Tag: former president mohamed nasheed

Omnia Strategy helping government respond to UN working group on arbitrary detention

UK-based international law firm Omnia Strategy is providing legal advice to the government in responding to a petition filed by former President Mohamed Nasheed at the UN working group on arbitrary detention.

The opposition leader’s international legal team is seeking a judgement declaring his imprisonment arbitrary and unlawful. The government has been asked to respond before the first week of July.

The government previously said the law firm owned by Cherie Blair, the wife of former British prime minister Tony Blair, was hired to “advise on strengthening the legislative framework” for democracy consolidation.

The foreign ministry said today that Omnia Strategy has “carried out a two weeks research mission in Malé and has been invited to review the current legal and constitutional framework in line with international standards and in particular to assist the government in preparing a response to the communication filed by former President Nasheed to the UN working group on arbitrary detention.”

Speaking at a press conference with foreign minister Dunya Maumoon this afternoon, Toby Cadman, a partner at the law firm, said due process was followed in Nasheed’s trial and that the government has prepared its defence.

The former president was sentenced to 13 years in prison over the military’s detention criminal court chief judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

“If the offence had occurred in the United Kingdom the former President could have been charged with an offence of kidnapping or false imprisonment, an offence which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment,” said Cadman.

“Throughout the legal proceedings against former President Nasheed, his constitutional right to effective legal representation has been guaranteed and when his legal representatives boycotted the proceedings, the former president was repeatedly reminded of his right to alternative legal representation”.

Cadman also said that Nasheed was not kept in solitary confinement, but was “detained in a facility that would not only meet international best practices, but arguably far exceed any acceptable level.”

Nasheed’s conviction on terrorism charges after a 19-day trial was widely criticised over apparent lack of due process. International pressure on the government to release the former president and other “political prisoners” have been mounting in recent weeks.

The European parliament and US Senators John McCain and Jack Reed have called for Nasheed’s immediate release.

Briefing the press in Washington DC after filing the petition in late April, Nasheed’s lawyer Amal Clooney said the terrorism trial violated due process and compromised the basic guarantee of presumption of innocence.

Amal said that the court had said that there was no need to call for defence witnesses because such witnesses “would not be able to refute the evidence submitted by the prosecution”.

“This tells you everything you need to know about the process. Because why call a defense witness, if you already know that the verdict is going to be guilty,” she said.

Following the government’s announcement that it has enlisted Omnia Strategy earlier this month, Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) expressed “disgust” with the law firm’s decision to represent President Abdulla Yameen’s administration.

Omnia Strategy also advises the governments of oil-rich Gabon and Kazakhstan. Gabon’s president, Ali Bongo Ondimba, was elected in 2009, after his father who ruled over the country for 42 years died in 2009.

MDP international spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said the international community was “united in its condemnation of the Yameen regime’s thuggery and un-democratic behaviour.”

“The UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, the UN Special Rapporteur on Judges and Lawyers, India, The US Senate, the European Parliament and Amnesty International and many others have vigorously denounced the abuses to human rights and democracy by Yameen’s regime,” he said.

“It is hard to believe that Cherie Blair would want to keep company with such thugs of ill repute. It is unethical for Blair to work for this regime. No doubt she is being paid a small fortune, to help wash the blood off Yameen’s reputation.”

He added that the current administration “appears to have hired the most unethical and profiteering mercenaries money can buy.”

Dunya told the press today that the law firm’s fees and expenses will be revealed when its work is complete.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed appeals for clemency

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s lawyers have appealed to President Abdulla Yameen to reduce the 13-year jail sentence of the opposition leader.

In a letter sent to the president yesterday, lawyer Hassan Latheef noted that the clemency law gives the president the “full power and discretion” to reduce the sentence.

“The president has the discretion, on the president’s own initiative, to commute the sentence of a person convicted of a criminal offence, based on their age, health, treatment they are currently undergoing, their status and circumstance, or from a humanitarian perspective,” reads article 29(c) of the Clemency Act.

President’s office spokesperson Ibrahim Muaz Ali told Minivan News that the office attends to letters in accordance with procedures and declined to comment on whether President Yameen would consider the appeal.

Despite the lapse of a 10-day deadline for filing appeals, the prosecutor general and the government have insisted that Nasheed could still appeal at the High Court. President Yameen has maintained that he does not have constitutional authority to pardon convicts before the appeal process is exhausted.

Nasheed was found guilty of terrorism on March 13 over the military’s detention of criminal court chief judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012. The former president’s conviction drew widespread international criticism over the apparent lack of due process in the 19-day trial.

Latheef contended that Nasheed was denied the right to a fair trial as guaranteed by both domestic law and the Maldives’ obligations under international conventions.

The former human resources minister noted that foreign governments, international human rights organisations, and the UN have condemned the trial.

Amnesty International called the conviction a “travesty of justice” while the UN human rights chief said Nasheed was sentenced after a “hasty and apparently unfair trial” and noted “flagrant irregularities.”

The UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers noted “serious due process violations” such as denial of the opportunity to present defence witnesses, which led her to believe “the outcome of the trial may have been pre-determined.”

The European parliament in April adopted a resolution condemning the “serious irregularities” of Nasheed’s terrorism trial while US secretary of state John Kerry said during a visit to Sri Lanka that Nasheed was “imprisoned without due process”.

“This is an injustice that needs to be addressed soon,” he said.

Last week, US senators John McCain and Jack Reed urged their government to press for the release of all political prisoners in the Maldives.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Diplomatic pressure ramps up on Maldives

The Canadian government and the Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) have called for international action to secure the release of “political prisoners” in the Maldives.

Canada called on the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) to “urgently put the deteriorating situation in the Maldives on its formal agenda,” while the ACHR called on the the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to adopt a resolution demanding the “unconditional release of all political prisoners” in the Maldives, including former President Mohamed Nasheed and former defence minister Mohamed Nazim.

The ACHR has special consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council and provides information and complaints to national human rights institutions and the United Nations bodies and mechanisms.

The organization also called on the UNHRC to appoint a Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Maldives and to make a recommendation to the UN General Assembly to suspend the Maldives from the Human Rights Council.

The European parliament in April adopted a resolution condemning the “serious irregularities” of Nasheed’s terrorism trial while US secretary of state John Kerry said during a visit to Sri Lanka that Nasheed was “imprisoned without due process”.

“This is an injustice that needs to be addressed soon,” he said.

Last week, US senators John McCain and Jack Reed urged their government to press for the release of all political prisoners in the Maldives.

Commonwealth values

Canada also called on the Maldivian government to release jailed opposition politicians.

“On June 12, protestors gathered in the Maldives capital, Malé, to call for the release of political prisoners,‎ an independent judiciary, an end to politically motivated charges, and respect for freedom of expression and fundamental democratic values,” Canadian foreign minister Rob Nicholson said in a statement yesterday.

“Canada strongly supports these objectives, which are consistent with Commonwealth values and principles as set out in the Charter of the Commonwealth.”

In March, foreign minister Dunya Maumoon slammed alleged attempts to place the Maldives on the CMAG agenda over Nasheed’s terrorism trial.

Former foreign minister and UN Special Rapporteur on Iran Dr Ahmed Shaheed said Canada’s call shows “that countries in the commonwealth care about the Maldives.”

Suspension from UNHRC

The 29th session of the UNHRC is taking place from June 15 to July 3 in Geneva, Switzerland. The inter-governmental body is comprised of 47 member states and meets for 10 weeks every year, in March, June and September.

The Maldives was first elected to the council in 2010 and re-elected for a second term in November 2013.

The prosecution and imprisonment of political opponents constitute “gross and systematic violations of human rights” as provided under the General Assembly resolution establishing the Human Rights Council and justifies the proposed measures, the ACHR said in a statement yesterday.

As the European parliament has adopted a resolution calling for Nasheed’s release, the ACHR suggested that European Union members on the council should sponsor the resolution.

The foreign ministry said yesterday that the Maldives delegation will focus on “issues of priorities such as women’s rights, children’s rights, climate change, rule of law, among others.”

“Trumped up charges”

The ACHR meanwhile accused President Abdulla Yameen of jailing political opponents under “trumped up charges” to bar rivals from contesting the 2018 presidential election.

“While key democratic leaders have been put behind bars under terrorism charges, President Yameen has taken little or no measures to counter real terrorists: over 200 Maldivians are currently fighting for Islamic State (IS) in Iraq and Syria with at least four of them having died in the fighting,” the ACHR claimed.

The judiciary remains unreformed since the 30-year autocratic reign of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, the ACHR continued, and currently serves as the “handmaiden” of President Yameen – “a replica of the rule by the Rajapaksa brothers which ended in neighbouring Sri Lanka in January 2015.”

Adhaalath Party president Sheikh Imran Abdulla, Jumhooree Party (JP) deputy leader Ameen Ibrahim, and JP council member Sobah Rasheed have also been charged with terrorism and accused of inciting violence at a mass protest on May 1.

The terrorism charges cast doubt on the government’s sincerity in calling for talks with opposition parties, the ACHR suggested.

The organisation noted that Nasheed’s conviction on terrorism charges in March after a 19-day trial was widely criticised over apparent lack of due process.

Amnesty International called the conviction a “travesty of justice” while the UN human rights chief said Nasheed was sentenced after a “hasty and apparently unfair trial” and noted “flagrant irregularities.”

The UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers noted “serious due process violations” such as denial of the opportunity to present defence witnesses, which led her to believe “the outcome of the trial may have been pre-determined.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Jailed ex-president’s visitation rights restricted

The government has restricted visitation rights for imprisoned ex-President Mohamed Nasheed to his wife, children and parents, the former president’s office has revealed.

The opposition leader’s siblings and members of his extended family were previously allowed to visit him at the high-security Maafushi jail.

“Today’s arbitrary change was announced suddenly and does not seem to be a reflection of any established procedures or regulations governing the Maldives Correctional Service,” the former president’s office said in a statement.

It added that an official from the Maafushi informed the family of the restrictions in a phone call to a non-family member.

“These changes come at a time where President Nasheed’s lawyers were denied their weekly visit – without rationale – on Wednesday, and while it has been over a month since he has been denied a MRI scan recommended by doctors at Maafushi health centre and the military clinic in Malé,” the statement continued.

“The MRI can only be done in Malé and the authorities denied him the scan even though they brought him to Malé on 22 May.”

The home ministry’s media coordinator Thazmeel Abdul Samad and prisons officials were unavailable for comment.

The former president was found guilty of terrorism in March over the detention of a judge during his tenure and sentenced to 13 years in prison. The 19-day rushed trial was widely criticised over its apparent lack of due process.

The home ministry has previously said prisoners are only allowed a visit once a month.

Nasheed’s lawyer Hassan Latheef told Minivan News today that the legal team was previously allowed daily visits, but the home minister later restricted the visits to once a week.

After visiting the former president every Wednesday for three weeks, Latheef said the lawyers were informed via a phone call yesterday that the weekly visit has been cancelled.

Authorising visits from the lawyers now appears to be at the discretion of prison officials, Latheef said.

Last month, home minister Umar Naseer complained of Nasheed’s lawyers “having fun, laughing and joking, and entertaining him” during visits to the jail.

Latheef at the time expressed concern with the home minister’s knowledge of confidential meetings between lawyers and a client.

“We fear that the meeting areas may be bugged,” he said.

In his reply to the home minister, Latheef noted that were also communicating with the former president’s international legal team and providing documentation for a petition at the UN working group of arbitrary detention.

Former first lady Laila Ali lodged the petition in April requesting a judgment declaring Nasheed’s detention arbitrary and illegal.

The opposition is planning to hold a third mass protest tomorrow (June 12).

The family of Adhaalath Party president Sheikh Imran Abdulla’s family have accused the government of attempting to weaken him physically and psychologically, while under police custody.

The criminal court last week ordered police to hold Imran in pre-trial detention until the conclusion of his terrorism trial.

Imran, who has diabetes, was brought to the AMDC clinic in Malé on Wednesday. He was also taken to see a doctor on Tuesday and on the night of June 7 as well.

The home ministry has not yet responded to queries regarding Imran’s health.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Lawyers ‘entertaining’ Nasheed during daily visits, complains home minister

Home minister Umar Naseer has advised former president Mohamed Nasheed’s lawyers not to use their visits to “entertain” the imprisoned opposition leader.

In a letter to Nasheed’s attorney, Hassan Latheef, the home minister said that the legal team was “having fun, laughing and joking, and entertaining him” during daily visits to the Maafushi jail.

“I advise you to make proper use of the opportunity to meet lawyers,” Naseer stated.

The letter was dated May 3, but the legal team said it was only delivered yesterday.

Nasheed is serving a 13-year jail sentence following his conviction on terrorism charges on March 13 over the detention of a judge during his tenure. The 19-day trial was widely criticised by foreign governments, the UN, and international human rights organisations over its apparent lack of due process.

In a tweet last night, Latheef called Naseer’s letter “insane.”

“Stupidity to the max!” the former labour minister tweeted.

Latheef told Minivan News that Naseer did not have the authority to “determine whether we can laugh or not.”

The consultations with Nasheed were “none of Naseer’s business,” he continued and expressed concern with the home minister’s knowledge of confidential meetings between lawyers and a client.

“We fear that the meeting areas may be bugged,” he said.

Latheef said the legal team was only allowed to meet Nasheed once a week for two hours, which poses difficulties as the lawyers were also communicating with the former president’s international legal team and providing documentation.

The lawyers were able to meet other clients on any day at their convenience, he continued, but visits to Nasheed were authorised under strict supervision of the home minister.

In his reply to the home minister – shared on social media today – Latheef said the legal team’s efforts are intended to “save” the former president from the jail sentence and prove his innocence.

“As such, a case has been filed at the UN working group of arbitrary detention,” Latheef noted.

Former first lady Laila Ali lodged the petition last month requesting a judgment declaring Nasheed’s detention arbitrary and illegal.

Latheef said the conduct of the criminal court judges and proceedings at the court were amusing.

“Therefore, laughing at times while talking about the case is only natural,” Latheef wrote.

Latheef urged the home minister not to use his complaints “as an excuse” to narrow or deny the former president his constitutional right to legal representation.

 

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP proposes imprisoned ex-president to represent party in talks

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has proposed imprisoned former President Mohamed Nasheed, chairperson Ali Waheed and MP Ibrahim “Ibu” Mohamed Solih as representatives for talks with the government.

The main opposition party’s national council adopted a resolution today to accept the government’s calls for dialogue to resolve the ongoing political crisis.

“The [MDP] believes that the anxiety and distress in the country can be resolved by all the opposition parties sitting down at the table for discussions with the government,” reads the resolution.

President Abdulla Yameen’s proposed agenda for talks focuses on three aspects: political reconciliation, strengthening the judiciary and legal system and political party participation in economic and social development

However, the government has ruled out negotiations over the release Nasheed and former defence minister Mohamed Nazim, insisting the president does not have the constitutional authority to release convicts before the appeal process is exhausted.

President’s office spokesperson Ibrahim Muaz was not responding to calls at the time of publication.

However, Muaz told Haveeru before the resolution was passed that the government will go ahead with the talks even if the MDP declines the president’s offer.

During the national council debate on the resolution, MP Eva Abdulla stressed the importance of talks involving all political parties, including the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).

“MDP is the first party that called to solve the political crisis. So we are happy the government took the initiative to hold talks and we accept it. But we want to hold the discussions together, not separately as the government has suggested,” she said.

President Yameen had sent invitations to the three allied opposition parties separately and assigned two ministerial teams for the talks.

Eva also argued that the agenda for the talks should be up for discussion.

“We are not going to discussions to talk only about what the government wants. The discussions will include what the government wants, but also what we want. The agenda of the talks also should be set at the discussions,” she said.

Eva also suggested MDP should not join the discussions without the proposed delegation: “I don’t think there is anything we can solve without the delegation MDP proposed.”

Nasheed is currently serving a 13-year jail term at the high-security Maafushi prison following his conviction on terrorism charges in March.

The MDP has maintained that the trial was a politically motivated attempt to bar the party’s president and presumptive candidate from the 2018 presidential election.

Foreign governments and international bodies including the UN have criticized the trial for apparent lack of due process, while the EU parliament has called for Nasheed’s immediate release.

MDP chairperson Ali Waheed was meanwhile released from police custody this afternoon. He had been held in remand detention since his arrest in the wake of the mass anti-government demonstration on May 1.

Police have concluded an investigation on charges of inciting violence and forwarded a case against Waheed to the prosecutor general’s office. A seven-day extension of detention granted by the criminal court expired today.

While the Jumhooree Party (JP) has accepted the invitation for talks, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party proposed its detained president, Sheikh Imran Abdulla, among the party’s representatives.

Imran was also arrested on May 1 and remains in police custody.

Speaking at today’s emergency meeting of the national council, MP Ibu, MDP parliamentary group leader, noted that the acceptance of the government’s invitation does not mean the party trusts the government.

“We are going to sit down with the government not necessarily because we trust them. We should always learn from what has happened in the past. Recently we saw the Ukrainian government sitting down for talks with Russia despite the distrust,” he said.

Ibu said the planned mass protest for June 12 – organised by the MDP –  is also a call for discussions.

“The June 12 protest is also a symbol of negotiations and talks. So I call on the people of Maldives who support our cause to come and join us in discussions,” he said.

Other members of the national council questioned the “sincerity” of the government’s invitation for talks.

“The deputy leader of JP, Ameen Ibrahim, was set free by the High Court but the state once again appealed his case in the apex court to detain him again. So the intent of the government is questionable,” said MP Rozaina Adam.

Ameen is among the five-member team to represent the Jumhooree Party. Some opposition politicians contend the police’s attempt to detain Ameen is an attempt to prevent him from representing the JP.

The resolution was passed with the support of of 42 members with one vote against.

The dissenting member objected referring to Nasheed as the party’s president, arguing that the government might reject the resolution on the grounds that he no longer holds the post.

In late April, the pro-government majority voted through amendments to the Prison and Parole Act that prohibited inmates from holding high-level posts in political parties.

The revised law effectively stripped Nasheed of the MDP presidency.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nasheed denied right to fair trial, concludes Bar Human Rights Committee

Former President Mohamed Nasheed was denied the right to a fair trial ahead of his conviction on terrorism charges in March, the UK’s Bar Human Rights Committee (BHRC) has concluded in its trial observation report.

The BHRC’s findings echo widespread criticism from foreign governments, the UN, and international human rights organisations over the apparent lack of due process in the 19-day trial.

Following its third legal observation mission to the Maldives from February 26 to March 6, the BHRC found that there was “a clear appearance of bias on behalf of two of the three judges, such as to vitiate the fairness of the entire proceedings.”

Two of the three judges presiding over the trial had provided witness statements to the 2012 investigation of the case.

Nasheed was also “deprived, as a self-representing defendant, of adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence,” denied legal representation at the arraignment hearing the day after his arrest, and the criminal court failed to adequately guarantee the right to a public hearing.

The BHRC is an independent body and the international human rights arm of the Bar of England and Wales.

The mission, undertaken by Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh, BHRC vice chair and barrister at Matrix Chambers, assessed the trial on compliance with international fair trial standards, in particular Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

On March 13, Nasheed was found guilty of terrorism and sentenced to 13 years in prison over the military’s detention of criminal court chief judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

“Serious concerns also arise regarding the unexplained delay of 15 months post-election in pursing criminal proceedings against Mr Nasheed, the overall speed at which the terrorism trial before the criminal court took place, once the new charges were laid, the limited time given to his defence team to prepare and the refusal by the court to permit defence witnesses to be called,” the report stated.

“In light of the above, Mr Nasheed’s conviction cannot properly be regarded as safe.”

The prosecutor general had withdrawn previous charges of illegal detention against Nasheed in early February and pressed terrorism charges on the day of his arrest (February 22). The surprise trial began the next day.

In several recommendations made to the government, the BHRC called for an investigation of “all serious allegations of violations of due process and fair trial rights through independent and impartial processes and hold to account those found responsible for those violations.”

The committee also recommended reforms to “strengthen the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.”

The BHRC advised the government to adopt a new penal code, evidence code, and criminal procedures law to codify fair trial and due process guarantees in the constitution, and “institute mandatory training in fair trial rights and guarantees, including those arising under the ICCPR, for all judges, at all levels of seniority.”

Following international criticism of Nasheed’s conviction, President Abdulla Yameen had called on all parties to respect the criminal court’s verdict.

Meanwhile, during the Maldives’ Universal Period Review in Geneva on May 6, foreign minister Dunya Maumoon claimed that Nasheed chose not to appeal his 13-year sentence and that due process concerns regarding the trial were procedural and not substantive.

Criticism of Nasheed’s trial had “mainly focused on the process and not the merits,” she said.

But Nasheed’s office contends he was deliberately denied the right to appeal after the criminal court failed to provide necessary documentation within the ten day appeal period specified by the Supreme Court.

Amnesty International had meanwhile called Nasheed conviction a “travesty of justice” while the UN human rights chief said the opposition leader was sentenced after a “hasty and apparently unfair trial” and noted “flagrant irregularities.”

The UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers noted “serious due process violations” such as denial of the opportunity to present defence witnesses, which led her to believe “the outcome of the trial may have been pre-determined.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Foreign minister ‘misled’ UN on Nasheed trial

The office of former president Mohamed Nasheed has accused foreign minister Dunya Maumoon of “deliberately misleading” the UN Human Rights Council regarding the opposition leader’s terrorism trial.

During the Maldives’ Universal Period Review in Geneva on May 6, Dunya claimed that Nasheed chose not to appeal his 13-year sentence and that due process concerns regarding the trial were procedural and not substantive.

Criticism of Nasheed’s trial had “mainly focused on the process and not the merits,” she said.

But Nasheed’s office contends he was deliberately denied the right to appeal after the criminal court failed to provide necessary documentation within the ten day appeal period specified by the Supreme Court.

“The Maldives’ criminal court refused to release the transcript of the trial — information vital to the launch of an appeal — until 11 days after conviction, thus deliberately preventing Nasheed’s legal team from appealing,” reads a statement released yesterday.

It added that Nasheed’s lawyers informed the court of their intent to appeal four days after the conviction on March 13.

“The lawyers repeatedly asked the criminal court for the trial transcript, but the court refused to release it until the window for appeal had closed. When the transcript was finally released, it had been doctored and was full of irregularities,” the statement continued.

President Abdulla Yameen and other senior government officials have repeatedly advised Nasheed to appeal. Prosecutor general Muhthaz Muhsin told Minivan News last week that the High Court could accept an appeal despite the expiration of the 10-day period.

“I personally think this case has a high possibility of being accepted at the high court since Nasheed is a former president, since it is related to a judge and since it is a terrorism charge,” he said.

But Nasheed’s lawyers say the Supreme Court, in the same ruling that had shortened the 90 day appeal period to ten days, had removed the High Court’s discretionary powers.

The apex court in January had voided Article 42  of the Judicature Act which set out appeal deadlines and gave judges discretionary powers in accepting late appeals. The 90–180 day appeal period obstructed justice, the Supreme Court said. A new 10-day appeal period was set out, but the apex court was silent on procedures for late appeals.

Nasheed’s lawyer, Hisaan Hussain, told the press today there was no “legal basis” for the government’s stance.

She suggested the government was encouraging Nasheed to appeal because it could determine the outcome through its undue influence over the judiciary.

“The government is saying in the same breath that it does not meddle in court cases but that there is still the opportunity to appeal despite the 10-day period elapsing,” she said.

Nasheed wanted to appeal, but was effectively deprived of the right to appeal due to the criminal court’s “deliberate” refusal to release the transcripts until the 11th day after sentencing, she said.

The legal team reiterated calls for president Yameen to exercise powers under clemency laws to pardon and release Nasheed.

Lawyer Hassan Latheef claimed 10 countries had called for Nasheed’s release during the UPR session, warning that the Maldives could face international sanctions if the government does not comply.

Nasheed was found guilty on terrorism charges relating to the detention of criminal court chief judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Amnesty called the conviction a “travesty of justice” while the UN human rights chief said Nasheed was sentenced after a “hasty and apparently unfair trial” and noted “flagrant irregularities.”

The special rapporteur noted “serious due process violations” such as denial of the opportunity to present defence witnesses, which led her to believe “the outcome of the trial may have been pre-determined.”

The European parliament meanwhile adopted a resolution condemning the “serious irregularities” of the trial while US secretary of state John Kerry said during a visit to Sri Lanka that Nasheed was “imprisoned without due process”.

“This is an injustice that needs to be addressed soon,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nasheed calls on prosecutor general to appeal terror charges

Former president Mohamed Nasheed has called on the prosecutor general to appeal his terrorism conviction and 13 year jail term amid growing international criticism of the flawed trial.

Nasheed’s lawyers say they were unable to lodge an appeal at the high court within the shortened ten day period due to the criminal court’s failure to provide a full report of case proceedings, but say the PG can lodge an appeal at any time, “without discussions, without permission.”

Lawyer Hassan Latheef said PG Muhthaz Muhsin has an important role in “bringing an end to the distresses of the international community on his own initiative.”

The PG can uphold the constitution and “save the Maldives from the storm that is about to come from international pressure,” he added.

The UN office of the human rights commissioner on Friday said Nasheed’s trial “was vastly unfair and his conviction was arbitrary and disproportionate.”

The EU parliament last week urged the government to free Nasheed immediately, while US secretary of state John Kerry said Nasheed’s imprisonment is an “injustice that needs to be addressed soon.”

Nasheed’s wife, Laila Ali, has also asked the UN working group on arbitrary detention to rule Nasheed’s imprisonment illegal.

PG Muhsin, however, has dismissed Nasheed’s call, saying the high court would accept an appeal despite the expiration of the appeal period.

“The High Court regulation allows Nasheed to appeal the case still. Why doesn’t he do it himself? I personally think this case has a high possibility of being accepted at the high court since Nasheed is a former president, since it is related to a judge and since it is a terrorism charge.”

Muhsin said Nasheed’s lawyers are now politicizing the case.

The Supreme Court had shortened the appeal period  from 90 days to 10 by annulling provisions in the judicature act, just a month before Nasheed’s arrest. The high court has previously said judges have the discretion to accept late appeals, but lawyers say the apex court’s ruling had removed the discretionary powers.

Nasheed’s lawyers had previously called on President Abdulla Yameen to reduce Nasheed’s sentence and release him under special provisions in the Clemency Act. But the president’s office has refuted the claims.

On Friday, in Geneva, a legal advisor to the UN, Mona Rishmawi also noted the clemency act provided an avenue for Nasheed’s release.

Following a visit with Nasheed in late April, Rishmawi said Nasheed “seemed to be in good spirits, but was not relaxed as he was facing 13 years in prison; he also worried a lot about his safety.”

According to the main opposition Maldivian Democratic Party, tens of thousands have signed a petition calling on the president to release Nasheed. Supporters attempted to deliver the petition to the president’s office on Thursday, but were turned back by the police.

The opposition’s daily protests over the imprisonment of Nasheed is continuing. Two former defence ministers and an MP have also been jailed on various charges last month.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)