Canada condemns Maldives govt’s “politically motivated threats to arrest its opponents”

Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs John Baird has issued a statement expressing “deep concern” over ongoing political tensions in the Maldives, in particular the government’s “politically motivated threats to arrest its opponents.”

As Canada’s foreign minister, Baird is a member of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the international body’s democracy and human rights arm that suspended the Maldives following the controversial transfer of power on February 7, and was behind the strengthening of President Mohamed Waheed’s Commission of National Inquiry (CNI).

“It is clear that the arrests of senior officials of the Nasheed government are politically motivated. Such actions are completely unacceptable and must be reversed,” Baird stated.

“The threats of the present government to arrest its opponents, including former President Nasheed – the only democratically elected president in the last four decades – so as to prevent his candidacy, undermine that government’s credibility and violate its undertakings to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group. They also fly in the face of the core Commonwealth values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law,” Baird stated.

“The Maldives has been given the benefit of the doubt by the Commonwealth so far. Continued intimidation, illegal arrests and other authoritarian tactics by the present government may require the Commonwealth to consider a different approach, in our view.”

Nasheed was today ordered to attend police headquarters on August 2 concerning comments made during a tapped phone conversation released by police last week, in which the former President states “I think we need to fight back [against police].”

The government’s actions were, Baird said, “further evidence of the need for early elections, as Canada has repeatedly urged. These disputes must be settled, and the will of the people must be heard.”

“In order to safeguard the important democratic progress made in recent years, an inclusive political solution is critical to the future of Maldives. Canada will continue to work with the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group to push for greater respect for democratic values.”

Canada’s statement on the state of the Maldives is among the most strongly-worded issued by another nation following the political turmoil of February 7, with the exception of Timor Leste (East Timor).

Nobel Peace Prize recipient and President of Timor Leste, José Ramos-Horta, issued a statement on February 21 condemning “the ousting under military pressure” of President Mohamed Nasheed in an ““obvious” coup d’état.

“It should be of concern to the World that extremist elements abusively invoking Islam were instrumental in stirring up violent demonstrations, religious intolerance and social upheaval as the coup d’état set in motion,” Ramos-Horta said at the time.

“Therefore, it is all the more strange and unsettling the silence with which big powers and leading democracies respond to the undemocratic developments in the Maldives. It has been a sad day for democracy in the Maldives and beyond.”

President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza said the Canadian Foreign Minister’s statement was “based on misinformation” as “no arrests have been made and all political opponents are free to conduct their protests every day.”

Riza suggested that the statement was based on information “received only from one side”.

As for the suggestion of a “different approach” by the Commonwealth, Riza said the government was “very much engaged” with the international body, and that Baird’s was “one isolated view” that the Maldives Foreign Ministry would look into.

“We met with several [international] authorities while in Geneva and the Maldives is not much of a concern [to them]. They welcome the work the government is doing regarding human rights and development,” Riza said.

According to tourism statistics 2243 Canadian tourists had visited the Maldives as of June this year, an increase of 4.5 percent on the same period last year.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“No Islamic fundamentalism in the Maldives”: Foreign Minister

The Indian government’s biggest concern is the internal stability of the Maldives,  Foreign Minister Abdul Samad Abdulla said today.

In a press briefing to brief media about his official visit to neighboring India, and his recent meeting with Sri Lanka’s Minister of External Affairs, Dr Samad, said the Indian government was eager to know how the Maldives had been progressing after the transfer of power that took place on February 7.

“The officials of the Indian government were concerned with the country’s internal stability after the events that unfolded on February 7,” he said.

Samad also said that India was concerned about whether the events that unfolded on February 7 involved Islamic fundamentalists, but he said he assured them that Islamic fundamentalism had no part to play in the events.

He expressed disappointment over statements made by officials of Nasheed’s government that the Maldives had a growing issue with Islamic radicalism and fundamentalism.

Samad further went onto dismiss such claims and said that religious fundamentalism did not exist in the country, and said he had assured Indian authorities that neither the transfer of power nor the vandalism of Buddhist relics in the National Museum on February 7 had involved any religious sentiment.

Speaking to Minivan News at the time, a museum official said that a group of five to six men stormed into the building twice, and “deliberately targeted the Buddhist relics and ruins of monasteries exhibited in the pre-Islamic collection”, destroying most items “beyond repair”.

A journalist asked Samad about the 2007 bombing of Sultan Park and the government’s subsequent clash with radical Islamists on the island of Himandhoo – footage of which later appeared in an Al Qaeda training video – to which the foreign minister replied “That was in the past.”

Dr Samad stated that he had met all key officials of Indian foreign affairs including the Minister of External Affairs, S M Krishna, and Indian Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai. Samad said he briefed them about the events of February 7, the works of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), and the all party talks.

Samad also acknowledged support from Indian High Commissioner to the Maldives, Dnyaneshwar Mulay.

“I especially thank Indian High Commissioner Mulay for briefing them about what happened in Maldives. Mulay, who was there during my meetings with Indian officials, observed the events very closely and even former President Nasheed was talking to him,” Samad said.

Samad also stressed that the Indian government was a “reliable and loyal” neighbor which had always been there for the Maldives, regardless of which government was in power.

He said that the main purpose of the trip was to get assurance of Indian support for the current government, which he claimed had been “very positive”.

India was initially concerned of the safety of Indian investments in the country, Samad said – Indian infrastructure giant GMR is currently redeveloping Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), the single largest foreign investment in the Maldives. Samad  said he had assured Indian officials that the current government of the Maldives will give the “utmost priority” in protecting Indian investments.

“Several Indian companies have huge investments in the Maldives. They have been involved in housing projects and as well as the privatisation agreement of INIA with GMR. The Indian government was concerned about these investments and we assured them that it remains safe,” Samad added.

Last week, Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad declared that the Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL) would be unable to pay the disputed airport development tax (ADC) without risking bankruptcy – a US$25 fee that was to be charged to outgoing passengers, as stipulated in the contract signed with in GMR in 2010. The government was to pay the fee from airport revenues after its collection was blocked by the Civil Court.

Samad also said that the safety of the Indian ocean was a priority for India.

“We are at the center of a very internationally strategic area and the Indian Ocean is a huge shipping lane as well.  The recent hijacking of a foreign vessel by Somalia pirates is a concern as well. India is highly concerned about the security of the Indian Ocean.”

Samad said he had discussed strengthening bilateral relations with India and had discussed in finding solutions the difficulty in obtaining visas for Maldivians travelling to India.

He also claimed that India would soon provide the Maldives government with land in Delhi to build a Maldivian Embassy, in the heart of diplomatic area.

Sri Lanka

Regarding the meeting held with the Minister of External Affairs of Sri Lanka, Professor GL Peiris, Samad said that he had briefed the Sri Lankan minister regarding the events of February 7.

He also said that the ministers had discussed resolving visa issues and complications faced by Maldivians travelling to Sri Lanka, particularly students, to which he said the Sri Lankan minister had been very positive.

Regarding the transfer of power in February 7, Samad claimed that the government had not changed on February 7 and that “technically” it was the same government and that only the president had changed.

“If you look at our constitution, we have a presidential system. This is not a parliamentary system to say that the government belonged to the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). People voted both Nasheed and Waheed in the elections. Nasheed did not win the election on his own. Nasheed and Waheed got less than 25 percent of the votes in the first round [of the presidential elections 2008]. He won the presidency with the support of Gasim Ibrahim and Dr Hassan Saeed,” Samad contended.

“So if you say its Nasheed’s government that means its Gasim’s government as well, it’s even Umar Naseer’s government,” he claimed.

The MDP has contended that nearly all political appointments have been replaced with supporters of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who was voted out in 2008.

He also revealed that former government had not built any ‘special’ diplomatic relations with Israel.

“I don’t think what some people speak on political podiums is the real foreign policy. From the documents that I have, Naseem [referring to former Minister of Foreign affairs, Ahmed Naseem] did not build any special diplomatic relations with Israel like he has been saying,” Samad claimed.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Foreign Minister visits India

Foreign Minister Dr Adbul Samad Abdullah yesterday travelled to India on an official visit to meet with his Indian counterpart, Minister of External Affairs S.M. Krishna.

India was one of the first states to recognise the new President, Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, after the resignation of Mohamed Nasheed. Nasheed is reported to be planning a trip to India to meet with politicians later in the month.

India has offered both diplomatic and material assistance to the Maldives since the events of February 7, brokering a multi-party plan that was intended to lead to new elections, as well as offering to replace police vehicles destroyed during the unrest.

The Defence Minister, Mohamed Nazim met with Indian military officials earlier in the week to discuss greater military coordination between the Maldives and its northern neighbour.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Leaked report reveals PR firm Hill & Knowlton responsible for majority of pre-2008 democratic reform

New York-headquartered public relations firm Hill & Knowlton (H&K) was responsible for recommending – and in some cases implementing – most of the pre-2008 democratic reform in the Maldives, according to details in a leaked 2003 report commissioned by then-President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

The company – one of the two largest PR companies in the world, representing groups as diverse as IBM, the Church of Scientology and the Ladies’ Home Journal – has come under criticism for working to improve the reputations of governments accused of human rights violations, including Indonesia and Turkey.

However, H&K’s report on the Maldives, titled ‘Issues audit and communications strategy for the Government of the Maldives’, reveals that the firm was responsible for much of the human rights and governance reform that paved the way for the country’s first democratic election in 2008.

The vast majority of recommendations in the report were subsequently implemented, portraying Gayoom as mellowing in the lead up to 2008 following the autocratic excesses of his 30 year rule.

H&K’s recommendations included the separation of the security forces into police, military and correctional institutions, constitutional reform and the introduction of multi-party democracy, strategies for the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM), reform of the Majlis, reform of the criminal justice system, including an end to the practice of flogging, and even the introduction of religious freedom.

The report opens acknowledging that the events of September 19, 2003 – unprecedented civil unrest sparked by the custodial death of Evan Naseem – were a “watershed” moment in Maldivian history, “and one after which nothing will ever be the same.”

“Perceptions of its significance are more diverse. Some believe it is a signal that the seal has now been broken and that further unrest could well follow. Others believe it was an understandable and genuine outlet of anger, yet one which can be avoided in the future, should meaningful reforms be introduced.  Yet others, point to an orchestrated event influenced by shadowy forces seeking regime change and which are backed by religious fundamentalists,” H&K stated, in 2003.

“Despite such divergences in views, what is clear, though, is that expectations have now been raised and presidential promises made; the delivery of meaningful reform is now required.”

The report, produced by H&K consultants Andrew Jonathan Pharoah, Timothy Francis Fallon and Biswajit Dasgupta following extensive meetings and consultations across Maldivian society, contains both a situational analysis of key issues and recommendations for Gayoom’s government on how to address them.

Human rights abuses

Stakeholders consulted by H&K were “almost unanimous” that human rights abuses were occurring in the Maldives. However, these abuses were in many cases believed “to be individual, not institutional.”

Outside the then nascent Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), complaints about arbitrary arrest and freedom of expression “were dismissed as being the hyperbole or outright lies of malcontents and trouble makers”.

H&K summarises the concerns of three institutions: Amnesty International, the UN Commission on Human Rights, and the US State Department.

“Critics of the Government continued to be detained, or imprisoned following unfair trials and should be regarded as prisoners of conscience. Government portrays convictions as being a result of criminal activities, but the real reason is as a result of political opposition,” H&K notes, citing Amnesty. The human rights organisation’s report is “littered with a number of individual case-study examples underpinning the accusations,” H&K adds.

The Maldives had meanwhile provided almost no information to the UN Commission on Human Rights, when challenged on issues such as racial discrimination.

“The Maldivian response had been to state that ‘no form of racial discrimination exists in the Maldives based on race or any other differences among the population’, and that ‘therefore, no specific legislation is required to implement the provisions of the Convention,” H&K cites.

The US State Department noted “unconfirmed reports of beatings or other mistreatment of persons in police custody during the year”, but noted that food and housing conditions at Maafushi prison were “generally adequate”.

The State Department’s opinion of the country’s media – which reflected few concerns other than politicisation of ownership – was “overly generous”, H&K suggested.

“Our own verdict was that the local media appeared to be uncritical, lacking any desire towards investigative journalism and averse to producing hard-hitting stories.

“Perceptually, the media was regarded by some as a Government mouthpiece and the close connections / ownership by the same did not help its cause in portraying itself as being an independent scrutineer. A kinder view may be that the media has limited resources and did not regard its job as doing the country down.

“ It was also suggested that negative perceptions were exacerbated as a result of the profession not being seen as a desirable career to enter. Consequently, the career did not attract the cream of the crop it is questionable whether there are many graduates in the profession.”

To address human rights issues, H&K recommended that HRCM be given a “clear and transparent mandate” with specific objectives and benchmarks, audited “by third parties such as Amnesty.”

“The Commission should play a key role in responding to the individual cases outlined by Amnesty International and others,” H&K suggested, and show a “clear and comprehensive communications structure” with “findings/initiatives widely publicised.”

Constitutional Reform

“Although the Maldives would like to be described as a young liberal Muslim democracy, the perception in the outside world perhaps not match this description,” H&K suggests.

“Critics have begun voicing disgruntlement. They describe an autocratic, six-term President, who does not allow any challenge to his leadership and who presides over a Parliament formed through bribery, corruption and fear.”

The agency urged Gayoom to allow multi-party democracy, stating that his existing position “is untenable, unsustainable and causing significant damage to perceptions of democracy.”

“To the external world there is an idealistic consensus that those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security. Moreover, the process gives the impression of a political elite which feels that it knows best,” H&K writes.

Parliament was meanwhile considered manifestly corrupt, as particularly on the islands H&K “got the impression that the process of candidates buying votes was commonplace and expected. Indeed, the agency heard some concern that the price of votes was going up and candidates had to spend way more than they did previously to secure the same votes!”

H&K urged “comprehensive reformation of the single candidate Presidential election system, with the adoption of a multi-candidate process”, and “a comprehensive reform of the Maldivian constitution to the extent whereby any political party can operate with complete freedom.”

The role of the Majlis was to be reviewed and given “more independence with greater powers of scrutiny”.

A further H&K recommendation – which was not implemented, and now seems somewhat prescient – was that “the office of an independent ombudsman should be introduced to investigate accusations of wrongdoing on the part of Majlis and Ministers.”

Criminal justice system

H&K called for “fundamental reform” of the criminal justice system, in which it said “there was little to no faith”: “Corruption is viewed as embedded, or alternatively justice is seen as being dispensed arbitrarily.”

“Structurally, there is concern at the signal sent out in having the President as the highest figure within the judiciary and also the executive. Similarly, there is also concern that the President has responsibility for the judicial appointments system and indeed the ages and experience of judges, who are all young and deemed inexperienced,” H&K wrote.

The consultants also noted that “despite his position, the President is not supposed to involve himself directly in the affairs of the judiciary. Yet, the President does review decisions – albeit through a three-man commission. Whilst this may have been established with the best of intentions, that the Commission has been described as ‘slow and lethargic’, ‘lacking in transparency and having no clear mandate’ only adds to the concerns.”

Basing the legal system on a combination of Sharia Law and 1968 Civil Law did not cause issues “in and of itself”, noting that it did not include punishments “which would be considered unacceptable in liberal democracies, such as stoning to death or amputations.”

Nonetheless, an end to the practice of flogging “would be an easy win”, H&K suggested.

As for judicial procedure, the accused “are often not given access to pen and paper and do not have enough time to prepare their case”, and “perversely, we also understand that neither are the police required to keep a police diary. It has also been claimed that the accused are not made aware of the full extent of the charges levelled against them (until they are in court) and that often they will not be informed of the date of their trial until the day itself. Anecdotal evidence also exists that prisoners have been in court charged with one offence and then convicted of another.”

The justice system was based on confession, “and the the police service believes that prisoners need to be held longer in order that they can extract a confession which is necessary to obtain a conviction – even when they believe forensic (and other) evidence may suffice.

“There is the perception that the police make clear to suspects that until they deliver a confession they will be held in prison indefinitely. There are also concerns that the need for a confession is one of the driving forces which leads to torture and or police brutality against prisoners.”

As a result, 90 percent of the prison population had confessed to their crime, H&K observed.

Recommendations for the reform of the criminal justice system included ending flogging and asking HRCM to review the practice of banishment: “Amnesty believes persons banished often have to undergo hard labour with an insufficient daily allowance for more than one meal a day. Women are also said to be easy targets for harassment and sexual abuse by village men.”

Furthermore, “the President must remove himself completely and permanently from any direct or indirect control or influence with regards to the Criminal Justice System, and that this position must be open to review/audit at any time by third party agencies.”

Police, NSS and correctional forces

There was, H&K said, “a common perception that the police considered themselves to be above the law – albeit, the general consensus was that abuses were considered individual rather than institutional. Moreover, that corruption exists amongst correctional guards was conceded at the highest levels.”

“In particular, there were a number of accusations of abuse of power. Amnesty, for example, points to a failure to return equipment after searches (which then leads to a loss of livelihoods), and also of widespread torture, ill treatment in prisons and the forcing of confessions.”

Joint training and the use of the same uniform at the time led to a crisis of identity among the security forces and, for the police, “a martial mindset which whilst suited to an armed forces, was felt not appropriate for policing.”

H&K recommended a “clear separation of duties and responsibilities assigned to the both the National Security Service and the Police Force”, with separate training facilities and “visible differences” in “look and operational style”. It also called for an “urgent review” of the competency of correctional officers.

Religious freedom

H&K’s most controversial recommendation was “that the Maldivian Government move as a matter of urgency towards a society and constituency whereby there is complete religious freedom.”

“One of the first – and most striking impressions – visitors to the Maldives receive is given to them when filling in the arrivals card. On the back, amongst hard hitting warnings about bringing drugs, spearguns and pornographic materials to the islands, stands further warnings forbidding ‘items of idolatry’ and ‘items contrary to Islam’,” H&K observed.

“The agency has seen reports in the media of bibles, effigies of Christ, Buddha and Krishna, being taken from visitors during baggage searches on arrival. Yet, through discussions we understand that, whilst the country is keen to preserve its Muslim traditions and forbids public worship of other religions, private worship is allowed. In this context, we were told, such items should not be being confiscated,” H&K stated.

The Maldives was in contravention of article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights concerning religious freedom, H&K noted, suggesting that “ordinarily [we would] make the recommendation that the Maldives change its laws and practices accordingly. However, we are aware that, regrettably, there is unlikely to be any appetite for this. Indeed, it could be argued that such a move could further encourage the Islamic fundamentalists who would regard as it as sign that the Government had sold out.”

Noting the US State Department’s concerns over freedom of expression, detention and counselling of potential apostates and detention and expulsion of foreigners for proselytising, H&K said it “ believes that this attitude is untenable and unsustainable alongside any claim to be in accord with human rights.”

“Notwithstanding the very clear infringement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the situation is manifestly unfair to the citizens of the Maldives who may wish to practice other religions. Indeed, it is worth noting that the Maldives has not always been a Muslim country,” H&K stated.

“Whilst the agency can accept that the Maldives is keen to maintain its Muslim traditions, some form of compromise – perhaps along the current lines – should be adopted.”

Following the government’s unfavourable response to this suggestion, and noting “significant resistance”, H&K  subsequently offered supplementary recommendations, including replacing hostile warnings on boarding cards with a notice “that private worship is permitted” – noting that “these will only be seen by foreigners”, “Take steps to make clear to diplomatic channels and holiday tour groups and reps that private worship of other religions is permitted”, and “Encourage authorities to turn a blind eye to incidences of Maldivians worshipping other faiths in private – be it individual or group worship.”

Action plan

H&K outlines a strategic program “to achieve balanced coverage of the Maldives and recognition for the very real changes which are being made by the Government.”

“In this regard, we need to be prepared for people to be critical of what we do and we must recognise that there are a number of people who will be implacably imposed to whatever the Government does.”

H&K proposes a “reactive, rapid rebuttal” strategy, “to ensure that no inaccuracies are allowed to stand without an attempt at rebutting them having been made.”

“There is also undoubtedly also a need to change the culture of communications. At present, we have witnessed a desire to engage only on the Maldives’ own terms,” H&K observes.

“We acknowledge concerns that journalists may twist stories and perhaps include comment from critics. However, if the journalists are intending to do this – they will go ahead regardless of whether or not they are proactively engaged. Better then at least to have the opportunity to put the story across with our own messages.”

“Second, not giving interviews will not help in demonstrating openness and transparency which are prerequisites for messages communicated to be believed. Third, from our experiences we have seen that changing perceptions is a case of turning the proverbial oil tanker; it takes time and results are not immediate. In any event engagement will need to take place at some stage – at least if we start now, we can begin to draw a line and at least try tackling the issues on the front foot.

“Fourth, even if journalists were to misreport the story, it provides us with a platform with which to go higher up the ladder and take issue with managers or editors. In this way, even were stories not to be retracted, corrected or the Maldives given a chance to respond, it nevertheless helps to ensure that in the future greater care and attention will be given to reporting.”

H&K puts forward a number of journalists to specifically target, and offer press visits to the Maldives.

“In organising the itinerary for such a trip it is important that we enable those attending to get a balanced picture of what is going on and therefore we must be prepared for them to meet with people who are to some extent critical of Government,” H&K stated.

“This is often quite a difficult step for Governments to overcome but unless we do this we believe journalists may feel we are trying to hide the truth from them. We should not expect that a journalist will not ask us difficult questions nor have relations with others who are critical.”

The journalists included: Dilip Ganguly (Associated Press), Krishan Francis (Associated Press), Zack Ijabbar (The Island, Sri Lanka) Warren Fernandez (Foreign Editor, Straight Times), Sunday Leader, Sri Lanka, Scott McDonald, (Reuters Colombo), Lindsay Beck, (Reuters Colombo), Chris Lockwood (Asia Editor, Economist), Catherine Philp (Times South Asia Correspondent in New Delhi), Alex Spillius (South-East Asia Correspondent, Daily Telegraph/Sunday Telegraph), Randeep Ramesh (Guardian, Delhi), Kathy Marks and Mary Dejevsky (The Independent/Independent on Sunday), Tom Walker (The Sunday Times), Tracy McVeigh (Observer), Khozem Merchant (Financial Times) and Rita Penn with BBC World.

Minivan News was not among the media targeted. The edits of H&K’s inaugural ‘e-newsletter’ in 2005, also obtained by Minivan News, described Minivan News as a “clandestine newsletter”.

“The peaceful and positive tone of the President’s address was in stark contrast to the incendiary language of certain sectors of the Maldivian press over the past week, who were calling for and even encouraging violent demonstrations to coincide with our National Day,” H&K’s newsletter states.

“If we could rephrase this,” reads the edit. “Many locals do not attach legitimacy to Minivan News; they only recognise as press what is in circulation in the country under registration. Hence, it may cause an uproar. ‘Clandestine newsletter’ maybe, your call.”

Reaction

The H&K report corroborates comments made by former Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed in a Q&A with Minivan News in June 2011, following his appointment as UN Special Rapporteur on Iran.

“I do not know the motives of Gayoom in hiring Hill & Knowlton,” Dr Shaheed told Minivan News at the time.

“But my links with them were on the basis that they would contribute to reform in the Maldives. So I agreed to be a liaison person with them, but only if they would work on a governance reform project,” he explained.

“Their first task was an audit of governance in the country: meeting various stake-holders, gauging public perception and making recommendations on what ought to be done. Their recommendation was that we needed to implement rapid political reforms, including political pluralism.”

Based on the 2003 report, Gayoom engaged H&K on a longer-term basis, Dr Shaheed explained.

“This entailed assisting him with reforms internally, and projecting those reforms externally. It was not purely a PR function and it did entail real policy prescriptions for Gayoom,” he said.

Dr Shaheed confirmed that H&K was not just making recommendations, but actively writing policies for Gayoom’s government.

“When you are in office for 30 years and your ministers and associates make recommendations to you, you don’t believe them. But if you have a posh firm from London making recommendations, you tend to believe them,” Dr Shaheed said. “And Gayoom did.”

“Things that Gayoom did on their recommendation included separating the army from the police, a whole raft of reforms on judicial function, prison reform, constitutional reform – all these things were done at their request.

“The only H&K recommendations he left out – Hill & Knowlton wanted [Gayoom’s half brother and STO Chairman] Yameen and the then Police Chief (Adam Zahir) sacked, and they also suggested that freedom of religion was something that was internationally demanded,” he said.

“Of course, there’s no way any government here can introduce freedom of religion, and H&K’s usefulness finally ended when they recommended Yameen be removed – at that point Gayoom stopped listening to them.”

Download the full H&K 2003 report (English)

Download the H&K recommendations (English)

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

“Copenhagen Accord was not an admission of defeat”: Foreign Minister

Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmed Naseem has delivered a keynote address in Dhaka at the Climate Vulnerable Forum organized by the Government of Bangladesh.

The forum was inaugurated by Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and attended by United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

“Today, conventional wisdom suggests that Copenhagen was a failure,” Naseem said. “I beg to differ. In my opinion, the Copenhagen Accord was not an admission of defeat, but the first step on the road towards a solution – a solution based on the vision laid down in the Male’ Declaration. That vision was simple: that global warming will only be halted when States realize the futility of arguing over whom should cut emissions, and begin competing to become the leaders of the new industrial revolution – a revolution based not on the finite power of coal and oil, but on the infinite power of the sun, sea and wind.”

Minister highlighted that it was the hope of President Nasheed that this year’s meeting will achieve on to remind the world of the plight of the most climate vulnerable countries and in so doing confront the  growing sense of apathy and re-energise the international community to  act.

Naseem also called for “a strong progressive message [at] COP 17 in Durban, encouraging the UNFCCC to establish a new legal framework on climate change which encourages and helps states take positive action, in other words to invest in low carbon technology, rather than only demanding that they accept negative obligations – namely to cut emissions.”

In his statement Minister also stressed on the challenges and difficulties faced by developing countries in shifting to a low carbon development pathway, and to give guidance to the international community regarding how it can best held and support that shift.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

DRP leader urges Foreign Minister to support UN recognition of Palestinian statehood

Opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader and MP for Kendhoo constituency Ahmed Thasmeen Ali has sent a letter to Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem, urging him to support UN recognition of Palestine as a state at the UN.

Thasmeen asked the Minister to fully participate in all the discussions held at the UN concerning the issue, and to vote in favor of Palestine in all votes regarding the issue.

Ending the letter, Thasmeen urged Minister Naseem to seek the support of friendly countries, saying it was “what the citizens of the Maldives would want to see.”

Meanwhile, the Foreign Ministry has stated that the Maldives strongly supports UN recognition of Palestinian statehood, with Naseem advocating the position before the UN Human Rights Council following the announcement by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas that he will apply to the UN Security Council for full UN membership.

“Let us be clear, the Palestinian people have, like everyone else, the right to self determination – the right to a state of their own. They have waited long enough for that most basic of rights. When the Palestinians present their case to the UN, the Maldives will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them, and we call on all others to do likewise,’’ Naseem told the UN Human Rights Council.

Naseem has said the Maldives does not believe that UN recognition of Palestinian statehood will would narrow the chances of a negotiated peace.

‘’We believe that rather it will help those chances by creating a situation in which two state partners can negotiate as equals,” Naseem said. “We hope the US will maintain its historical support for the right of all peoples to self-determination and we believe that the recognition of Palestinian statehood will help secure a negotiated peace in the future.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Ahmed Naseem first Maldivian Foreign Minister to visit Israel

The Maldives’ Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem is currently visiting Israel, the first foreign minister from the country to do so.

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that during his visit from May 16-20 Naseem would meet Israeli President Shimon Peres and have dinner with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Liberman, lay a wreath at Yad Vashem and visit other sites throughout the country.

Naseem also yesterday met with officials of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, including President Mahmoud Abbas, and discussed issues relating to the peace process and the Palestinian reconciliation agreement.

Palestine’s News and Information Agency reported Abbas as saying that the peace process had stalled due to Israel’s refusal to stop settlement activities and terms of references for the peace process. Naseem reportedly expressed support for the declaration of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry meanwhile noted that “Israel and the Republic of Maldives have enjoyed diplomatic relations since 1965, [which] were suspended in 1974. Israel was the third state to recognise the Muslim island nation and its ambassador was the first to present his credentials to the president of the Maldives,”

“Relations began to improve at the beginning of the 1990’s. The present government maintains relations of appreciation and friendship with Israel; the two states have signed three agreements in the fields of health, tourism and education.”

Visiting eye surgeons from the Israeli ‘Eyes from Zion’ NGO were recently met by large protests, the burning of Israeli flags in Republic Square and claims from several local religious NGOs that the doctors were seeking to “illegally harvesting organs from non-Jews around the world.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Majlis should welcome Guantanamo Bay detainees as Muslim brethren: Shaheed

The Majlis should welcome Guantanamo Bay detainees to the Maldives, Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed has said.

One of the two detainees to be transferred to the Maldives from the United States run Guatanamo Bay prison is a Palestinian. Dr Shaheed noted that Maldivians have a profound love of Palestinians as their Muslim brethren.

He said as Muslims it is incumbent upon Maldivians to demonstrate their love by helping the detainees, reports Miadhu. Dr Shaheed was speaking at the Annual Coordination Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Member States of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) held at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on 24 September 2010.

Various countries across the world have offered to take in detainees from Guantanamo Bay after President Barack Obama, shortly after taking office, closed the Guantanamo Bay prison established by his predecessor George W Bush as part of the ‘War on Terror’.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Leaked Gitmo documents spark police investigation

Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed has said the ministry yesterday asked police to investigate the case of leaked documents concerning Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Dr Shaheed said the documents consisted of unofficial communications to the Maldives government from the US government, and a document sent to the Attorney General’s office by the Foreign Ministry.

Dr Shaheed said the documents included an unofficial letter sent from the US to discuss how a legal framework could be established to bring in the detainees.

”The documents were sent to Parliament’s National Security Committee by an MP,” Said Dr Shaheed. ”MP Ali Waheed was the person who first spoke about these documents.”

Dr Shaheed said that the person who leaked the documents and delivered them to MPs was responsible for the act.

”The Maldivian government has not officially agreed to bring in the detainees,” he said. ”It is just at an early stage and a group of people who do not properly understand the matter are worried and concerned.”

Independent MP Mohamed Nasheed said the government’s desire to investigate the case was “stupidity and weakness”, ”as there are more concerning issues than the leaked document.”

Nasheed claimed to have seen the documents, summarising the communication in his blog and identifying it as an official diplomatic document sent by the US government to the Maldivian government.

”The government cannot take action against the person who leaked the documents,” said Nasheed. ”There is a law allowing people to inform others if an unlawful activity was going on inside the area in which he or she works, and according to that law, no action can be taken against that person.”

Nasheed said the letter to the AG from Foreign Ministry revealed that the government has already agreed to bring the Guantanamo Bay detainees in the country, but legal advice was needed on the matter.

”That was an official agreement and they are just pretending to make it an ‘early stage negotiation’,” Nasheed said.

He added that the document from the US government consisted of a list of things it believed had been been agreed by the Maldives, and was requesting confirmation.

”One of the leaked document gives information that the former inmate’s communication will be under surveillance and they cannot leave the Maldives,” Nasheed said.

Press Secretary for the President Mohamed Zuhair said that the document was not leaked but was “deliberately stolen”.

Zuhair said anybody who stole the documents has causes “a lot of trouble” for the Maldives, by disrupting diplomatic relationships between countries.

”Now the US government may think that we deliberately leaked the document,” Zuhair said. ”The recipient should be aware that it is unlawful to have a leaked document of the government and should have clarified whether the document was the original before distributing it to everyone.”

Zuhair said the US government had approached the Maldives to handle two detainees from the Guantanamo Bay prison.

”One of them was a man born in the West Bank,” he said. ”We do not have the information on the other person yet,”

He said the Maldives would be receiving “numerous benefits” for accepting the two detainees from Guantanamo Bay prison.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)