Tag: elections commission

Candidates from political parties finish signing voter lists

All 188 candidates representing political parties in the upcoming parliamentary elections finished signing voter lists by noon today, Elections Commission (EC) Director General Mohamed Shakeel has confirmed.

Shakeel told Minivan News, however, that some independent candidates have not signed the final eligible voters registry.

Of the 114 independent candidates, the EC media official said 18 candidates have not signed the lists.

Aside from the 18 independent candidates failing to sign, Shakeel said the EC’s “preparations for the election are perfectly on schedule.”

He noted that the EC had decided to extend the period offered for candidates to complete signing the list to 12:00pm today.

The commission has yet to make a decision on a further extension, he added.

Candidates were invited to the Dharubaaruge convention centre during the weekend to sign off on the final lists.

Obtaining signatures of candidates on the voter lists used at polling stations was among the 16-point guideline imposed on the EC by the Supreme Court in its judgment annulling the September 7 presidential polls last year.

The EC was required to ensure that the voter lists are agreed upon as valid by candidates or their representatives ahead of the polls.

However, the local council elections on January 18 took place as scheduled despite candidates signing voter lists for just 81 out of 464 ballot boxes.

Of 543 independent candidates, only 147 candidates had signed the lists.

The 302 candidates contesting the second multi-party parliamentary elections meanwhile include 85 candidates from the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party, 50 candidates from the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives, 28 from the Jumhooree Party, 12 from the religious conservative Adhaalath Party, seven from the Maldives Development Alliance, and six from the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party.

Quorum

The EC’s capacity to conduct the parliamentary polls as scheduled on March 22 was thrown into doubt last week following the Supreme Court’s controversial removal of EC Chair Fuwad Thowfeek and Deputy Chair Ahmed Fayaz for contempt of court.

Less than two weeks before the election, the dismissals left the EC without the three members required for a legal quorum to hold meetings and approve decisions.

However, on Wednesday (March 12), parliament approved Ismail Habeeb to the commission to replace former member Ibrahim ‘Ogaru’ Waheed, who had resigned in October citing poor health.

Following the vote to approve Habeeb, President Abdulla Yameen presented the letter of appointment to the former EC director on Thursday morning.

Shakeel noted today that the decision to extend the period for signing voter lists after the initial deadline expired at 10:00pm last night was made at a commission meeting.

The President’s Office welcomed parliament’s decision to approve Habeeb to the commission, noting that it “enables the EC to function with the legally required quorum and hold the general elections scheduled for 22 March 2014”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: EC crisis ends, polls as scheduled

The crisis that sought to engulf the March 22 parliamentary polls has ended as quickly as it appeared, with parliament unanimously filling an existing vacancy in the Election Commission (EC), ensuring the constitutionally-mandated quorum of three after the Supreme Court had disqualified two members – including EC President Fuwad Thowfeek and his deputy Ahamed Fayaz.

Of the three individuals nominated by President Abdulla Yameen to fill three vacancies – including the two ordered vacant by the Supreme Court – parliament cleared Ismail Habeeb to replace Ibrahim Waheed ‘Ogaru’, who resigned last October, citing health reasons.

That parliament was in no mood for any confrontation, either with the judiciary or the executive, became clear early on during the emergency sitting called by Speaker Abdulla Shahid when only 60 of the 77 sitting members turned up. No political party, starting with the the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), was known to have issued a whip on any vote that was considered imminent.

With opinion divided within the MDP on the future course of action deriving from the court verdict, as expected, the People’s Majlis took the relatively honourable  rpute of filling the earlier vacancy and leaving the court-ordered vacancies and the attended issues to be taken up possibly by the post-poll parliament. For now, Speaker Shahid announced – based on a decision by all floor leaders – that parliament would convene only after the scheduled polls of 22 March. This would help end speculation and rumours of every kind during the crucial residue of the run-up to the polls.

Second time in a row

Whatever the cause and justification, President Abdulla Yameen’s leadership – despite heading a diverse ‘ruling’ progressive coalition – has proved to be a better floor manager, twice in four months. Earlier, despite the MDP issuing a whip, the government ensured that the house cleared his 13-member cabinet as required under the constitution, without any confrontation – but cross-voting, nonetheless.

Now for a second time, MDP leader and vote-getter, former President Mohammed Nasheed, repeatedly asserted that any judicial intervention in the functioning of the EC could lead to a total boycott of the polls, the post-verdict national council meeting of the party demonstrated that many, if not most, members did not have the stomach for a showdown. It may be reflective of the national mood after the conclusion of the highly-polarised presidential polls, which also divided families in what is otherwise a closely-knit community.

The MDP’s predicament was summed up when party chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik declared himself against boycotting the polls. Talking to Haveeru after an inclusive session of the national council, he openly indicated that the national council was divided over the question. Having spent their time, energy, and more importantly their money for the upcoming polls, MDP candidates were obviously in no mood to extend their personal agonies any more than absolutely required. That was also possibly the mood within the governing parties.

Post-poll, however, the MDP leadership may be called upon to address the emerging/evolving internal crisis, which could take some form or the other in the weeks and months to come. Possibly taking a cue from the leadership, Speaker Abdulla Shahid – a relatively recent entrant into the MDP-fold – suo moto wrote to the president, the Supreme Court and others, contesting the content of the sack order against the two EC members.

MDP-controlled parliamentary committees also reacted likewise and even declared that the court-ordered sacking of the EC president and deputy was not on. However, when the matter came up before parliament, the mood was different.

Miscalculated, mistimed?

The crisis may have exposed foreign governments and international organisations for their continued lack of understanding of Maldivian politics and political manoeuvres. While sounding altruistic in the cause of Maldivian democracy – for which some of them tend to claim authorship – they refused to understand that the Maldivian polity and society had enough resilience to address internal issues, without blowing it out of proportions, or taking it to the international arena.

Even before the Supreme Court had pronounced its verdict on its suo moto contempt case against the EC, and coinciding with President Nasheed’s threat of poll-boycott, some western governments and institutions had cautioned the judiciary against such a course. They had followed it up with a more direct and more severe criticism of the judiciary and in defence of an ‘independent EC’ as it existed.

In doing so, some of them also called for ‘inclusive polls’, a term that the international community had used ahead of last year’s presidential polls, when President Nasheed faced possible disqualification flowing from a pending criminal case dating back to his presidency. The peaceful conclusion of the crisis may have now shown that they may have miscued, miscalculated, and definitely mistimed it all.

Indian non-interference

At the height of the global reaction to the judicial verdict – including from UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon – President Yameen and Supreme Court Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz (he had dissented against the majority judgment) criticised the international community for interfering with the internal affairs of Maldives. Faiz, addressing critics both near to home and further afield, also cautioned that challenging verdicts ‘threatens Supreme Court’s existence’.

Yet, both simultaneously acknowledged the need for judicial reform. President Yameen, in a public rally, declaring his government’s decision to abide by the court verdict in this matter as in others also expressed the hope that the MDP would not have a problem working with his leadership on such reforms. Clearly, all this would have to wait until after the parliamentary polls, whose results, could impact on the future course. Whatever that be, the initiative would still lie with President Yameen and his ‘Progressive Coalition’ leadership.

Compared to the West, the post-verdict reaction from the immediate Indian neighbour was not hurried in coming. When it came, it was balanced. Noting “with concerns the removal of the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson of the Elections Commission of Maldives”, a statement from India’s Ministry of External Affairs, welcomed the post-verdict “commitment expressed by the Government of Maldives to holding the parliamentary elections” as scheduled on 22 March.

The Indian statement was noticeable for absence of any reference to the Maldivian judiciary, this time as throughout the presidential poll crisis last year. Traditionally, too, the Indian political class and public administrators have been extremely respectful of the judicial processes back in the country, and have been even more wary of commenting on them.

Independent of their private opinion, if any, on judicial behaviour, processes, and pronouncements, successive governments in India – and more importantly, all legislatures across the country – have been known to honour court verdicts. Where a confrontation had looked imminent, particularly between the judiciary and legislature, the habit has been for the latter to honour the final pronouncement of the former, after what initially might have looked like deadlock.

The discourse and debates on such matters have mostly stopped within the court premises, or within the precincts of the legislatures. Court verdicts have rarely been made subject of public debate or discourse in India.

Even where political, journalistic, or academic criticism has been made, the authors have been circumspect to the point of erring on the right side of the public regard for judiciary as the final arbiter of constitutional issues and public morals. A situation like the one that could have evolved in Maldives just now has had the potential to create a constitutional deadlock, which the Indian leaderships at all levels have consistently avoided in the country – and would not wish on any other country, particularly a ‘friendly neighbour’, where such a course could have threatened political stability for a long time to come.

Era of the unknown

Post-poll, Maldivian polity could be expected to slowly but surely re-position itself for the future, targeting the series of presidential, local council and parliamentary polls that are now due in 2018-19. Among the ever-increasing numbers of young voters, including first-time voters, democracy is here to stay, and purported threats to the democratisation process that commenced at the turn of the century, are in their parents’ memory, possibly still fresh.

Developments, such as the one now confronted, could flag concerns in their minds, but such concerns would come to pass as the crises too pass as fast as they emerge. This could set off a sense of democratic complacency that is commonplace in most, if not all, democracies. They could see motives where altruism may still be the only cause. In turn, this could contribute to, and necessitate in political parties and leaderships a realignment of their policy priorities and programmes over the next five years, in preparation for an ‘era of the unknown’.

Immediately, however, after the conclusion of the last of the series of polls this season, individual parties would be tempted to look internally and take stock, to reposition themselves for the future. Figure-head leaders of every party and group and the parties that they are associated with will (have to) take stock.

In helping the transition to the future, where the adversity of the past decade, requires to be tempered by reason and a collective will to make Maldives peace-loving and prosperous all over again, the government will have to initiate legal and political measures that are aimed at institutionalising facilitating mechanisms for the purpose. Again, the initiative would lie with the government and President Yameen – no matter the parliamentary poll results.

The writer is a Senior Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation

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)

EC dismissals: Commonwealth, UK, EU, and India join international chorus of concern

The Commonwealth, UK, EU, and India have joined a growing international chorus expressing concern with the Supreme Court’s removal of the Elections Commission (EC) chair and deputy chair over charges of contempt of court.

“Such action by the court less than two weeks before the [parliamentary] election could be viewed as potentially affecting the electoral process adversely,” read a statement released yesterday by the Commonwealth secretariat.

The UK described the move as an “unprecedented expansion of judicial powers”, while India urged respect for the constitution. EU High Representative Catherine Ashton called the ruling a “serious setback in the democratic transition of the country.”

A statement from the President’s Office meanwhile called upon international partners to respect the Maldives’ constitution, echoing a statement released by the Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz on Tuesday (March 11).

The Supreme Court ruling on Sunday left the EC without the three members required for a legal quorum to hold meetings and finalise decisions ahead of the polls scheduled for March 22.

Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma noted the parliament’s approval of a new member to the EC yesterday, which ensures that the quorum is restored.

“We hope that a credible and inclusive parliamentary election can be held in accordance with the constitution, and that Maldivians will be able to cast their votes with confidence and with the will of the people being respected,”  the secretary-general said.

The secretary-general stressed that separation of powers was “a fundamental political value” of the Commonwealth.

“For a democracy to function effectively, it is critical that institutions operate within their own constitutional mandate and do not encroach either on the ability of other independent institutions to execute their own remits or on the constitutional authority of other branches of government,” he stated.

“Actions that undermine the independence of an elections commission have a negative effect on democracy as a whole.”

The secretary-general noted that the Commonwealth Observer Group to the Maldives for last year’s presidential polls had recommended that “there should be better recognition of the mandate and statutory and constitutional independence of the Elections Commission.”

The Commonwealth statement also noted that the Supreme Court “assumed new powers enabling it to initiate cases”.

The Supreme Court summoned EC members on February 27 and began a surprise trial on charges of contempt of court under new ‘sumoto’ regulations that allow the apex court to initiate proceedings and act as both prosecution and judge.

Yesterday’s flurry of statements followed condemnation of the Supreme Court decision by the United States, Canada and the United Nations earlier this week.

In response, the President’s Office has contended that “negative external reaction to judicial decisions” undermined the constitution and hindered efforts for consolidation of democracy.

“Unprecedented expansion of judicial powers”

The UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister Hugo Swire expressed “deep disappointment” with the Supreme Court’s dismissal and sentencing of the EC chair.

“The charges laid and the procedures adopted represent an unprecedented expansion of judicial powers,” the Foreign Office statement read.

The Supreme Court’s contentious ruling “appears to undermine the hard won independence of the Election Commission. This is extremely worrying so close to parliamentary elections,” the statement read.

Noting the appointment of a new member to the EC, the minister urged the government to ensure that the “the Election Commission’s independence is swiftly restored and to ensure that inclusive, free and fair Parliamentary elections are held within constitutional deadlines and in line with international standards.”

“This is essential for the consolidation of democracy in the Maldives and for the country to uphold its international reputation after the difficult events of the last two years.”

The EU’s statement commended the work of the EC, noted the key role of an independent elections body in a democracy, and drew attention to its team of monitors currently in the Maldives for this month’s poll.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs meanwhile issued a press release welcoming the “commitment expressed by the government of Maldives to holding the parliamentary elections as scheduled”.

“India has consistently supported the strengthening of democratic processes and institutions in the Maldives. In this context, the Government of India has noted with concern the removal of the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson of the Elections Commission of Maldives from their positions and deferred prison sentence of the Chairperson,” the press release stated.

As “a close friend and neighbour of the Maldives”, the Indian government urged state institutions and political parties to respect the constitution and rule of law.

The statement also expressed hope that the EC’s independence will be ensured and that “the forthcoming parliamentary elections are held in a free, fair and credible manner, fulfilling the democratic aspirations of the people of Maldives.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Vandals attack campaign offices of Majlis speaker

Speaker of the People’s Majlis and MP for Keyodhoo constituency Abdulla Shahid has today condemned an attack on his office, following the news that two campaign offices had been vandalised in the early hours of the morning.

“It was more than damage, it was an attempt to intimidate,” Shahid told Minivan News, declaring that he “would not back down” in the face of “intimidation”.

Police have confirmed that two attacks that took place in the early hours of this morning (March 13).

Speaking with Minivan News, Shahid confirmed that he was awoken at around 4am by supporters saying that there had “been some damage to the office”.

“It looked like it had been a big piece of rock damaging the class panel, and caused considerable damage,” explained Shahid.

A police statement reveals that as well as vandalism carried out at Shahid’s campaign hall, the campaign offices of Machchangoalhi Dhekunu constituency candidate Hassan Mamdhooh.

Shahid is campaigning for the 18th Majlis on a Maldivian Democratic Party ticket, while Mamdhooh is running as an independent.

The police said they are investigating the matter, but that no suspects have been arrested.

Shahid suggested that the perpetrators were intending to “intimidate the public. They want to send a message to the people that politics is violent, politics is not safe, a message to the public to lay off politics.”

Earlier this week, Shahid’s name appeared on a letter sent to the chief justice and attorney general, stating that the recent dismissal of the president and vice president of the Elections Commission (EC) was contrary to the constitutional procedures which reserved such powers for the Majlis.

The letter – also signed by Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim – was based on legal advice from the parliament’s consul general after an analysis of the Supreme Court’s verdict.

Currently, the vacant seats in the EC are being filled in an effort to keep the parliamentary elections timely. So far, parliament has approved Ismail Habeeb Abdul Raheem to replace former commission member Ibrahim ‘Ogaru’ Waheed.

When asked about the parliamentary elections, Shahid remarked: “I’m hoping against hope that it will happen,”  adding that any more delays in the elections “will destroy the democratic process of the country”.

He finished by stating that the political system will only work when there is a “peaceful environment” in which it can flourish.


Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: Government calls on international partners to respect Maldivian constitution

The government has called on international partners to respect the Maldivian constitution and democratic processes following condemnation of the Supreme Court’s controversial removal of the Elections Commission (EC) chair and deputy chair.

The appeal was made in a statement released by the President’s Office last night welcoming parliament’s approval of a new EC member, which “enables the EC to function with the legally required quorum and hold the general elections scheduled for 22 March 2014.”

“Negative external reaction to judicial decisions of the Maldives challenges the domestic institutions and national processes, thereby undermining the constitution of the Maldives and hindering the ongoing process of democracy consolidation,” the statement read.

It added that strengthening of state institutions was “an ongoing process,” and noted that “high-profile” cases remained stalled at court.

“The government is always ready to work with interested external actors through a process of dialogue and cooperation based on mutual respect in working towards consolidating democracy in the Maldives.”

Since the adoption of the 2008 constitution that established a presidential system with separation of powers, the Maldives has “experienced a vibrant democratic process that has enabled the nascent system to flourish,” the President’s Office said.

The statement comes as the UK, India, and the Commonwealth joined the US, Canada, and the UN in expressing concern with the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the elections commissioners.

The President’s Office statement also echoed calls by Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon earlier this month urging international partners not to “undermine our judicial system.”

The President’s Office also suggested that its submission to parliament of candidates to fill the vacancies in the commission demonstrated “the government’s unshakable commitment to the independence of the EC”.

“The government of Maldives is fully committed to ensuring the constitutionally guaranteed independence, professionalism, and integrity of the Elections Commission,” the statement read.

The President’s Office argued that parliament’s decision to approve Ismail Habeeb Abdul Raheem to the EC was “consistent with the Supreme Court verdict” dismissing the EC chair and deputy chair.

“In compliance with the verdict, the government proposed to the Majlis for consideration and to vote on the names of candidates to fill the remaining two vacant positions at the Elections Commission,” it added.

Despite parliament’s approval of Ismail Habeeb Abdul Raheem yesterday to replace former EC member Ibrahim ‘Ogaru’ Waheed – who resigned in October citing poor health – the opposition-majority independent institutions committee has declared that EC Chair Fuwad Thowfeek and Deputy Chair Ahmed Fayaz remained EC members

The move followed a letter sent to President Abdulla Yameen, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz, and Attorney General Mohamed Anil by Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid contending that the dismissals were unconstitutional.

The letter – based on legal advice provided by parliament’s Counsel General Fathmath Filza – stated that the pair were removed in violation of procedures specified in both the constitution and the Elections Commission Act for the appointment and dismissal of EC members.

Article 177 of the constitution states that an EC member could be removed from office if a parliamentary committee established “misconduct, incapacity or incompetence” and  “upon the approval of such finding by the People’s Majlis by a majority of those present and voting.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: PPM urges appointment of new commissioners ahead of Majlis polls

The ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has proposed that a parliamentary meeting be held to appoint members to replace recently dismissed Elections Commission (EC) President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz.

The Supreme Court’s decision to remove the pair has been rejected by parliament’s independent institutions oversight committee which decided on Monday that the two members remained in their posts.

PPM Deputy Parliamentary Group Leader Moosa Zameer told local media that the party wished to abide by the constitutional provision that the EC should consist of five members.

Zameer further asserted that the party believes there is sufficient time to appoint persons to the remaining two seats ahead of the parliamentary election scheduled for March 22.

“We can hold the elections even with three members in the Elections Commission. However, the constitution says there must be five members in the commission and we want to hold the elections in accordance with the constitutional terms,” Zameer is quoted as saying.

“There is nothing stopping us from doing so, is there?”

However, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid decided on Wednesday to not hold any further parliament meetings ahead of the upcoming election, claiming that he had discussed decision with leaders of the political parties.

Zameer nevertheless called on the oversight committee to review the names submitted by the President, and for the parliament to vote on the matter at the earliest opportunity.

“If the parliament cooperates, then this will not prove to be a difficult task,” Zameer stated.

PPM’s Zameer and MP Ahmed Nihan were not responding to calls at the time of press.

Meanwhile, President Abdulla Yameen on Wednesday nominated four persons to posts in the EC, submitting their names to parliament.

The names sent were Mohamed Zahid, Mohamed Shakeel, Ahmed Sulaiman, and Fathimath Muna.

While the parliament committee maintains that the posts held by Fuwad and Fayaz are not vacant, a replacement for the fifth commission seat has been unanimously approved by the parliament.

The position was previously filled by ‘Ogaru’ Mohamed Waheed who had resigned due to ill health during last year’s presidential election. The new appointee is president’s nominee Ismail Habeeb.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament approves Habeeb to Elections Commission with unanimous consent

Parliament has approved Ismail Habeeb Abdul Raheem with 60 votes in favour and none against to the Elections Commission (EC) to replace former commission member Ibrahim ‘Ogaru’ Waheed.

Following Waheed’s resignation in October last year citing poor health, President Abdulla Yameen nominated three individuals to fill the vacancy on the five-member commission, submitting their names to the People’s Majlis.

All MPs belonging to the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) in attendance today voted in favour of approving Habeeb to the post.

After interviewing Yameen’s nominees last night, the opposition-majority independent institutions oversight committee awarded Habeeb the highest marks and recommended approving his appointment to the commission.

Presenting the committee report (Dhivehi) to the Majlis floor today, Deputy Chair MP Rozaina Adam noted that one of the three nominees – former Deputy Commissioner of Police Mohamed Rishwan – did not turn up for the interview.

Meanwhile, after interviewing the third nominee, Mohamed Tholal – chair of the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives’ (PPM) elections committee – the committee learned that his wife was contesting in the upcoming parliamentary elections, Rozaina said.

Tholal had conceded that he could face a conflict of interest in EC decisions concerning the Maradhoo constituency poll, she added.

In the ensuing debate on the committee report, PPM MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abubakur said there were “no questions about Ismail Habeeb’s competence” as he had previously served as the EC’s executive director and director general.

Habeeb was sacked from the EC in January 2013 before contesting his dismissal at the Labour Tribunal. The tribunal ordered his reinstatement in August 2013, by which time he has been appointed to the Civil Court as its senior administrator.

Government-aligned Maldives Development Alliance MP Ahmed Amir meanwhile accused former EC members of “favouring a particular political party”.

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party MP Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed asserted that EC President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz had become “sacrificial lambs”, and praised their “hard work and service to the nation.”

The EC members had worked “like slaves during the time of the Pharaoh” under difficult circumstances to ensure citizens’ right to vote, he said, adding that unfounded allegations against the pair were “shameful”.

The outcome of last year’s presidential poll would have been different if the allegations were true, Nasheed said.

Quorum

Habeeb’s confirmation to the EC today follows the Supreme Court’s controversial removal of Thowfeek and Fayaz on Sunday on contempt of court charges.

The dismissals left the EC without the three members required for a quorum to hold meetings and approve decisions, raising doubts over the commission’s ability to prepare for and conduct the parliamentary elections as scheduled on March 22.

The Supreme Court judgment also ordered the executive, parliament, and the EC to “make all necessary arrangements” for the polls within six days.

While the President’s Office invited interested candidates to submit applications in the wake of the apex court ruling, Speaker Abdulla Shahid sent a letter to President Yameen, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz, and Attorney General Mohamed Anil contending that the dismissals were unconstitutional.

The letter – based on legal advice provided by parliament’s Counsel General Fathmath Filza – stated that the pair were removed in violation of procedures specified in both the constitution and the Elections Commission Act for the appointment and dismissal of EC members.

Based on the counsel general’s advice, the independent institutions committee decided that Thowfeek and Fayaz remained EC members and summoned all four commissioners to a closed-door session yesterday.

The oversight committee had also summoned members of the Judicial Service Commission to discuss the Supreme Court’s ‘sumoto’ regulations as well as possible actions against the apex court.

However, with the exception of Civil Service Commission Chair Dr Mohamed Latheef and Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman, JSC members refused to attend the meeting, citing short notice.

The oversight committee decided to summon members of the judicial watchdog body again on Friday (March 14).

Meanwhile, MDP Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik told local media yesterday that the opposition party wished to see the Majlis elections take place as scheduled on March 22.

Moosa had adjourned an MDP national council meeting earlier this week without calling a vote on a proposal to boycott the polls, stating that the party’s 85 candidates should be consulted before approving such a decision.

The Hulhuhenveiru MP suggested that the polls could be held on March 22 if parliament approved a third member to the EC as most of the preparations had been completed.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: “Falsified” accounts by international community undermining judiciary, says Chief Justice

Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz has accused the international community of fabricating lies regarding the Supreme Court’s verdict against the Elections Commission (EC).

In doing so, “they have engaged in a battle against the constitution with an independent nation”, said Faiz.

The Chief Justice released a statement strongly condemning statements released by the US State Department and the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Tuesday.

These voices of disapproval were joined today by Australia, which has similarly expressed concern over recent developments, noting its “firm expectation” that scheduled elections will go ahead “in a manner that is free, fair, credible and peaceful”.

In his response to such comments, Faiz claimed that neither international countries nor organisations have the authority to criticise and spread falsifications regarding any verdict of the Supreme Court.

Claims by the international community that the apex court is unduly influencing the work of the EC and undermining their independence is against the truth, argued the chief justice.

“I would like to say that these statements regarding a Supreme Court verdict in an internal legal case of the Maldives are inclusive of falsified claims, and undermine the respect and authority of the Maldivian judiciary,” said Faiz.

“They are thus an irresponsible act by the international community, one conducted without observing the events occurring in the Maldives or getting clarifications of the matter from local authorities. I thereby strongly condemn these statements,” the statement read.

“The Maldives is a free and independent state. It is a sovereign state which rules over itself. The releasing of falsified accounts and statements of the Maldives’ Supreme Court’s actions to fulfill its legal obligations is neither an assistance towards consolidating democracy in the Maldives nor towards maintaining rule of law or strengthening of the justice system.”

Faiz emphasized that he would continue to fulfill his legal obligations concerning the mandates of the courts, and that he would do so without any hesitation towards or consideration of international opinion.

Challenging the Supreme Court

Faiz also condemned local groups’ criticism of the verdict. The Maldivian Democratic Party and the Majlis secretariat have both deemed the ruling unconstitutional.

Faiz stated that the most important duty of the apex court is to establish justice, rule of law and to maintain the empowerment of law, and the constitution requires that the Supreme Court has the final say in the interpretation of laws.

He further noted that it was the constitutional responsibility of all state authorities to maintain the respect and positive reputation of the courts.

“While this is so, when the few persons in charge of running the matters of the state repeatedly challenged the verdicts of the Supreme Court and undermined the respect towards the courts, it was an act that certainly eroded people’s trust in one branch of the state and an act that paved the way to the obliteration of the foundation of the Supreme Court,” Faiz continued.

“There is no doubt that the failure to take action against such acts – despite them becoming alarmingly common – negatively affects the Constitution of the Maldives and casts a shadow over the courts of law.”

“It is an incontestable reality that it is a danger to our constitution when there are matters in the judiciary which need to be reformed through the joint efforts of all state authorities, and instead of constructive work to achieve this, the courts are challenged and the judiciary is attacked.”

Faiz concluded the statement asserting that he will continue to work according to his mandate regardless of the criticism that comes his way, and without any hesitation despite any criticisms or obstacles that may be put forth by international organisations and foreign countries.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC dismissals: Court decision condemned by international community, EC praised

The decision of the Supreme Court to dismiss members of the Elections Commission (EC) this week has been roundly condemned by the international community.

In statements released today, the US has said it “strongly objects” to the courts actions, and Canada has said that it was “deeply troubled” by the decision, while UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has also expressed concern.

Meanwhile, all three statements have praised the work of the EC over recent months – the US noting that the EC has made “laudable efforts to hold multiple successful elections despite previous judicial interference.”

“The Maldives Election Commission has done an exceptional job under especially difficult circumstances in ensuring transparent, inclusive and credible electoral processes in the Maldives,” read the Canadian statement.

Similarly, the UN stated noted that Ban Ki-Moon “commends the Elections Commission for its professionalism and tireless efforts to ensure credible and transparent elections.”

The growing international criticism of the court’s decision comes alongside domestic accusations that the ruling has undermined the constitution and the independent institutions contained therein.

With less than two weeks remaining until the Majlis polls on March 22, the EU’s Maldives Elections Observer Mission has noted the significant “time pressure” which now weighs on the EC.

Following the dismissal of EC President Fuwad Thowfeek and Vice-President Ahmed Fayaz on Sunday (March 9), the EC is left without a constitutionally mandated quorum needed to hold meetings.

The government is currently taking applications for the vacant positions, after which the president is legally required to submit names to the Majlis for approval.

The Majlis yesterday wrote to both the Chief Justice and the Attorney General stating that the constitution granted the powers for appointments and dismissals of the EC to the legislature.

International critics

“The Court’s decision to censure all members of the commission for ‘disobeying and challenging’ previous Supreme Court judgements also raises questions regarding due process and judicial interference in the electoral process,” read today’s Canadian statement.

“An independent and effective election commission is an essential element in any genuine democracy, and undermining the commission and its ability to function again places the Maldives’ democratic transition in question.”

In a similar vein, the US statement suggested that the court’s decision represented an “unprecedented expansion of judicial powers”.

“The Supreme Court’s insistence on holding parliamentary elections on March 22 while imprisoning the very official responsible for holding those elections calls into serious question the government’s commitment to democracy,” said the US State Department.

Ban Ki-moon underlined the “importance of respect for the principle of separation of powers, the rule of law, and the independence of constitutionally established bodies.”

Today’s criticism comes after repeated warnings from the government to refrain from criticising the country’s courts.

President Abdulla Yameen yesterday noted that the tendency for “first world” countries to “interfere” in the internal matters of small countries was concerning, echoing comments recently made by the Maldives’ foreign minister at the UN Human Rights Council.

“We request our international partners to support us. We request you to contribute constructively in overcoming our challenges. We urge you not to undermine our judicial system,” said Dunya Maumoon the HRC’s 25th session last week.

Dunya yesterday also called upon the Commonwealth – a notable critic of the Maldives during the recent protracted presidential elections – to become a more “relevant” and “responsive” body.

The Commonwealth had not released any statements on the current EC case at the time of press.

The Maldives judiciary has been the subject of international criticism on a number of occasions in recent months.

The UN Human Rights Committee on civil and political rights has previously said it is “deeply concerned about the state of the judiciary in the Maldives”, while the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay last year accused the Supreme Court of “subverting the democratic process”.

UN Special Rapporteur for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul expressed concern over the judiciary in a 2013 report, while the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) had in 2011 stated that the Maldivian courts were failing to serve the public impartially.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)