Tag: Court

High Court orders police to investigate allegations made to ACC regarding High Court judge

An ongoing legal dispute between the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and Malaysian mobile security solutions provider Nexbis escalated this week, after the High Court ordered police to investigate claims made to the ACC that Chief Judge of the High Court Ahmed Shareef met officials from the company in Bangkok.

The dispute concerns the deployment of a border control system, specifically the installation of an electronic border gate system in Male’s Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), bringing technological upgrades such as facial recognition, fingerprint identification and e-gates to the Maldives.

The project stalled after the ACC alleged corruption in the bidding process, leading to a ongoing series of high-profile court battles.

In May 2012 the project was brought to a standstill by a High Court injunction and a raid on immigration offices by ACC staff. At the time the Rf 10 million (US$650,000) first phase of the border control project had been completed, according to local media reports.

Nexbis has threatened legal action against the Maldivian government should it incur losses for the work already done on the project, and earlier this month filed a case with against the ACC accusing it of breaching article 141 of the constitution, stipulating non-interference in judicial matters by public officials, and article 42, entitling the company to a fair trial.

The Supreme Court in late June meanwhile dismissed the High Court’s injunction against the continuation of the project, on the basis that the bench overseeing the case had been unlawfully reconstituted. Immigration Controller Dr Mohamed Ali told local media at the time that the department was trying to interpret the order, which he contended “doesn’t make sense”,

In the most recent development Nexbis denied allegations – submitted to the ACC and published in Haveeru – that Chief Judge Ahmed Shareef had returned home from a conference in Singapore after spending a week in Bangkok, where he was alleged to have met Nexbis representatives.

Nexbis denied that any such meeting took place, and this week filed a case in a bid to stop the ACC from publicly sharing information on the investigation while the matter was in court, and seeking an apology for the damage to its reputation.

Asking police to investigate the allegations made to the ACC, the High Court meanwhile stressed in a statement this week that “no individual Judge can simply influence a decision of the Court, as all cases at the High Court are presided by a minimum three Judges bench and a ruling is only made by the majority of a particular bench.”

The accusations sent to the ACC were an “extremely irresponsible act with intentions to deceive and manipulate the truth,” the Court’s statement read.

The Court contended that the ACC’s investigation of the judge would amount to a conflict of interest, as the ACC was investigating a case it had itself filed in court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Department of Judicial Administration failed to distribute RF1.3 million in child support

The Director of the Department of Judicial Administration (DJA) has made no effort to distribute child support money worth over Rf1.3 million (US$85,000), according to the Auditor General, while large amounts of money owed after court rulings has not been collected from offenders or distributed to successful plaintiffs.

According to a 2010 audit report on the DJA released on Thursday, auditors found that if the recipients of the child support did not explicitly collect the money from the court, the money remained undistributed and no additional measures were taken by the court deliver the child support to its rightful recipient.

“Until December 2010, a total of Rf1,301,767.67 million remains undistributed with the court. However, the documents indicate that the court has made no efforts to distribute the money,” the report reads.

Following the breakdown of a marriage, husbands are mandated to make payments to their former spouses to cover the costs of childcare.

The report further notes that “as the records on child support money received by the court so far have not been maintained by the court properly”, it was unclear as to how much money the court was also supposed to receive as per the court orders.

The audit report noted that the DJA had not collected a total of Rf 1.6 million (US$104,000) owed by men found guilty of divorcing their wives outside the court.

A total of Rf2.1 million US$136,000) needs to be collected by the Civil Court as of February 2011, while a significant sum of Rf22 million (US$1.42 million) is owed to the Criminal court following court rulings and remained uncollected as of January 2011.

“The Department of Judicial administration has not done adequate work to collect the funds,” Auditor General Ibrahim Niyaz observed in the report.

Niyaz refrained from issuing an opinion on the financial statements provided the DJA, citing that the statements were not prepared in accordance with international public sector accounting standards (IPSAS) following principles of “accrual accounting” or the “financial reporting under cash basis of accounting” issued by the IPSAS board, while several “fundamental records” were unaccounted for in the statements.

He noted that earnings from the magistrate court amounting to almost Rf4.9 million (US$318,000) were not recorded as income in the financial statement, while the funds remained in court safes and bank accounts. Similarly, Rf6.9 million (US$448,000) dispersed in advance to magistrate courts were recorded as an expenditure in the financial statement, while the auditors found that the funds remain “unspent” by the courts.

In an issue highlighted in previous audit reports of state institutions for 2010, the AG noted that between October 2008 and December 2011, Supreme Court judges had paid their phone bills amounting to Rf281,519 from the state budget, despite the fact that parliament had not allocated any phone allowances to the judges.

Therefore he recommended the amount be reimbursed and that the granting of phone allowances be determined as per parliament’s decision.

Meanwhile, Rf117, 832 (US$7640) was found to have been overspent on wages and allowances to the driver of a judge’s car.

DJA’s reponse: “loophole in the system”

The Director of the Department of Judicial Administration Ahmed Maajid said there is a “loophole in the implementation and enforcement” system that is resulting in millions of rufiya not being collected or distributed after legal decisions have been made.

Maajid explained these findings, arguing that there was currently no governmental authority or body to handle this aspect of the court’s work.

“It is upon the mother to get [the child support]. We have not executive or judicial authority to distribute it. There is a loophole in the system. It is not a case of corruption but a weakness in the system itself,” said Maajid.

“Currently the courts have no authority to give money over to the women. What normally happens is that the men get away without paying,” he continued.

Maajid went on to say that the issue concerned both the collection and the distribution of moneys owed. He argued that a new authoritative body was needed with the responsibility to collect these outstanding fees.

Maajid, however, did not see the problem as insurmountable although he felt it required urgent attention.

“This shortcoming in the system must be patched up very soon in order to fix this loophole,” he said.

Additional reporting by Daniel Bosley.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Four arrested on prostitution charges in police raid of salon

Police last night arrested two Thai women and two local men on prostitution charges after raiding a Male’-based business suspected of operating as a massage parlor.

The business, called Maldivian Care, was located on the first floor of H.Hulhugali, a property belonging to Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Former President Ibrahim Zaki – who has not been implicated in the raid.

Speaking to the press today, Deputy Head of Serious and Organized Crime Inspector Mohamed Dhaudh said that police had received information that prostitution was allegedly being conducted at Maldivian Care’s premises -charges it said were later confirmed through police intelligence.

Dhaudh said police entered the saloon last night at 9:45pm with a court warrant.  Maldivian Care was located on the first floor of the house, where police claim that the business was ran from an apartment with two lockable rooms.

Dhaudh added that when police entered the property, the outside door of the apartment was locked as well as the two interior rooms as well.

Police officials identified the two Thai national suspects as Thonbai Sons and Sdhafone Budicha and the two Maldivian men as Mohamed Shinah of Thinadhoo in Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll and Moosa Ibrahim of Inguraidhoo in Raa Atoll.

Police said that although the Maldivian Care business appeared to be operated as a salon, officers had discovered items used for sexual activities inside the property.

In the first room, police reported finding a Thai woman and a naked Maldivian.  After searches were conducted of both suspects, an unused condom was found inside the pocket of the man’s trouser, whilst Rf500 was found in the pocket of the woman.

Police claimed that large amounts of Maldivian Ruffiya, US dollars and Euros were found inside the female suspect’s bag.

According to police, another Maldives national and a Thai female were found inside the second room.  Upon entering, police reported that the Maldivian man was discovered lying down, whilst the Thai woman was waiting near him.

When police searched the woman’s bag, lots of Maldivian Ruffiya, Euros and US dollars, as well as pills used for “sexual activities” were found inside.

Dhaudh said the sponsor of the two Thai nationals arrested during the raid was Mohamed Adam of Fenfushi in Alifu Dhaalu Atoll.  According to police, the sponsor has a previous police record relating to prostitution charges.

Last month, police confirmed they had made several raids on properties linked to prostitution, resulting in the arrest of a number of female expatriates.

Under the previous government, the shutting down of alternative medical centres linked to sexual activities was one of the five demands made by a coalition of NGOs and then-opposition party politicians.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court upholds Civil Court injunction against investigation of Judge Abdulla by judicial watchdog

The High Court today upheld a Civil Court injunction against the Judicial Services Commission (JSC)’s investigation of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed.

Abdulla Mohamed was a central figure in the downfall of former President Mohamed Nasheed, following the military’s detention of the judge after the government accused him of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, links with organised crime and “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist” to protect key figures of the former dictatorship from human rights and corruption cases.

Abdulla Mohamed obtained the Civil Court injunction against his investigation by the judicial watchdog in September 2011, after it produced a report stating that he had violated the Judge’s Code of Conduct by making a politically biased statement in an interview he gave to private broadcaster DhiTV.

The JSC appealed the injunction on January 24, claiming that the Civil Court had disregarded the commission’s constitutional mandate which allowed it to take action against judges, and argued that the court did not have the jurisdiction to overrule a decision of its own watchdog body.

The commission further argued the Judge Mohamed did not have the authority to seek the injunction preemptively as the commission had not yet taken action against him.

The JSC had therefore requested the High Court to terminate the injunction, citing contradictions to legal and court procedures.

However presiding High Court Judge Dr Azmiralda Zahir contended that the commission had not provided the court “any reason to terminate the injunction”.

Zahir further observed that the High Court would be violating the court procedures if it decided on the injunction before the Civil Court had reached its own verdict in the case.

She also added that that JSC could not establish a connection between the Civil Court’s injunction and jurisdiction of the court, and concluded it is not a reasonable argument to terminate the injunction.

Therefore, she ruled that the judges who evaluated the case had found no grounds to change the civil court’s injunction.

Former President’s member on the JSC and whistleblower Aishath Velezinee for several years contended that Abdulla Mohamed was a central, controlling “father figure” in the lower courts, answerable to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and a key figure responsible for scuttling the independence of the judiciary under the new constitution.

“When Abdulla Mohamed [was arrested by Nasheed’s government] I believe the opposition feared they were losing control over the judiciary, and that is why they came out on the streets. If you look at the so called public protests, it was opposition leaders and gang members. We did not see the so-called public joining them – they were a public nuisance really,” Velezinee observed, in a recent interview with Minivan News.

“For nearly three weeks they were going around destroying public property and creating disturbances. It wasn’t a people thing – we can say that. We locals – we know who was there on the streets. There is footage and evidence available of it. We’ve seen the destruction they were causing in Male’ every day.”

Following the arrest of the judge, Nasheed’s government appealed to the international community – in particular the Commonwealth, the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) and the UN – for assistance in resolving the spiralling judicial crisis. A Commonwealth team arrived in the Maldives the day before Nasheed’s government was overthrown after a group of police sided with opposition demonstrators, attacking the military headquarters and seizing control of the state broadcaster.

Velezinee bemoaned the local and international focus on the arrest of the judge rather than the decline of the institution that led Nasheed’s government to such desperate interference in the judiciary.

“To the international community [the protesters] were a crowd of people – and to them that’s the public. It’s a public protest to them. But it was not. We need to consider who was involved in the free Abdulla Mohamed campaign. These are the same people I have previously accused of covering up and being conspirators in the silent coup,” Velezinee told Minivan News in an interview in February.

The first complaints against Abdulla Mohamed were filed in July 2005 by then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed – now Dr Waheed’s political advisor – and included allegations of misogyny, sexual deviancy, and throwing out an assault case despite the confession of the accused.

Asked in February this year whether he was satisfied with the investigation into the judge’s conduct and the action taken since his complaints in 2005, Dr Saeed replied that “under that constitution [President Gayoom] was the head of the judiciary. So it was my legal and moral obligation to raised that issue with him, which I did.

“I did not know if it was followed up. Obviously if there are issues it has to be resolved in accordance with the established laws and institutions.”

During the same interview, President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan said it was “for the judiciary to decide what to do with him, not for me.”

“I don’t want to interfere in the judiciary. I want our constitution to be respected, and work with everybody to make our constitution work. This is a new constitution, and it is the first time we are trying it out. And so there are difficulties in it. We need to find ways of solving it. It is time for us to work together, and if there are problems with the judiciary we need to work together to solve them – they are intelligent good people in the judiciary and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC).”

The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) last week summoned former President Mohamed Nasheed, former Home Minister Hassan Afeef, and former Defence Minister Tholath Ibrahim for questioning over their detention of the judge. It had promised to conclude the investigation by April.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP’s Lonuziyaaraiy Kolhu case continues

Further specifics of the government’s case against the Madivian Democratic Party (MDP) emerged duing the continuation of the Lonuziyaaraiy Kolhu case yesterday.

As the hearings neared their conclusion, the state was given the opportunity to defend itself against the charges levelled against it following the dismantling of the ‘Justice Square’ camp on Monday March 19.

Deputy Solicitor General of Attorney General’s (AG) Office Ahmed Usham, presented video and pictoral evidence to the court which, he argued, proves illegal activity was occurring on the site.

He also told the court that the MDP had breached the terms of the lease agreement with the council, utilising space beyond the boundaries of the agreed upon Tsunami Monument area. This claim was contested by the MDP.

Usham also suggested that the lease was made on the condition that the camp’s activities remained legal, did not disturb the local residents, and were respectful of prayer times; conditions that he argued were breached.

Finally, the government representative suggested that Male’ City Council’s (MCC) lease of the area for political purposes was in contravention of the decentralisation regulation which prohibits the use of public space for political purposes.

The MDP maintains that the seizure cannot be legal if it was not supported by a court order. They also pointed out that the alleged discovery of alcohol in the area had not yet been proven in court.

The case is scheduled to continue on Thursday.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court conducts second hearing of MDP’s case against clearing of protest sites

The Civil Court has conducted a second hearing of the case presented to the court by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) against security forces, after the police and Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) dismantled MDP’s protest camp near the tsunami monument.

The MDP’s official website reported that the state attorney had denied the allegations made by MDP and contended that a court warrant is not required to dismantle the area.

MDP lawyer Hisan Hassan told the judge that the police could only search the area with the presence of MDP senior persons and that the MDP wanted to clarify why the area was destroyed.

Hisan also told the judge that the police did not even have a list of items they confiscated from the area.

According to local media, state attorney Ahmed Usham told the court that the area was dismantled because the protesters threw bricks at the security forces, and that the dismantling of the protest was not an action that was taken to narrow freedom of speech.

Usham also said that alcohol and items “used to conduct sexual activities” were discovered in the area, and that those were items disallowed under Islamic Sharia.

The state attorney claimed knives and sharpened iron bars and other materials were also found.

He futther alleged that MDP protesters had been attacking police officers that have went there to investigate violence that occurs in the area.

Usham claimed that people gathered in the area had been using filthy words to speak and had been encouraging violence.

He also alleged the education of children living in the area had been affected and that their rights had been violated.

The local media reported that Usham had told the judge that many crimes have been conducted in Male’ after the area was used for “planning and organising crime”, and that criminals had used the area “to flee from police”.

MDP reported that the next hearing of the case is scheduled for Sunday.

The tsunami monument area was dubbed ‘Justice Square’ by the MDP following the outside of former President Mohamed Nasheed on February 7, in what he claimed was a police and military led coup de’tat. Thousands of by MDP supporters had used the area as a camping site during the ongoing protest against the legitimacy of President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s new government.

Following a day of protests on Monday, police and army in a sudden raid on the camp ordered everyone in the area to leave without giving reason, and arrested some of the people who refused.

The police then dismantled the tents, removed all the lights, speakers, megaphones, banners, flags and the stage in the area built by the MDP, and cleared political slogans and graffiti from the sea wall.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Legal wrangling begins over MDP camp seizure

The seizure and dismantling of the Maldivian Democratic Party’s (MDP) camp in the south-east coast of the capital by security forces has sparked debates over the legality of their actions.

The camp, often referred to as “Justice Square” at Lonuziyaaraiy Kolhu had served as the base for MDP protests since the resignation of former President Mohamed Nasheed in February.

During a press conference at Iskandar Koshi last night, Police Superintendant (SP)Ahmed Mohamed noted that the “operation [at the camp] was executed with regard to complaints received that major illegal activities were taking place”.

Following the raid, police displayed a case of beer cans and a barrel of home brewed alcohol – reportedly seized from the camp – to local media.

The SP also cited constitutional obligations which include the maintenance of law and order in the face of criminal activities as a reason for the dismantling of the camp.

“The violence in Male’ was also linked to the protesters who started the demonstrations from the Lonuziyaaraai area,” Mohamed alleged.

MDP’s response

Meanwhile, the MDP has denied all allegations about the camp and filed a civil suit against the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) and the Maldives Police Service (MPS) arguing that the security forces had acted unconstitutionally on a number of counts when dismantling the party’s camp.

In the first hearing of the case last night, the Attorney General’s (AG) Office justified the raid.  She argued that the raid was executed without a court order, on the grounds of suspected criminal activity in the camp, according to the head of the MDP’s legal team, Hissan Hussian, in an interview with Minivan News today.

According to the AG’s office, the suspected illegal activities negate any need for a court ordered warrant.

Hisan explained that the MDP’s defence calls on Article 19 of the constitution, amongst others.  These articles provide freedom from restraint in any activities unless the activities’ restraint is expressly authorized by law.

Should the veracity of the police’s suspicions be supported, they could provide the legal cover necessary to nullify this aspect of the MDP’s argument.

Additionally, the apparent discovery of alcohol at the camp yesterday may jeopardise the MDP’s defense under Article 19 which does not guarantee protection of any activities prohibited under Shari’ah.

The finding of alcohol has been questioned by the MDP, which has argued that a media blackout immediately following the military occupation gave time for such evidence to be planted.

Hissan claimed that basic rights to private property had been infringed due to the actions of security forces.

MDP spokesman Hamid Abdul Ghafoor meanwhile has complained that property belonging to the party members were seized during the raid and “nothing has been returned”.

“They [police] have even eaten the food [at the camp].” Ghafoor alleged.

Police however have stated that all property owned will be returned to the rightful owners and that officers “had not inflicted any damage to any item confiscated from the area.”

The other “reasonable limits” to which the constitution’s basic freedoms are subject to will no doubt form a major part of the next hearing which is scheduled for Wednesday at 4pm.

Ownership debate

Should the MDP’s constitutional arguments prevail, it is likely that they will still have to overcome the issues of jurisdiction regarding the camp area.

Attorney General Azima Shukoor was reported as having told local media yesterday that the area around the tsunami monument belonged to the Maldives National Defence Force, invalidating any deals made between the MDP and the Maldives City Council (MCC).

This argument has been used before by the Defense Ministry who have argued that 3,800 square metres of the south-eastern corner of Male’ were granted to the MNDF in 1997 owing to its strategic significance. State Minister Muizz Adnan confirmed to Haveeru on March 14 that this was the case.

This claim is disputed by Hissan who felt this agreement was superseded by the 2010 Decentralisation Act, under which the land was transferred to the MCC. The land was then leased to the MDP, with the lease running until the end of July.

This view has been corroborated by Mayor of Male City, Ali Manik, who also told Haveeru that the council had not been informed of the security forces’ intentions.

The Attorney General’s Office explained during the court hearing on Monday night that the reason a court order was not required was because the space was a public one.  Attorney General Shukoor referred Minivan News to the police for further comment on the issue.

Hassan Latheef of the MDP’s legal team doubts that this argument is “watertight”.

“Ninety-five percent of Male’ belongs to the state, so this is a questionable policy. There should be a warrant. One should not go into private property,” said Latheef.

Controversy over the area’s use has been building for some time. The decision to extend the MDP’s use of the area until the end of July was contested, with Council member Ibrahim Shujau in particular feeling that it was unfair that one group monopolise a public space for such a length of time.

Local media recently alleged that the MCC had denied a medical emergency helicopter from using the area’s helipad.

Similarly, there have been reports of complaints being made regarding the noise created by the camp and the disturbances caused to local residents.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM members files two cases against Nasheed

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM)’s two members have filed cases requesting the police to investigate into major breach of laws committed by former President Mohamed Nasheed during his short-lived tenure, local newspaper Haveeru has reported.

According to Haveeru, the first case filed by the two PPM members Ahmed “Maaz” Saleem and Ahmed Siddeeq include the alleged transgression against the judiciary by locking up of the Supreme Court in 2008, allowing police entry into Judicial Service Commission (JSC), illegally appointing JSC members, ordering the removal of the interim Chief Justice.

The other case is about the leasing of Male’ International Airport to India’s GMR in 2010 for 50 years.

Saleem claimed that the filing of the cases had been delayed as it was understood that Nasheed would not have allowed the police to carry out the investigations, reported Haveeru.

“After Nasheed has resigned all institutions have now become independent and without any political influence. Hence I have filed the case to carry out a probe in accordance with the law,” Haveeru quoted Saleem as saying.

Siddeeq meanwhile has said that further constitutional violations by the Former President is under evaluation and will be filed with the police for subsequent investigation.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court upholds charges, removes MP Ismail Abdul Hameed from parliament

The Supreme Court has upheld criminal charges against Kaashidhoo MP Ismail Abdul Hameed, reports Haveeru.

The Criminal Court had last year sentenced the Independent MP to one and a half years banishment for corruption. The charges were upheld by the High Court in November.

The charges concerned Hameed’s use of his position as then Director of Male Municipality to buy a barge for the waste management unit, claiming that it had been received when it had not, and paying the remaining 50 percent of the bill to the company concerned.

MPs sentenced to more than one year’s prison or banishment are disqualified from their seats.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)