of the former.

In practice, the use of the word ‘record’ is much more limiting than the use of the term ‘information’. Providing access to “information” will mean that applicants will not be restricted to accessing only information that is already in the form of a hard copy record or document. The current formulation excludes access to materials such as scale models; samples of materials used in public works and information that may exist in disaggregate form in multiple records that may require compilation or collation. Replacing the term ‘records’ with the term ‘information’, unless otherwise required by the context is required.

Ensure stricter harm tests in the exemption clauses: Several exemptions clauses listed in the Bill have a lower threshold of harm test than what is considered as international best practice. The term ‘prejudice’ is used to define the harm caused to a protected interest if information is disclosed under specific circumstances [For example S27 (a), 28, 30]. ‘Prejudice’ is a vague term and is amenable to varied interpretation. Instead the phrase ‘serious harm’ is a much better usage as it requires that sound arguments and logic be put forth to refuse disclosure.

Public authorities must have a duty to confirm or deny possession of information: most of the clauses stipulating the circumstances in which information is exempt from disclosure do not place a duty on public authorities to confirm or deny the existence of a record in their possession. For example, S23 relating to personal information, S24 relating to protection of professional privilege, S25 relating to business affairs and trade secrets, S26 relating to health and safety, S28 relating to law enforcement, S29 relating to defence and security, S30 relating to economic interest, S31 relating to administration and formulation of policy and S32 relating to a Cabinet document all empower a public authority to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of a record in its possession.

This rider is characteristic of the second generation of access laws passed after World War II. The access laws of Canada, Australia passed in the 1980s and more recently the access law in UK contain such provisions. However several access laws belonging to the third generation enacted during the 1990s and later place an obligation on public authorities to confirm or deny the existence of a record. The change in international best practice is most welcome as the absence of an obligation to confirm or deny the existence of a record opens the path to commit a lot of mischief.

In conclusion, the implementation of the RTI in Maldives means that beginning of decentralization and participatory governance and a citizen-friendly orientation to government. This will help Maldives in effective nation-building and empowering citizens.

Venkatesh Nayak is Coordinator, Access to Information Programme and Balaji is Volunteer with Media Unit of Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative

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 moves into Commonwealth’s Small States Office in Geneva

The Maldives is one of several small island states being provided subsidied office space by the Commonwealth’s Small States Office when it opens in Geneva on January 17.

The Maldives, the Bahamas, Solomon Islands, the Organisation for Eastern Caribbean States and the Seychelles will operate from the new office, which includes a business centre for visiting delegations attending meetings in Geneva. Tenants will also have access to a resident technical expert on trade and human rights.

“We are delighted to open this new office to assist our small states that could not otherwise afford the full cost of a Permanent Mission in Geneva,” said Commonwealth Secretary-General, Kamalesh Sharma.

“The office will allow these countries to establish a diplomatic presence in the region for bilateral accreditation in Europe and to the many multilateral organisations in Geneva. It will also act as a global hub for small states to work with other countries on issues such as trade, private investment, human rights, health and labour.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Commonwealth Secretary-General to visit Maldives

Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma will visit Maldives from October 16-18, and will meet with the President, opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Ahmed Faiz Hussain.

The Secretary-General is also scheduled to meet Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed, Health and Family Minister Dr Aminath Jameel, Minister of Human Resources, Youth and Sport Hassan Latheef, Speaker of the People’s Majlis Abdulla Shahid and the Chairperson of the Maldivian Democratic Party Mariya Ahmed Didi.

Discussions are expected to focus on capacity-building for socio-economic growth, climate change and other issues faced by small island developing states like Maldives.

“I look forward to further discussions on [the President’s] vision for Maldives and how the Commonwealth can work hand-in-hand with his administration and other stakeholders in Maldives to support national development, including the consolidation of democratic processes, institutions and culture, and in particular, the promotion of the Commonwealth’s Latimer House Principles that define the balance between the three branches of government,” Sharma said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Commonwealth media development workshop concludes

Media in the Maldives is “now viewed as the fourth organ of the state” and “has an increasingly important role to play in protecting and preserving human rights in society,” President of the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives, Ahmed Saleem, told assembled journalists at a media development workshop, a four day event organised by the Commonwealth.

“In fact, the media, as an independent observer with a social responsibility, should value and have knowledge of human rights, more than anyone else. It is therefore vital for the media, as a watchdog and voice of the public, to act in the name of human rights to establish a genuine democracy,” he emphasised.

However, “with rights also come responsibilities. Like any other freedom or right, we often see the freedom of press being abused and misused. For instance,false claims and accusations in complete disregard of the right to privacy, and reporting against the notion of innocent until proven guilty are matters for particular concern. Those operating media work are under a special duty of care and carry a unique social responsibility.”

Saleem was among several high-level speakers who spoke to the Maldives press pack, who included broadcast, radio, online and print reporters. Minister of Tourism Ahmed Ali Sawad also spoke to the journalists, as well as former Information Minister Mohamed Nasheed, and Attorney General Husnu Suood.

Communications Advisor to the Commonwealth Secretariat and organiser of the event, Geraldine Goh – herself a former practicing journalist – observed that many of the conversations were “pretty vibrant. When we first arrived many of the participants were quite timid and shy, and not very confident – many of them were very young with less than two years experience,” she noted.

“But I saw eagerless to learn, inquisitiveness and drive, which has to come from within.”

The course, led by veteran journalists Bhagman Singh and Jayandra Menon from Singapore, was intended “not just to teach, but also to learn and share mutual experiences,” Goh said.

Media in the Maldives was “very partisan”, she observed, and the workshop emphasised the importance of relying on the facts, reporting without bias, “and showing a conviction in the moral values of the media and a duty towards truth.”

“Media ownership” was one issued Goh said journalists needed to be aware of, with political leanings “filtering through to the newsroom.”

“Credibility is so important – if you lose credibility, you lose yourself,” she said.

Ahmed ‘Hiriga’ Zahir, President of the Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) which helped to organise the training event, acknowledged the political culture was something the media had to learn to understand and adapt to.

“The Maldives faces a difficult challenge in developing an independent media,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)