Tag: former president mohamed nasheed

Former President Nasheed calls for reinstatement of GMR agreement

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has called on the government to reinstate the concession agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to develop and manage Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

In 2010, GMR-Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB) consortium, the government of former President Mohamed Nasheed and Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL) entered into a 25 year concession agreement worth US$511 million (MVR 7.787 billion).

The agreement charged the GMR-MAHB consortium with the management and upgrading of INIA within the 25 year contract period.

However in November 2012, the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed declared the developer’s concession agreement void and ordered it to leave the country within seven days.

A last minute injunction from the Singapore High Court during arbitration proceedings was overturned on December 6, after Singapore’s Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon declared that “the Maldives government has the power to do what it wants, including expropriating the airport.”

GMR is now seeking upwards of US$1 billion in compensation for the sudden termination, while at least one of the project’s lenders has called in loans that were guaranteed by the Finance Ministry at the time the contract was signed.

The Maldivian government is contending in court that it owes nothing as the contract was void ab initio –  invalid from the outset – and therefore clauses relating to termination and compensation did not apply.

Should the argument of void ab initio fail, the government has claimed the second legal grounds on which it would argue in favour of termination of the contract would be that the contract had been ‘frustrated’ – an English contract law doctrine which acts as a device to set aside contracts where an unforeseen event either renders contractual obligations impossible, or radically changes the party’s principle purpose for entering into the contract.

The case is currently in the arbitration and is set to take place in Singapore with using Maldives Airport Co Ltd v GMR Malé International Airport Pte Ltd as a reference point.

The Attorney General’s Office has previously stated that the Maldives will be represented by Singapore National University Professor M Sonaraja, while former Chief Justice of the UK, Lord Nicholas Addison Phillips, will represent GMR.

The arbitrator mutually agreed by both GMR and the government is retired senior UK Judge, Lord Leonard Hubert Hoffman.

Deal was “highly beneficial to the Maldives”: Nasheed

Nasheed in the statement released by his office on Monday said the agreement would have been highly beneficial to the country’s economy and would have boosted investor confidence in the Maldives.

“The agreement was entered into after a transparent international bidding process and under the consultation from the International Finance Corporation (IFC).  The agreement also gave confidence to foreign investors who had been interested in investing in the Maldives,” read the statement.

Nasheed said the concession agreement had been the single largest foreign investment in the country’s history, and noted that it had been terminated for political reasons.

The statement also alleged the current government gave little consideration to the repercussions of terminating such an agreement, which included worsening bilateral ties, hindering development, and lowering investor confidence in the country.

The statement also acknowledged recent remarks by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – whom Nasheed defeated in the 2008 presidential elections.

Gayoom blamed Nasheed for not obtaining parliamentary approval and “consulting all political parties” before signing the deal with the GMR-Malaysian Airports consortium.

“This was a mistake. Had he consulted all political parties, the public would not have formed the impression that corruption had taken place,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Hindu.

“Then we told the next President Mr Waheed that he should hold discussions with the GMR Group and the Indian government to arrive at an acceptable solution, after which the government was free to act on its own. Unfortunately, this was not done and suddenly there was this unhappy ending.”

Nasheed’s office however emphasised that the government was legally able to enter into such an agreement and that this was in line with the section 6 of the Public Finance Act.

Gayoom had told Indian media that former President Mohamed Nasheed – whose government was controversially replaced in February last year – had to take the majority of blame for the GMR contract dispute, despite not being in office at the time of its cancellation.

“The GMR experience was not a very good one for us. It began badly with [Nasheed] not informing parliament,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Indian Express.

Nasheed meanwhile condemned President Waheed’s “negligent” decision to evict GMR for political gain without giving due consideration to bilateral ties with India.

Waheed’s Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed – who was a fierce critic of the GMR deal before its cancellation – in November last year appealed to Prime Minister Singh to terminate the GMR deal, writing that “GMR and India ‘bashing’ is becoming popular politics”.

While in opposition in December 2011, the DQP also released a 24 page pamphlet alleging that allowing GMR to develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) was “paving the way for the enslavement of Maldivians in our beloved land”, and warning that “Indian people are especially devious”.

Former Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, the DQP’s Deputy Leader at the time of the pamphlet’s publication, was recently unveiled as the running mate of Gayoom’s party Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen – Gayoom’s half brother.

Nasheed meanwhile called on parliament to take prompt action and said that it was important for it to seek a quick remedy to the issue.

“The decision [to cancel] was made without consulting the views of major political parties and resulted in incalculable damage to the country and its economy,” Nasheed’s statement read.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives Pavilion at Venice Biennale split in “mini-coup d’etat”

The political strife gripping the Maldives has permeated the country’s first pavilion at the Venice Biennale art show, catalysing a behind-the-scenes split that ultimately factionalised the pavilion in what one side contends was a ‘mini-coup d’etat’.

What was initially intended to be an innocent story highlighting the creative climate change advocacy occurring through the pavilion’s artistic expression, instead revealed infighting and controversy stretching back to February 2012.

The official Maldives Pavilion exhibition is curated by a joint Arab-European collective of artists called the Chamber of Public Secrets (CPS), and commissioned by current Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture Ahmed Adheeb.

The overarching theme of the Maldives’ pavilion, entitled “Portable Nation: Disappearance as a Work in Progress – Approaches to Ecological Romanticism”, is about how the survival of the nation, Maldivian people and cultural heritage are threatened by catastrophic climate change impacts, such as rising sea levels.

The unofficial pavilion, located 200 metres up the road, is the Maldives Exodus Caravan Show, curated by Danish artist and former resident of the Maldives Søren Dahlgaard and initially commissioned by former Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture, Maryiam Zulfa.

Deputy Curator of the Exodus Caravan Show, Elena Gilbert, told Minivan News that the some of the artists “recognising the necessity and urgency to focus on the current political and cultural unrest of the Maldives, and to provide solidarity with the majority of the population against the dictatorship”, split from the pavilion following February 7’s controversial transfer of power.

The rebel pavilion, Gilbert said, “presents a selection of works and
 performances from Maldivian and international artists in regards to an expanded conversation of climate.”

Dahlgaard told Minivan News he “initiated the original idea to have a Maldives National Pavilion at the Venice Biennale in 2010, then presented this idea to former President Mohamed Nasheed and former Minister Zulfa,” Dahlgaard told Minivan News this week.

“In December 2011, Zulfa commissioned me to organise/curate this project – there was no money from the Maldivian government involved in this, I was to raise the finances for the project myself,” said Dahlgaard.

“But now the Maldives National Pavilion is a deeply problematic project, which represents the current coup regime. The artists are now puppets of the regime, whether they are aware of it or not,” he added.

Dahlgaard met with former President Mohamed Nasheed in Copenhagen, Denmark this April and discussed the Venice Biennale ‘proxy-coup’.

“Nasheed laughed when I told him about the coup of the Maldives National Pavilion by Khaled Ramadan, the CPS Danish-based Lebanese curator,” recounted Dahlgaard, “because this is of course peanuts in comparison to the fight Nasheed has gone through and is going through for democracy in Maldives.”

‘Hijacked’ pavilion

Dahlgaard explained that he wanted the project to be a collaborative effort and met with many people experienced with Biennales and large exhibitions, and said ultimately Khaled Ramadan and the CPS decided to join the project.

However, the partnership between Dahlgaard and Khaled began to fall apart following the controversial transfer of power which rocked the Maldives in February 2012.

“Khaled has hijacked the project and is now working closely with the coup regime and representing them in Venice,” said Dahlgaard. “Most of the artists in the Pavilion have not been told this story.”

“After the coup in Feb 2012, we decided to continue the planning of the project, since we were hoping the democratic party would be back in power by June 2013, in time for the opening of the Venice Biennale,” he said.

“If this was not the case, the plan was to clearly state that the Maldives National pavilion was representing the democratic Maldives and did not acknowledge the current coup regime,” he continued.

“You have to be aware of the situation you are part of, and this includes the political situation. The political context is very important… even a flower painting is political in the current context of the situation in Maldives,” he explained.

“So you can not ignore that, especially when dealing with an issue like climate change.”

Dahlgaard alleged  that instead of leaving the project, “Ramadan wanted to take control… But the only way he would do this was to jump into the pocket of the current regime in Maldives.”

“Khaled first went to the Venice Biennale office and told them that the commission I had was from the previous government, creating an issue around this so the Biennale Foundation would want a new letter,” said Dahlgaard.

“Then he proceeded to the Maldives, where he stayed for more than two months trying to get an appointment with people at the Ministry of [Tourism and] Culture,” he continued.

According to Dahlgaard, he and Ramadan were supposed to travel to the Maldives together in March 2013, but claimed Ramadan stopped communicating with him in late January.

“I don’t know what Ramadan said to Adheeb and the present Culture Ministry, probably along the lines that ‘Soren Dahlgaard is the son-in-law of [former Foreign Affairs Minister Ahmed] Naseem, is connected to President Nasheed, and therefore representing the opposition now’,” alleged Dahlgaard.

“Or that we had been talking about having a pavilion that would have free expression and be a platform for voices from the ground.”

Ultimately the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture issued a new letter of commission on April 8, 2013, declaring that “Dahlgaard is no longer associated with the Maldives Pavilion by any means” and “obliged” CPS and their representative Ramadan to “send regular reports on their activities to the ministry”.

The previous letter, issued by the ,inistry on March 5, 2013, confirmed that Dahlgaard alone was to be the “official organiser and curator” of the Maldives Pavilion.

“It’s a coup dictator regime that can say whatever they want [and] Adheeb is a horrible gangster,” alleged Dahlgaard.

“He only learned about the project when Khaled Ramadan came to Malé to explain to him that this is a big international cultural prestige project.”

Dahlgaard told Minivan News he believes the situation is “not about two guys having a power struggle”.

“I don’t want or need power or to be the boss; I was not kicking him out,” Dahlgaard said.

“I have nothing to hide and the truth must come out. I am not scared of Khaled’s crazy accusations,” he added. “I have no wish to damage anybody’s reputation. I will however defend myself against untruthful attacks from Khaled Ramadan.”

Nasheed knew nothing about the Biennale: Ramadan

CPS curator Khaled Ramadan and the producer of his documentary film, Abed Anouti, claimed former President Mohamed Nasheed “never knew anything about the pavilion not even till this very moment”.

“I met Mr Nasheed as an Arab journalist and I am sure he has no idea at all about the Maldives Pavilion at the Venice Biennale,” Ramadan said in a letter, sent to Minivan News and the Inter Press Service (IPS) following the publication of articles he felt were “full of errors and misinformation”.

Former President Nasheed told Minivan News on June 10 that “Soren has been working on [the pavilion] for a long time and has in many instances come to me and we have had many discussions about it. The last I heard about was when I was last in Denmark and it’s good he has been able to get the show on the road.”

No dispute

“The pavilion has never been part of any political dispute in the Maldives. It was independently curated from A to Z and different art councils from around the world financed the works of the invited artists,” Ramadan told Minivan News via email.

“In relation to the Venice Biennale, governments do not usually outsource such assignments,” he explained.

“Due to the prestigious nature of the biennale, governments commission professional curators by inviting them to help promote local artists and cultures.”

Ramadan claimed that the “entire project, concept, title, construction of website, design of social media, formulation and design of PR material, and all applications are the outcome of the CPS members, NOT Soren Dahlgaard in any respect.”

“He is incapable of contributing to any of the mentioned products,” Ramadan added. “Mr Dahlgaard has never been an inspiration to any of us in the group due to our academic backgrounds and level of art conduct.”

He alleged Dahlgaard “cheated his way into serious art arrangements like the Venice Biennale by obtaining a letter of commissioning via corrupt contacts and not according to qualifications.”

After the Venice Biennale office contacted the CPS about the March 2013 letter from the Maldives’ Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture, which stated Dahlgaard was to be the sole organiser and curator of the Maldives Pavilion, “we immediately contacted the [Maldives’] Minister of Culture asking for an explanation,” said Ramadan.

He claims the letter Dahlgaard provided the Venice Biennale was a “corrupt letter” which Minister Adheeb “didn’t know anything about”.

“Therefore the minister ordered the total removal of Dahlgaard from the project… following an internal inquiry,” said Ramadan.

He said that the CPS’ collaboration with Dahlgaard ended when the Minister Adheeb “discovered that Mr Dahlgaard was misusing the Ministry’s name and was planning a secret pavilion”.

Contentious IPS article

The split at the biennale was first noted by an article on the Maldives Pavilion published on the Inter Press Service by journalist Ferry Biedermann.

Biedermann wrote that the pavilion, once the initiative of former president Mohamed Nasheed, “was almost abandoned after he resigned under hotly contested circumstances in February 2012.”

“The new government, with plenty of other issues demanding its attention, lost interest and allowed a joint Arab-European collective of curators, calling themselves Chamber of Public Secrets, to take over the pavilion and mount a show under the banner Portable Nation,” the journalist wrote.

He cited Maren Richter, an Austrian associate curator: “They did not care. They did not mind. They don’t believe in the power of art to affect anything anyway.”

Following the publication of the IPS article, referred to by Minivan News in an earlier story on the pavilion controversy, Ramadan and Anouti wrote a letter to both publications accusing Biedermann of “misuse and misinterpretation of our artistic intentions” to “score a journalistic sensation”.

“Our work in the Maldives Pavilion is an independent and positive project that focuses on climate issues in global context while addressing the Maldives as a case study,” the pair stated.

“The article by Ferry Biedermann published at IPS is full of miss information. Mr Ferry NEVER interviewed anyone from the Maldives Pavilion, his claims stand for his own account. He has no sound recording, email correspondence, footage or even photos from the curators of the pavilion to support his claims,” they alleged.

Minivan News put the allegations to Biedermann, who replied he was “puzzled more than anything else by how brazen Mr Anouti is in his attack from the very first line.”

“Unfortunately for him, he immediately makes the grave mistake of saying something that can be easily disproven; of course I have sound recordings and email exchanges to prove that I talked to Ms Richter and communicated by email with Mr Ramadan.

“They would never deny that. If they, as curators, do not belong to the Maldives pavilion, then who does?” he said.

Image courtesty the Maldives Exodus Caravan Show

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President’s coalition expects to be joined by the Jumhoree Party ahead of election

A coalition of political parties backing President Dr Mohamed Waheed in September’s election has expressed confidence it will be joined by the government-aligned Jumhoree Party (JP) – despite no official talks having taken place as yet.

Abdulla Yazeed, a spokesperson on the media team of President Waheed’s ‘forward with the nation’ coalition, said the group would continue to welcome other political parties to join its existing members, but denied any such talks were presently being held.

“Our plan is to have a very large coalition backing President Waheed,” he said.

However, JP MP Abdul Raheem Abdulla today said that while no decision would be taken on whether to join President Waheed’s coalition before its national congress scheduled for later this month, the party anticipated fielding its own candidate during the election.

“What I will say is that our articles and regulations state that our leader has to run as a presidential candidate. We have to run for the seat on our own,” he said.

Raheem added that the party did nonetheless have criteria under which it would look to join a coalition.

“We have done this before. In 2008, we stood alongside the Adhaalath Party,” he said.

However, Raheem said that while the JP was presently a member of President Waheed’s coalition government, it would not advocate for him during September’s election, citing concerns that he had agreed upon assuming office in February 2012 that he would not seek to stay in power.

He also questioned the legitimacy of the president’s Gaumee Ithihaad Party (GIP) and whether it had officially obtained 10,000 members that is required to be registered as an official party under contested legislation passed this year.

“Right now, our party has more than 10,000 members and is a legitimate party,” Raheem added.

Party lines

At present, the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) are the only two parties to have announced their intention to field individual candidates against President Waheed’s coalition during Septembers election.

Both parties have recently dismissed the viability of forming coalitions in the Maldives based on past experiences in the country, claiming that the vast majority of the country’s electorate where divided between their two competing ideologies.

Coalition Media Team Spokesperson Yazeed said today that group of parties backing President Waheed, which had not yet declared their values and full campaign manifesto, would still seek to expand support before voting begins.

With the election scheduled for September 7, Yazeed said that while the MDP and PPM were already campaigning around various islands, the coalition remained confident there was sufficient time to inform the public of its message going forward.

“This will be a very tight campaign, but we are already planning on having teams simultaneously planning to visit islands,” he said.

Earlier this week, President Waheed pledged to establish a housing policy for the people of Male’ as part of his bid to secure election in the upcoming presidential elections.

Yazeed’s comments were made after President Dr Waheed’s Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed was quoted in local media yesterday (June 10) as claiming that a single candidate or party such as the government-aligned JP would not alone be able to manage to run the country ahead of this year’s election.

He reportedly told a crowd gathered on the island of Naifaru in Lhaviyani Atoll that the JP and its leader Gasim Ibrahim did not presently have a team of other parties backing him during September’s voting, limiting his ability within the country’s political arena.

Saeed is the leader of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), one of three parties within the present government coalition along with Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) and the the religious conservative Adhaalath Party to have so far backed President Waheed and his Gaumee Ithihaad Party (GIP) in the election.

He also yesterday criticised President Waheed’s direct election rivals, claiming the country – despite its current financial challenges – faced being set back by three years in the past under an MDP government or 30 years should the public elect the PPM.

However, following yesterday’s announcement that DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali would be standing as President Waheed’s running mate in the election, political rivals claimed the decision would have little impact on their own campaigns.

PPM MP Ahmed Nihan said that Thasmeen’s appointment as Dr Waheed’s running mate was not seen as a concern by the party and would actually serve as a positive development for its own election campaign.

“He is the weakest link among all the wannabe leaders at present,” Nihan said after the announcement.

Nihan said that the party would therefore carry on with it plans to begin campaigning in the north of the country ahead of September’s election.  “This is the very least of our concerns as a party,” he said.

Nihan nonetheless said that the party continued to remain concerned at what it alleged was President Waheed’s continued use of state funds and resources to support campaigning for the coalition.

“This is our one crucial concern. President Waheed needs to facilitate a free and fair election, but he has today used government speedboats to transport coalition members. This should not be seen n a democratic society,” he said.

Meanwhile, MDP presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed contended during an interview with state broadcaster Television Maldives (TVM) on May 16 that President Waheed and the DRP has been forced to form a coalition out of necessity.

Nasheed therefore questioned the president’s coalition’s claims that it presented a “third way” for voters as opposed to the policies of the MDP and PPM. Nasheed reiterated his belief that power-sharing coalitions were not compatible with the Maldives’ presidential system of government.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives forms environment police as civil society criticises lack of enforcement, legislation

The Maldives Police Service (MPS) and the Ministry of Environment and Energy have announced the formation of a new unit that will assign 22 trained officers to deal with ecological violations across the country.

The Environmental Police Unit, formed through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed on June 6, will aim to investigate and punish violations of laws relating to biodiversity and littering, the Environment Ministry claimed in an email to Minivan News.

Formation of the new unit comes as NGOs and not for profit groups have raised individual concerns over a perceived lack of enforcement or a clear legal framework to uphold environmental protection efforts across the country.

These ongoing concerns over enforcement are said to already directly impact both the country’s fledgling national parks and marine reserves, as well as on individual inhabited islands.

Enforcement

According to the Environment Ministry, officers from the new police unit will be required to assist the state in enforcing national regulations such as in providing sports fines related to vehicular emissions or cases of illegal sand-mining, or dealing with poaching of protected species in the country.

Police will also be required to share details of environmental crimes to the ministry, which did not share any further information on the specific offences that police will asked to focus on at time of press.

Under the MOU, the Environment Ministry will be required to give technical advice on the formation of the environment unit, including training for 22 officers in dealing with environmental crime.

The ministry is also called on to host workshops and awareness events for various agencies within the police force, as well as for customs officials, port authorities and the coast guard.

Environment authorities are also required through the MOU to provide all necessary information on laws and regulations, as well as other treaties and agreements signed by the Maldives as part of the country’s wider sustainability aims.

Stakeholder concerns

Numerous stakeholders in Maldives’ environment sector have meanwhile this week told Minivan News that a perceived lack enforcement as well as concise national legislation has in recent years held back ecological protection efforts.

For Ali Rilwan, Executive Director for local NGO BluePeace, a lack of enforcement of the country’s environmental regulations was believed to be the most pertinent long-standing issue setting back conservation and protection efforts at present.

Rilwan claimed that a lack of national mechanisms to report and enforce environmental crimes continued to hamper state initiatives to curb practices such as harvesting of turtles eggs and the export of shark.

In the case of national parks and biospheres, Rilwan alleged that a lack of enforcement was a particular problem for any conservation attempts.

He claimed that without such regulation, marine reserves and other conservation zones currently established in the country were operating more as “paper parks” than designated protected areas.

According to Rilwan, the lack of a nationwide enforcement mechanism to protect environmental laws was presently most apparent in smaller islands where police presence was often limited, making it difficult to report suspected offences.

“The police are supposed to have already been enforcing laws and regulations for environmental protection. But enforcement is something that we have not seen attempted,” he said.

Rilwan added that with the Environment Ministry not having representation within island councils, monitoring potential abuses of environmental law on more than 1,000 islands across the country would limit the effectiveness.

“There are local councils who can focus on the issue, but in the case of any criminal acts, councillors themselves would not be able to investigate or penalise any perpetrators contravening environmental law,” he said.

Rilwan added that with the training of environmental police in the country, he believed there could be an opportunity for effective enforcement going forward.

However, Mohamed Hameed, Promoter of the Edu Faru Marine National Park project in Noonu Atoll, has said he believes the Maldives main challenge regarding ecological protection was the continued lack of a holistic legal framework to protect the environment.

“The Maldives at present is an example of a very sensitive environment. You can get police to check on it, but you need a legal framework to protect these places,” he said. “At present, this legislative framework is lacking.”

Despite successive government in the Maldives playing up sustainability as a key part of their national development plans, Hameed said that current legislation on the environment was presently “all over the place” with various laws overlapping ad contradicting each other in some cases.

Taking successful international examples of marine reserves such as Australia’s Great Barrier Reef or the Kosterhavet National Park in Sweden, he claimed that both parks were protected within the respective legal frameworks of both nations.

Without similar amendments being considered in the Maldives, Hameed said that it would be very difficult to ensure projects like the Edu Faru MNP were properly protected.

He claimed from his own experience of trying to establish the country’s first MNP, a process said to have taken over two decades, efforts to set up an environmental not for profit organisation had been complicated by the fragmented legislative framework presently used in the country.

Hameed claimed that despite both President Dr Mohamed Waheed and former President Mohamed Nasheed supporting the MNP’s formation, he was still waiting for official paperwork and all the agreed lands to be handed over to him so work could fully begin on the site.

The MNP, which was established through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Environment Ministry back in 2011, is designed to protect nine islets by keeping them in a “pristine” state and undeveloped for future research.

Reserve focus

National parks and reserves are expected to become an increasingly important part of the Maldives conservation efforts on the back of a pledge by the current government to make the country the world’s largest marine reserve by 2017.

The government has is committed to move ahead with plans to transform the Maldives into a biosphere reserve through the designation of zones across the country that would earmark land use for specific purposes such as tourism development or conservation.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed ignored advice on GMR termination, PPM alleges

The Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has accused President Dr Mohamed Waheed of ignoring the advice of his coalition government by abruptly terminating the US$511 million airport development contract with Indian infrastructure group GMR last year.

PPM MP Ahmed Nihan said that while the PPM believed terminating the GMR contract had been the right decision, President Waheed had nonetheless personally taken an executive decision to cancel the agreement without listening to the party’s advice in seeking a compromise with the company and the Indian government.

However, the PPM’s coalition partners today accused the party of making “contradictory statements” regarding the decision to terminate GMR’s concession agreement, accusing its senior leadership of trying to terminate the deal at the time without discussion or following due process.

The allegations against President Waheed surfaced following the visit to India last week by former President and PPM founder, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who pledged his party would seek to restore relations with India damaged by the government’s summary eviction of the GMR.

While Gayoom ultimately blamed former President Mohamed Nasheed for not obtaining parliamentary approval and “consulting all political parties” before signing the deal with the GMR-Malaysian Airports consortium in 2010, he was also critical of the present administration’s handling of the termination.

“Had Nasheed consulted all political parties, the public would not have formed the impression that corruption had taken place. Then we told the next President Mr Waheed that he should hold discussions with the GMR Group and the Indian government to arrive at an acceptable solution, after which the government was free to act on its own,” he said. “Unfortunately, this was not done and suddenly there was this unhappy ending,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Hindu.

“Better” handling

MP Nihan said following a press conference held by the PPM in Male’ today that the party continued to believe the decision to terminate GMR’s concession agreement was in the best interest of the country.

However, amidst concerns about the subsequent negative impacts on bilateral relations from cancelling the deal, he stressed that the president could have handled the matter “better” in order to protect the relationship between the Maldives and India.

“We believe that the room was there to correct any negative relations with India,” Nihan claimed.

“This could have been much easier and perhaps a new approach could have been found to cancel the GMR contract,” he added.

Nihan said that as well as the GMR contract, President Waheed had on a number of occasions sought to take advantage of his position by making executive decisions against the wishes of his government coalition, all while trying to shift blame away from himself.

“We have seen [President Waheed] try to spin all good developments as being the result of his work, while anything that has gone wrong [in the government] is the PPM’s fault,” he said.

Following a PPM press conference today, Nihan added that the media has been shown two different letters sent from the party’s council to the government prior to the termination of the agreement last November that called to find a solution through dialogue.

Nihan also reiterated Gayoom’s comments that the manner in which the contract was not a “happy ending” in terms of its impact on bilateral relations with India.

“We are of the view that the agreement was only to be cancelled through due process of the law,” he said.

Nihan claimed that the contract dispute had also further exacerbated concerns held by the Indian government about treatment of Indian nationals in the country. He said this had in turn created difficulties for Maldivians in obtaining visas to travel to India for medical treatment.

Considering former President Gayoom’s 30 years spent in office, Nihan praised his efforts to try and strengthen bilateral relations with India.

The government’s sudden eviction of the Indian investor did not appear on a list of 11 grievances handed to all senior Maldivian reporters by the Indian High Commission in January.  The list instead included concerns such as discrimination against Indian expatriates and the confiscation of passports by Maldivian employers.

Tension

The argument over responsibility for the GMR contract termination has comes amidst reports of increased tension within the present coalition government, with PPM presidential candidate Abdullah Yameen last month criticising President Waheed over his alleged use of state funds for campaigning.

The PPM has nonetheless pledged to continue supporting President Waheed’s government up until September’s election, despite concerns about the decision to dismiss former Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed after he decided to stand as MP Yameen’s running mate.

DRP response

The PPM’s recent criticism of President Waheed’s handling of the GMR dispute was today slammed as being “contradictory” by government coalition partner the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).

The party added that its members had previously come under heavy criticism from the PPM for advocating at the time that any termination of the GMR airport deal should be made via the due process of the law.

DRP Parliamentary Group Leader Dr Abdulla Mausoom told Minivan News that it was in fact senior figures in the PPM that were  among the most vocal supporters for terminating the GMR agreement.

“It is ironic that we are hearing these statements from the PPM, whose leader has been witnessed supporting rallies demanding the cancellation of the [GMR] agreement,” he said.

Dr Mausoom alleged that he had also been informed from “a reliable political source” present during government consultations last year over whether to terminate the GMR agreement that it had been PPM presidential candidate Yameen who personally advocated cancelling the deal without a need for discussion.

“Either there is no harmony within the [PPM], or this is all political talk to try and gain an advantage. Either was it is very irresponsible,” he said of the PPM’s recent comments about terminating the GMR concession agreement.

Mausoom alleged that contrary to the PPM’s claims, it had been the DRP which had advocated finding a legal means of terminating the GMR agreement at at time when fellow government-aligned parties had taken to the streets holding rallies demanding the airport be “reclaimed”.

Despite appeals by GMR that it was acting as a caretaker for running and improving Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), which would remain Maldivian-owned, efforts to cancel the concession agreement – which was vetted by the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC) – intensified up to November.

On November 13, just ahead of the contract termination, a seaborne armada of about 15 dhonis carrying flags and banners circled the airport seeking to increase pressure on the government to “reclaim” the site from GMR.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM will address Maldives’ strained relationship with India: Gayoom

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom has pledged during a visit to India that the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) will repair strained relations between the two countries should it come to power in September, local media has reported.

The three day visit, which concluded Thursday (June 6), saw the former president meet with dignitaries including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to discuss bilateral relations and the impact of the Maldives government’s decision to last year cancel a US$511 million airport deal with India-based infrastructure giant GMR.

In interviews with Indian media, Gayoom expressed sadness that the Maldives’ relationship with India had been impacted by President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s administration deciding to evict GMR from the country with seven days notice.

Gayoom blamed Nasheed for not obtaining parliamentary approval and “consulting all political parties” before signing the deal with the GMR-Malaysian Airports consortium.

“This was a mistake. Had he consulted all political parties, the public would not have formed the impression that corruption had taken place. Then we told the next President Mr Waheed that he should hold discussions with the GMR Group and the Indian government to arrive at an acceptable solution, after which the government was free to act on its own. Unfortunately, this was not done and suddenly there was this unhappy ending,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Hindu.

Waheed’s government late last year declared the contract between GMR and the Nasheed government, which was vetted by the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC), as ‘void ad initio’, or invalid from the outset. It is currently disputing its obligation to compensate the company in arbitration proceedings, arguing that the termination clause could not be applied to a contract it had deemed invalid.

Gayoom told Indian media that former President Mohamed Nasheed – whose government was controversially replaced in February last year – had to take the majority of blame for the GMR contract dispute, despite not being in office at the time of its cancellation.

“The GMR experience was not a very good one for us. It began badly with [Nasheed] not informing parliament,” Gayoom was reported as saying in the Indian Express.

“By law, he should have had it passed by parliament. Some may even say it had an illegal beginning. [The cancellation] was a very populist move at the time as the public had a perception that the contract was bad for the country. The way it was handled was not good. I am sad that this has somehow affected our bilateral relations. We want to overcome that and restore our relationship with India to its former level,” Gayoom told the paper.

The government’s sudden eviction of the Indian investor did not however appear on a list of 11 grievances handed to all senior Maldivian reporters by the Indian High Commission in January, which instead included concerns such as discrimination against Indian expatriates and the confiscation of passports by Maldivian employers.

The list’s release was followed by the Indian High Commission issuing a statement in early February slamming local media in the Maldives for “misrepresentation and twisting of issues”.

Gayoom nonetheless told the Hindustan Times publication this week that he would endeavor to maintain strong bilateral relations with India, claiming that people who were “anti-GMR” were not “anti-India”.

The PPM is presently part of the coalition government backing President Waheed, whom Gayoom said had been requested to find an “acceptable solution” for both GMR and the Indian government that addressed concerns about the airport deal.

Fierce criticism

Among the most fierce critics of the GMR airport deal before its cancellation last year were the now government-aligned Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP ), led by President Waheed’s Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed.

Saeed in November last year appealed to Prime Minister Singh to terminate the GMR deal, writing that “GMR and India ‘bashing’ is becoming popular politics”.

While in opposition in December 2011, the DQP also released a 24 page pamphlet alleging that allowing GMR to develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) was “paving the way for the enslavement of Maldivians in our beloved land”, and warning that “Indian people are especially devious”.

Former Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, the DQP’s Deputy Leader at the time of the pamphlet’s publication, was recently unveiled as the running mate of PPM Presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen – Gayoom’s half brother.

SOFA a concern: Gayoom

Gayoom – described in the Hindu as a “sprightly 76 year-old” – also expressed concern about the Status of Forces (SOFA) agreement being negotiated between Waheed’s government and the United States.

“I am not happy. I didn’t want that to happen,” he said, warning that such a move risked upsetting the balance of power in the Indian Ocean.

A source within the PPM said former President Gayoom, during his 30 years as head of state had forged strong relations with various regional powers such as India and Sri Lanka.

The source said that while the handling of the GMR contract remained a controversial issue, the recent strain in the relationship between India and the Maldives was the result of a number of factors, including “certain difficulties” facing expatriate workers from India living in the country.

“We have a large number of professional expatriates from India working here in health, education and accountancy. The [Indian] embassy here in Male’ has aired some of the issues with us,” the party source claimed, adding that the Maldives also had grievances over obtaining visas to travel to India that needed to be resolved.

The party official claimed that Indian authorities had raised these issues not only with the PPM, but all other stakeholders both in government and the country’s political opposition, presently represented by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

Highs and lows

Despite admitting that every country has high and lows in their bilateral relations with neighbours, Indian High Commissioner to the Maldives Rajeev Shahare has previously emphasised what he called the country’s “unshakable” long-standing relationship with the Maldives.

“During my tenure, I will endeavour to further strengthen the relationship between India and the Maldives, which is already very strong with an unshakable foundation,” he said on April 10, shortly after his appointment.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government uncertain over waste management future as Tatva negotiations continue

The government remains locked in negotiations to find a “permanent” waste management solution in the Maldives following concerns about a recent build up of garbage in Male’, State Environment Minister Abdul Matheen Mohamed has said.

Matheen told Minivan News that although immediate concerns about garbage levels in the capital had been dealt with by Male’ City Council (MCC), which was in the process of “clearing” waste disposal sites on a daily basis – uncertainty remained on a long-term solution to dealing with trash.

At present, waste from across the country is shipped over to the island of Thilafushi near Male’ – an island that serves as the country’s key site for processing and burning garbage.

Certain councillors and MPs from Male’ last week claimed that a failure to deal with a build up of waste in the capital in recent months had escalated into a “national disaster” that could have potential health and safety implications for the public if not addressed.

However, Matheen added that the Finance Ministry’s decision last month to provide an estimated MVR 7 million (US$454,000) in funding to the MCC to try and clear trash from waste sites in the capital had already shown positive results.

“The MCC is clearing waste daily, the crisis is over,” he said. “Right now I believe that trying to manage waste in Male’ is not the best solution. If this waste can be shifted to Thilafushi that may be for the best.”

State negotiations

Matheen said that the government was committed to seeking financing for alternative waste management schemes, while also renegotiating a deal signed by the former government with Tatva Global Renewable Energy.

The government of former President Mohamed Nasheed signed a contract with Tatva in 2011 to allow the India-based company to take over handling of waste in the capital – as well as from nearby inhabited islands and resorts properties.

The agreement also outlined a means of generating power from recycling waste products brought to Thilafushi in an attempt to cut down on trash being burned.

By December last year, President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s administration announced it was in the process of renegotiating Tatva’s agreement in a bid to replace the deal with what Environment Minister Dr Mariyam Shakeela at the time called a “mutually beneficial” agreement.

Just last week, Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad said that although the new agreement with Tatva was yet to be signed, a deal was expected to be finalised in the coming days.

However, Matheen today claimed that no agreement had been reached as yet over the negotiations, which he claimed appeared to be nearing some form of conclusion.

“The process has taken so much time. We will have to take a decision soon [on whether to sign the Tatva deal],” he said.

According to Matheen, the discussions with Tatva Global Renewable Energy had been complicated by having to find an agreement between a number of different parties; including the government, the MCC, service providers like the State Electric Company Limited (STELCO) and management at Thilafushi.

He alleged that another concern about the deal was the need for Tatva itself to find sufficient investment to back its own part of the proposed waste management scheme.

A spokesperson for Tatva was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Matheen said that the government was waiting to see if an agreement could be reached with Tatva over the deal, adding that authorities would otherwise seek to open discussions with other service providers to try and find an alternate means of waste management.

Male’ clean up

While the negotiations continue, Male’ Councillor Mohamed Abdul Kareem confirmed to Minivan News that despite difficulties earlier this month, the council had now almost dealt fully with waste build-up in the capital after receiving funding from the Finance Ministry.

“The only problem we have had with waste management has been the budgeting issues, other than that, we have the technical expertise to clean the waste,” he said.

Kareem claimed that upon receiving funds from the government, the MCC had been able to hire special dhonis (boats) to clear garbage from disposal sites in Male’ that had been allowed to build up over a period of several months. The build up of waste had led to disputes between the council and various state bodies over responsibility for clearing the waste.

Waste being cleared from Male' Saturday (June 1)

With a proportion of funding now having been received by the MCC from the Finance Minsitry, Kareem said the council had been able to clear waste yard number two in Male’ of rubbish.  The site was now being “treated” to try and reduce odours that had built up at the site as a result of recent wet weather, before it would again start receiving waste.

He added that the site was presently being cleared and would not be temporarily open for use until the council completed its treatment and renovation.

Kareem claimed that as long as the government continued to provide funding for the MCC to handle waste management in and around the capital, the MCC did not expect to have any similar problems cleaning waste in the future.

He alleged last month that following the initial signing of the Tatva waste management deal under the previous government in May 2011, the MCC had not been provided with a budget for waste management – even after the deal was stalled by the present administration.

Waste concerns

In April, divisions were reported to have arisen between different ministerial bodies and the private sector over who should take responsibility for garbage being dumped into the sea.

Earlier this year, Minivan News reported that government authorities were working on trying to create functional waste management projects that would serve as an alternative to shipping waste to Thilafushi, despite numerous failed attempts in the past.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC “fully controlled by political figures”: lawyer for Chief High Court judge

Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is set to face another court battle after attorneys representing Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef announced on Thursday that they would challenge the commission’s decision to suspend the judge.

Chair of JSC, Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed, had earlier held a press conference declaring the commission had decided to “indefinitely suspended” Chief Judge Shareef, over a complaint filed against the judge last year.

That decision came hours after the High Court temporarily halting the hearings of a case against the JSC lodged by former President Nasheed – who has accused the judicial watch-dog of exceeding its mandate in appointing the three-member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court currently hearing a criminal case against him.

According to the JSC Chair, the suspension of Chief Judge Shareef – who is among the three judges presiding over the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed’s case – was a “precautionary” measure while investigation of the complaint was proceeding.

Judge Shareef in the new Civil Court lawsuit against the JSC will be represented by former Attorney General and veteran lawyer Husnu Al Suood and his law firm, Suood, Anwar and Co.

Briefing the media about the court case which is set to be filed on Sunday, Suood said that Chief Judge Shareef was suspended in contrast with the existing laws and the decision undermines the independence a Judge requires in executing his legal duties.

He said the Chief Judge’s team of counsels will plead in court that the decision by the JSC was an attempt to unduly exercise influence over judges.

He also added that once the case is registered at the Civil Court, a request will be made at the Supreme Court to take over the case, as has been the previous practice.

The Supreme Court previously took over the case filed at Civil Court by prominent lawyer Ismail Wisham against the JSC, challenging the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Magistrate Court it created.

The case was also represented by Suood, which eventually led to the Supreme Court endorsing the legitimacy of the controversial court in a 4 to 3 majority decision in which Chair of JSC and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed cast the controversial deciding vote, despite initial pleas against the judge sitting on the bench by Suood on the ground of ‘presumption of bias’.

“Not a small thing”

Speaking of the JSC’s decision, Suood – who is also the President of Maldives Bar Association – said the suspension coming after the JSC sitting’s on the case for a year was “not a small thing”.

“That is not a small thing when you get a suspension after one year. Suspending a country’s Chief Judge of High Court is not a small thing,” he said.

JSC Chair Adam Mohamed has meanwhile said “there are no legal grounds to stop looking into a complaint submitted [to the commission] or halt proceedings”.

According to local media reports, the call for an indefinite suspension of the Chief Judge was proposed to the JSC by the incumbent Attorney General Aishath Bisham – who is yet to receive parliament’s consent following her appointment – and was passed by the vote of three members out of the 10-member commission.

Those who voted in favour included two representatives of the executive branch, the attorney general herself, the President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s representive Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem, and a third vote by Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi.

The public’s member to the JSC Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman opposed the motion while lawyers’ eepresentative Ahmed Rasheed and Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan abstained. High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed did not participate in the vote.

Both the Speaker of parliament Abdulla Shahid and Parliament’s representee to the commission MP Gasim Ibrahim did not attend the meeting.

Politically motivated and influenced

Suood said the JSC’s passing of a motion to suspend the judge with a vote of just three members – two of whom represented the executive – lead to presumption that the vote had been influenced.

He said that such a grave motion being passed by the support of just three members also led to the belief that the JSC was seeking to undermine the independence of the judges.

“There is reason to believe this decision had political motives behind it,” said the veteran lawyer.

Suood further said the decision could also be perceived as a way to prevent a further delay of the case filed by Nasheed, who is contesting the legality of the three-member judges panel appointed to Hulhumale Magistrate Court by the JSC.

“The JSC is one party to the ongoing High Court case of which Chief Judge Shareef is among the judges who presiding over the case. It is wrong in every aspect for JSC to take action against the judge,” he said. “Due to such actions, public confidence in state institutions is being lowered day by day.”

“Entire judiciary under the influence of retired Supreme Court Judge Mujthaaz Fahmy” – Suood

Suood also alleged that two parliament members and a retired Supreme Court judge have long been influencing the work of judges and their verdicts on several cases.

Suood claimed that the presidential candidate for the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, the Deputy Speaker of Parliament and PPM MP Ahmed Nazim, and retired Supreme Court Judge Mujthaz Fahmy have long been in the business of influencing the judges and the verdicts they had been issuing.

He further contested that his allegations were based on evidence, and said he would do everything possible to make the judiciary free from such undue influences.

“The entire judiciary is under the influence of [retired Supreme Court Judge] Mujthaaz Fahmy ,” he alleged.

Suood further alleged that Deputy Speaker Nazim had close ties with members of the JSC, and said several judges had told him that Yameen Abdul Gayoom – half brother of  former President of 30 years, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – had on several occasions given instructions to the judges over the phone as to how their sentences should be phrased.

Despite claiming to have strong evidence to support his allegations, Suood admitted that it would be extremely difficult for the authorities to take action against the three individuals.

JSC juggling judges to appease politicians

Suood further contended that the JSC had been taken over “dark powers”, and that it was fully under the control of certain political figures.

He alleged that in a bid to serve the interests of a few politicians, the JSC was planning to juggle judges from court to court and even had planned to give salary increments to certain judges.

Among the planned switches, Suood claimed that Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed – who was taken into military detention during former President Nasheed’s administration over allegations of gross judicial misconduct – is set to be transferred to Civil Court, while JSC member and Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi will become the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court.

Among other changes, Suood claimed that JSC had been working to transfer the two “best serving” Civil Court Judges – Judge Aisha Sujoon and Judge Mariyam Nihayath to the Drug Court.

“These things are carried out under a great plan. They are installing judges to courts as they please,” Suood said.

Denial

All the three individuals accused by Suood have dismissed the allegations in responses given to local media.

Speaking at a membership event held in PPM’s headquarters on Friday night, PPM’s presidential hopeful Yameen Abdul Gayoom denied the allegations, describing them as an “outright lie”.

“The JSC is taking action against a judge. They don’t have judges sitting on the JSC. Therefore I do not believe anyone can influence the JSC,” Yameen said.

He further expressed his frustration over the allegations claiming that it had become common for people to make erroneous and slanderous remarks against political figures.

“This would not have happened if defamation had been kept as a criminal offence. All this is happening because defamation has now been changed to a civil wrong,” he said.

He further said that even though he did not influence judges and their work, he admitted to speaking about lapses within the judiciary and the delaying of cases on public forums.

“It would be better for Suood to stop making such irresponsible comments and focus on working for his clients,” Yameen responded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC suspends Chief Judge hours after High Court postpones case against JSC

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has announced that the High Court has temporarily suspended the hearings of the case against Judicial Service Commission (JSC) filed by the party’s presidential candidate, former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Nasheed is challenging the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of the three-member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court to hear Nasheed’s criminal trial.

The party’s remarks come just a day after High Court cancelled a hearing of the case in which local media reported that the court was to decide on counter-procedural issues taken by JSC. The JSC has contended that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to look into a matter.

Member of Nasheed’s legal team, Hassan Latheef, told Minivan News on Wednesday that the hearing was cancelled after the judge who was presiding over the case opted to “take leave” for the day.

However, shortly after the cancellation, the JSC declared that the commission had indefinitely suspended the Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef – who also happened to be among the judges presiding over Nasheed’s case against the JSC.

JSC Chair and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla insisted at a press conference yesterday that the disciplinary action had no relation to the former president’s case.

In a press conference held today at the party headquarters, Vice Chairperson of MDP Ali Shiyam said the party saw the High Court’s decision to withhold the hearings until next July as an encouragement for Nasheed and the party to continue its nation-wide presidential campaigning.

Shiyam added that if no further disruptions came from the courts, it would mean an additional strength to the party in their bid to secure the presidential elections in the first round. Shiyam also described the move as an end to the obstructions leveled against Nasheed by the courts and the judiciary.

“President [Nasheed] will not have to halt the campaign and come to Male to appear before the court. That is a new strength, a new encouragement to our campaign,” Shiyam said.

Meanwhile, another member of Nasheed’s legal team, Hisaan Hussain, tweeted that despite the indefinite suspension of Judge Shareef, neither the JSC nor the acting chief judge appointed to fill the vacancy of Judge Shareef would be allowed to reshuffle the judges presiding over the case.

Speaking to Minivan News, MDP Spokesperson MP Imthiyaz Fahmy said the move to hold the hearings was also an assurance to the public and the international community that former President Nasheed would be able to take part in the elections, as was unlikely that Nasheed would be given a criminal sentence.

He added that the party were facing a lot of challenges compared to other political parties who are also campaigning for the election.

“Because of the ongoing case concerning President Nasheed, the party has had to spend equal time and resources on its legal battles while running a nation wide presidential campaign. The MDP is battling with everything including the judiciary, the Prosecutor General and all the injustices faced by ordinary people,” he said.

Fahmy further added that the previous scheduling of Nasheed’s cases and sudden cancellations resulted in severe financial losses to the party, as each campaign event is organised by the hard work of party members across the country.

However, Fahmy also echoed Shiyam’s statement that the suspension of the case marked the end of Nasheed’s legal battle, stating that the High Court’s decision would allow the party to focus its energy on campaigning rather than winning court battles.

The Hulhumle-based magistrate court is currently hearing the case against the former President over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed by the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) during the last days of his presidency.

During the first trials of the hearing, Nasheed’s legal team contested the legitimacy of the magistrate court.

However, in a Civil Court case filed by lawyer Ismail Wisham, which was subsequently taken over by Supreme Court – and to which Nasheed’s legal team also intervened – endorsed the legitimacy of the much-debated Hulhumale Magistrate court.

As soon as the trials resumed, Nasheed’s legal team challenged the legitimacy of the appointment of the three-member judges panel to the magistrate court. The former president’s counsel is arguing that appointing judges to specific cases was not the JSC’s responsibility, but that of the chief judges of respective courts.

Minivan News contacted a High Court media official but was told the court had no comment on the case.

JSC suspends High Court Judge, appoints acting replacement

The JSC has meanwhile appointed Judge Abdul Rauoof Ibrahim as acting Chief Judge of High Court until the JSC concludes its inquiry into complaints filed against the suspended Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef.

Speaking to Minivan News, JSC Media Official Hassan Zaheen confirmed the appointment and said that Judge Abdul Rauoof would be in charge of running the High Court until the JSC concludes its inquiry.

The JSC on Wednesday issued Judge Shareef an ‘indefinite suspension’ following a complaint filed by the remaining judges of the court against him during last year.

The ruling came hours after the High Court suspended hearings against the former President.

A similar case was lodged last April in which eight judges of the High Court’s nine-member bench lodged a case with the JSC against Chief Judge Shareef, for suspending the Hulhumale Magistrate Court’s trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed without registering the case in court.

The suspension coincided with the cancellation of a hearing of a High Court’s case in which Nasheed challenged the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of the three member panel of judges to Hulhumale Magistrate Court.

High Court Chief Judge Shareef was summoned to the JSC earlier this month, almost a year after the complaint was lodged.

According to local media reports, the decision was approved at a JSC meeting today with three votes in favour and one against. Attorney General Aishath Bisham, President’s Member Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem and Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi voted in favour while Public Member Shuaib Abdul Rahman voted against the motion.

Lawyers’ representative Ahmed Rasheed and Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan reportedly abstained while High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed did not participate in the vote.

Speaker Abdulla Shahid and Majlis Member MP Gasim Ibrahim did not attend the meeting.

Shuaib told private broadcaster Raajje TV following the meeting that the decision was made in violation of due process and JSC procedures as a report regarding the allegations against the chief judge was not presented to the commission members.

The motion or petition to suspend Shareef was proposed by Attorney General Bisham, who is yet to receive parliamentary consent for her appointment.

Meanwhile, at the press conference this evening, Justice Adam Mohamed refused to reveal either the details of the vote or the members in attendance despite repeated queries from reporters.

He also refused to state which High Court judge would take over the chief judge’s administrative functions.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) – of which Nasheed is the presidential candidate – described the actions by the JSC as attempts to influence the case filed by Nasheed against the JSC.

“We condemn the actions of the Maldivian courts, which violate the electoral rights of nearly 50,000 Maldivian Democratic Party members. The disruption to President Nasheed’s campaign trip to Raa atoll is an unnecessary, politically motivated challenge,” the party contended yesterday.

“The JSC continues to try and cover up the unconstitutional manner in which they appointed the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court bench through attempts at influencing the judiciary, while the Courts create logistical challenges such as today’s.  However, it does not stop affect the spirit of President Nasheed’s campaign,” said MP Mariya Ahmed Didi.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)