Tag: Former President Nasheed

Judge Abdulla suspected of involvement in “contract killing,” says Nasheed

Police suspected Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s involvement in a “contract killing” after he released a murder suspect, alleges the closing statement prepared by former President Mohamed Nasheed for his trial on terrorism charges.

The office of the former president released the statement (Dhivehi) yesterday, noting that Nasheed was unable to complete it ahead of the final hearing on Friday (March 13), where he was found guilty of ordering the arrest of Judge Abdulla in January 2012 and sentenced to 13 years in prison.

Nasheed stated that he had been “continuously receiving complaints” regarding the chief judge from both his home minister and the commissioner of police.

“The latest incident I was informed of was a very tragic incident. It was reported that after Judge Abdulla released a murder suspect from detention, claiming the hospital had not submitted a document related to the case, the man went on to commit another murder,” Nasheed stated.

“Both the police and home minister characterised the incident as a direct contract killing.”

Nasheed alleged that the role assigned for Judge Abdulla under the contract was releasing the murder suspect.

“While other murder suspects are kept in detention until the conclusion of trial, the police institution believed the suspect in this case was released for that purpose and informed me thus,” the statement added.

“Contract killing”

The alleged “contract killing” Nasheed referred to involved Ibrahim Shahum Adam, who was released by Judge Abdulla on February 17, 2011 to “hold the health minister accountable” for the government-run Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital’s failure to provide a medical report to the police.

Shahum was brought before the judge for extension of remand detention.

Following his release in February 2011, Shahum allegedly stabbed 21-year-old Ahusan Basheer to death on March 16. Police launched a manhunt the following day and took him into custody from an uninhabited island.

Shahum had been arrested in August 2010 for the murder of 17-year-old Mohamed Hussain in Malé. In March 2013, he was found guilty of the murder and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

In October last year, Shahum escaped from Maafushi jail along with another convict and was apprehended from a guesthouse in Malé six days later.

The Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) advised MPs to stay in at night following the jailbreak.

The following month, the Criminal Court found Shahum not guilty of murdering Ahusan Basheer.

Delivering the verdict on November 20, Judge Abdulla Didi – who also presided over Nasheed’s terrorism trial – stated that Islamic Sharia requires the eyewitness testimony of two males to prove guilt in murder cases.

The state had presented one eyewitnesses to the assault and three witnesses who claimed to have heard the victim saying before he died that Shahum stabbed him.

“National security threat”

In July 2010, then-deputy police commissioner accused the chief judge of obstructing “high-profile corruption investigations” after Judge Abdulla suspended two police lawyers on “ethical grounds.”

After Judge Abdulla was taken into military custody on January 16, 2012, then-Home Minister Hassan Afeef said the chief judge was deemed a national security threat and listed 14 cases of obstruction of justice, including shielding officials of the former regime from human rights and corruption cases.

Afeef contended that the chief judge had taken “the entire criminal justice system in his fist” and alleged that the judge actively undermined cases against drug trafficking suspects and had allowed them opportunity to “fabricate false evidence after hearings had concluded”.

In his closing statement, Nasheed said he asked the police to investigate the chief judge in accordance with the law.

“After the police failed to summon Judge Abdulla for questioning, and after continuing the investigation as far as possible without questioning him, police found that Judge Abdulla constituted a threat to national security,” Nasheed explained.

“When informed of this, I ordered the home minister to take all measures necessary to safeguard the nation from this threat. I did not give directions at any time to any party, to complete a specific task in a specific manner or to take any specific measures.”

Nasheed insisted that he never ordered the police or military to arrest the judge and hold him under military custody, noting that none of the prosecution witnesses testified to any such verbal or written order.

On the day of his arrest, police summoned the chief judge for questioning. However, the High Court quashed the summons in an unprecedented move after Judge Abdulla challenged its legality.

Nasheed also referred to numerous complaints against the chief judge submitted to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), which in November 2011 found him guilty of ethical misconduct after he made political statements in the media.

However, the Civil Court issued a stay order halting disciplinary action against the judge by the judicial watchdog or oversight body.

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed found guilty of terrorism, sentenced to 13 years in prison

Nasheed denies ordering Judge Abdulla arrest, granted three days to answer charges

Chief Judge “took entire criminal justice system in his fist”: Afeef

Failure of judiciary, JSC and parliament justified detention of Abdulla Mohamed, contends Velezinee in new book

Civil Court dismisses ruling of own watchdog body against Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

India, UK politicians continue to voice concern over Nasheed’s imprisonment

Politicians from the United Kingdom and India this week continued to voice concerns over former President Mohamed Nasheed’s 13 year jail term for terrorism offences.

“We have a number of serious concerns about increasing political tensions in the Maldives and the arrest of former President Nasheed,” Minister of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Hugo Swire told parliament this week.

Meanwhile, Indian diplomats have called the trial a foregone conclusion, while the French government has added its voice to growing international concern over the trial.

On March 16, UK Conservative Party MP Geoffrey Clifton-Brown questioned Swire about discussions held with Maldives foreign minister Dunya Maumoon regarding Nasheed’s rushed trial.

In response, Swire said the trial was not conducted in “accordance with due legal procedure.”

“Despite calls from the international community for due process to be followed, we are concerned that the former President’s trial has not been conducted in a transparent and impartial manner nor in accordance with due legal process,” he added.

Last week, Lord Alton of Liverpool asked the UK government for its assessment of the Criminal Court’s decision to deny Nasheed rights of appeal in relation to his initial arrest, and asked what discussions had taken place with the Commonwealth over the rule of law in the Maldives.

Conservative peer Baroness Joyce Anelay referred to Swire’s statements expressing concern over irregularities in Nasheed’s trial, saying the UK continues to monitor the situation closely.

“It is important for international confidence in Maldives that Mr Nasheed, like all other citizens, is seen to be enjoying due legal process and respect for his fundamental rights,” she said.

International concern grows

Nasheed was charged with terrorism over the military’s detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012. The Criminal Court’s refusal to allow Nasheed legal counsel, adequate time to prepare defence, or to hear defence witnesses has caused international concern.

The United States, United Kingdom, and the European Union expressed concern with the lack of due process, while Amnesty International has said Nasheed’s conviction “after a deeply flawed and politically motivated trial is a travesty of justice.”

The French Embassy for Sri Lanka and the Maldives has been the latest to join the increasing international chorus of concern.

“France wishes to reiterate the importance of the right to a fair trial, which is a founding principle of democracy. We call on the Maldivian government to stand by its international commitments in this field,” a statement issued on Wednesday read.

Meanwhile, several Indian Diplomats told India’s Economic Times that the outcome of the trial had been a foregone conclusion, with the verdict written long before Nasheed was arrested and charged with terrorism.

“Every hearing at the court has been a blow to the rule of law,” said an unnamed Indian official.

“It is apparent that Yameen’s government, despite being seen as strong and stable, has seeds of instability within itself due to Yameen’s narrow outlook which has led to sustained efforts on the part of his coterie to neutralize other potential power centres and prospective threats,” the official said.

Government defends trial

Foreign minister Dunya Maumoon, at a press conference in Colombo on Monday (March 16), called upon India and Sri Lanka to defend the Maldives from “unjust criticism” from the international community.

Dunya and Attorney General Mohamed Anil maintained the trial was fair and just, insisting that the government does not interfere with the judiciary.

Arresting Judge Abdulla was a “serious crime,” Dunya said.

“We feel, that some people are a lot stricter on us because we are a small nation,” said Dunya. “There are countries with bigger issues than the Maldives.”

Dunya has previously condemned international statements of concern, stating: “Those who prefer to issue public statements about an on-going legal case, or on a domestic political situation, are advised to do a basic fact-check, before bandwagoning on to accusations made by a political party.”

In a statement issued last week, Dunya said that President Abdulla Yameen’s administration “will not take instructions from a foreign government on any issue in governing the country.”

President Abdulla Yameen has meanwhile called on all parties to respect the Criminal Court’s verdict.

In a statement released by the President’s Office on Sunday (March 15), President Yameen noted that the opposition leader has “a constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal” to challenge his conviction on terrorism charges at the High Court.

The Human Rights Commission of Maldives said the former president was denied fundamental rights that guarantee a fair trial in line with the Maldives’ obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Moreover, human rights NGO Maldivian Democracy Network urged the UN apecial rapporteur on the independence of judges to intervene in order to prevent a “slide back to autocracy,” whilst Transparency Maldives expressed “grave concern”, stressing that Nasheed was denied legal representation, the right to appeal, and sufficient time to mount a defence.

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed found guilty of terrorism, sentenced to 13 years in prison

“This is not a court of law. This is injustice,” Nasheed tells the Criminal Court

US, EU, and UK concerned over lack of due process in Nasheed trial

Foreigners cannot meddle in domestic affairs, declares President Yameen

Global change makers demand a fair trial for Nasheed

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Artists protest exclusion of Nasheed paintings from Minivan50 exhibition

A group of local artists staged a protest at the national art gallery today over the exclusion of paintings depicting former President Mohamed Nasheed from an exhibition organised by the education ministry.

The exhibition, launched yesterday, featured artwork and handicraft by students from 32 schools as part of events planned by the government to mark the upcoming golden jubilee of the country’s independence.

“Nasheed is said to be the Mandela of the Indian Ocean and I personally have a lot of respect for him. That is why I chose to paint him,” 18-year-old Mohamed Raaif told Minivan News today.

The Maldives National University student explained that his painting was initially put up, but he later discovered that it had been removed.

Raif MDP painting
Mohamed Raaif

Raaif said a teacher told him that the organisers claimed his painting  was of “a terrorist” and could not be displayed.

The opposition leader was found guilty of terrorism on Friday night (March 13) and sentenced to 13 years in prison over the military’s detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Education ministry officials in charge of organising the exhibition could not be reached at the time of publication.

A second painting by a student featuring the former president was also removed.

However, artwork featuring other politicians with blurred faces were displayed at the exhibition.

Raaif said he spent three days working on the painting and had stayed up all night to complete it. He said he was hoping to raise funds for his mother’s backbone surgery as the family was currently facing financial constraints.

He added that he did not have any intention of politicising the painting. However, Raaif said he associated the theme of the exhibition – freedom or independence – with former President Nasheed.

“Not free yet”

Online news outlet CNM reported that the second banned painting of Nasheed was from a grade ten student at the Addu20482_941120079255989_6670794182747816048_n City Feydhoo School.

“That photo is of a terrorist. Photos of terrorists cannot be promoted,” organisers allegedly said, according to an anonymous source.

Meanwhile, a group of about 30 people, including several artists, staged a silent protest inside the art gallery today, mingling with members of the public and holding up prints of the banned Nasheed paintings.

The exhibition was open to the public with free entrance.

The protesters also carried placards calling for freedom of expression and assembly as guaranteed by the constitution and stuck posters on the gallery walls that read, “Not free yet!” and “Minimum 50 years in prison.”

“The function of freedom is to free someone else,” read one of the posters, quoting Chinese dissident and Nobel laureate, Ai Weiwei.

“The work of art was a scream for freedom. Minivan [independent] 50 has not reached us yet!” read one of the placards held up by a protester.

An artist at today’s protest, Kareen Adam, told Minivan News: “The state cannot dictate to us what we can paint, draw, write or think etc. They should have called this exhibition ‘freedom within boundaries’ instead.”

Others artists said the organisers were sending a negative message to youth by banning the paintings of Nasheed, stating that former President Nasheed was an ineradicable part of recent Maldivian history.

Around 4:30pm – half an hour after the exhibition opened for the day – protesters told Minivan News that police asked them to leave as organisers had said the art gallery was closing.

A group led by Youth Ministry Coordinator Ali ‘Steps Ayya’ Shahid meanwhile arrived and began tearing down the material pasted on the walls.

“We will not keep paintings of terrorists,” one of the men allegedly said.

Protesters said the men tore down the paintings and ripped up the posters as police officers watched impassively.

A police officer was also photographed ripping a poster.

Steps Ayya Art Gallery protest
Youth Ministry Coordinator Steps Ayya. Photo by: Munshid Mohamed

 

Police told the protesters that the men had clearance to enter the gallery as they had passes of government coordinators.

One of the protesters took a photograph of the men and was allegedly pushed away.

The men also pushed out the protesters from the gallery. Protesters who spoke to Minivan News asked not to be named as they feared becoming targeted and said they did not have confidence that police would provide protection.

 

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed found guilty of terrorism, sentenced to 13 years in prison

Government will ensure Nasheed’s right to appeal conviction, says spokesperson

Respect Criminal Court verdict, says President Yameen

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM condemns statement by British MP Fiona Bruce

The ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has condemned a statement issued by British MP Fiona Bruce, chairperson of the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission, in which she urged the international community to consider imposing sanctions on senior Maldivian government officials.

Bruce had called the terrorism trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed a “grotesque travesty of justice.”

Referring to Bruce calling Nasheed “a champion of non-violent, peaceful democracy,” the PPM claimed in a statement released in English last week that the former president had “resorted to violent, unlawful, unconstitutional and undemocratic methods during his regime from 2008 to 2012, including the unlawful ‘abduction and isolation’ of the Criminal Court Chief Judge in 2012.”

“We are further baffled by her baseless allegation that Nasheed was ‘physically mistreated while in custody,'” the statement read.

“We would like to emphasise that he has been fully accorded his rights in line with the constitution and the laws of the Maldives.

“If Chairperson Bruce wants to adhere to her unfounded accusations, we urge her to show proof of any ‘physical mistreatment’ of Nasheed while in custody, not ‘bandwagon’ without basic ‘fact checks.’ We also wish to tell her that, according to the constitution, the government cannot drop the charges against Nasheed, or anyone else.”

The statement added that Nasheed had succeeded former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – the PPM’s leader – “who had ushered in modern liberal democracy in the Maldives, in addition to transforming the country from one of the poorest five countries in the world to a flourishing economy with the highest per capita income in the whole of South Asia.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government will ensure Nasheed’s right to appeal conviction, says spokesperson

The government will ensure former President Mohamed Nasheed’s right to appeal his conviction on terrorism charges if he believes the Criminal Court did not follow due process, President’s Office Spokesperson Ibrahim Muaz Ali has said.

The opposition leader was sentenced to 13 years in jail last night for ordering the arrest of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in 2012.

“I believe the Criminal Court would have afforded due process in the conduct of Nasheed’s trial. If you study this case, from the beginning to the end, it is clear the charges are not politically motivated,” Muaz said.

“Nasheed can still appeal at High Court.”

The government has no power over the courts, he added.

“We have a system of separation of powers. In a democracy, the head of state does not interfere in judicial proceedings and is not to blame for court proceedings,” Muaz said.

“Political leaders in other countries, such as Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka, have been summoned and tried in court as well.”

Delivering the guilty verdict last night, Judge Abdulla Didi said the prosecution’s evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that Nasheed as commander-in-chief ordered the arrest or “forceful abduction” of Judge Abdulla.

Reacting to Nasheed’s conviction, the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP “Ibu” Mohamed Solih said today the party would not be disheartened by President Abdulla Yameen’s alleged attempts to imprison his opponents.

“President Yameen is trying to jail his opponents before the next election. But even though Nasheed is convicted he still is the leader of MDP and he will contest in the 2018 presidential elections,” Ibu said on opposition-aligned Raajje TV.

However, Muaz denied that the president wished to prevent political rivals from contesting the 2018 election.

“President Yameen does not want to jail opposition politicians or plunge the country into civil unrest. He has an economic agenda. We respect the court’s verdict.”

Addressing the party’s supporters alongside the parliamentary group leader on Raajje TV, MDP Chairperson Ali Waheed meanwhile said the party would do everything in its power to free Nasheed.

“Our main work from now on will be to free President Nasheed. He will come back. So meanwhile stay united, don’t lose hope and pray for him,” Waheed said.

Following Nasheed’s arrest on February 22, MDP supporters have protested every night calling for his release.

Muaz said the government would allow the public to peacefully express their views, but stressed that protests should take place within bounds of the law.

“But we will not allow unrest in the country. Our aim is to establish peace and order in the country. We welcome freedom of expression and assembly, but they must be practiced within the bounds of the constitution. Our appeal to the public is not to disrupt public order,” he said.

“Injustice”

Nasheed was charged with “enforced disappearance” under the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1990, which carries a jail term of between 10 to 15 years.

Prior to a hearing on March 9, all four of Nasheed’s lawyers quit in protest of the Criminal Court’s refusal to grant sufficient time to examine the prosecution’s evidence and mount a defence.

The presiding judges had denied the lawyers’ request for adequate time, stating the legal team has had the case documents for three years.

Nasheed was first charged in 2012 with arbitrary detention under article 81 of the penal code, which carries either banishment or a jail term of up to three years.

On February 15, Prosecutor General Muhthaz Muhsin withdrew the charges filed at the Hulhumalé Magistrate Court. Nasheed was arrested on February 22 shortly after the PG filed terrorism charges at the Criminal Court.

Meanwhile prominent figures from both the international community and within the country have condemned the Criminal Courts verdict.

Husnu Suood, former judge and Attorney General – who was also a senior member of the team which drafted the anti-terrorism law in 1990 – tweeted: “Mohamed Nasheed is not a terrorist. Whatever act he did was certainly not terrorism. The charge not suitable, the trial was flawed.”

Deputy Attorney General Ahmed Usham also questioned Criminal Courts decision to jail Nasheed.

“Infringing the rights of one person in the name of giving justice to another person is in itself an injustice,” Usham wrote on his Facebook page.

MP Ahmed Mahloof, who was expelled from the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) recently after he criticized President Yameen, tweeted: “21 days for Judge Abdulla, 4745 days for President Nasheed. Is this what they call justice? Why not jail all opposition leaders and rule the country.”

Adhaalath Party President Sheikh Imran Abdulla – who played a pivotal role in the 2012 protests against Nasheed’s administration – tweeted: “Nasheed’s trial was not conducted justly.”

 

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed found guilty of terrorism, sentenced to 13 years in prison

Nasheed trial “not free or fair,” says Maldivian Democracy Network

Foreigners cannot meddle in domestic affairs, declares President Yameen

PPM accuses international community of “double standards and hypocrisy” in Nasheed’s trial

“This is not a court of law. This is injustice,” Nasheed tells the Criminal Court

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed found guilty of terrorism, sentenced to 13 years in prison

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has been found guilty of terrorism and sentenced to 13 years in prison for the military’s detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Delivering the verdict at the final hearing of the trial tonight, Judge Abdulla Didi said the prosecution’s evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that Nasheed ordered the chief judge’s arrest or “forceful abduction.”

Nasheed was the “architect” of the “atrocity,” Judge Didi said.

The chief judge’s detention on Girifushi Island was unlawful and unconstitutional, he continued, noting that the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) defied orders from the Criminal Court, High Court and Supreme Court to release the judge.

Judge Didi also said the former president has a criminal record for theft, terrorism, false testimony and disobedience to orders.

While state prosecutors presented closing arguments tonights, Nasheed asked for 20 days to prepare his closing statement, stating he was unable to communicate with lawyers and examine evidence while incarcerated at Dhoonidhoo detention centre.

The former president asked to be transferred to Malé for better access to his lawyers.

He also objected to the hearing taking place on a Friday, noting that it was a public holiday where Muslims were enjoined to worship and spend time with family.

Tonight’s hearing was scheduled to begin at 8:30pm, but started around 9:15pm. After closing arguments, the judges adjourned proceedings and reconvened around 11:00pm.

Nasheed was smiling when the verdict was read out and shook hands with three of his family members while he was escorted out.

The opposition leader’s lawyers have said they intend to appeal the verdict at the High Court. If the lower court ruling is upheld by both the High Court and Supreme Court, Nasheed would not be able to contest the 2018 presidential election.

Home Minister Umar Naseer meanwhile tweeted saying he has “asked police to hold [President] Nasheed in Dhoonidhoo Detention Centre until a special unit is constructed in Maafushi Prison.”

Nasheed was charged with “enforced disappearance” under the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1990, which carries a jail term of between 10 to 15 years.

Prior to a hearing on March 9, all four of Nasheed’s lawyers quit in protest of the Criminal Court’s refusal to grant sufficient time to examine the prosecution’s evidence and mount a defence.

The presiding judges had denied the lawyers’ request for adequate time, stating the legal team has had the case documents for three years.

Judges also insisted in tonight’s verdict that Nasheed was offered both enough time to prepare his defence and access to lawyers, claiming he refused the opportunity to appoint new lawyers.

Nasheed was first charged in 2012 with arbitrary detention under article 81 of the penal code, which carries either banishment or a jail term of up to three years.

On February 15, Prosecutor General Muhthaz Muhsin withdrew the charges filed at the Hulhumalé Magistrate Court. Nasheed was arrested on February 22 shortly after the PG filed terrorism charges at the Criminal Court.

At the previous hearing, Judges Didi, Abdul Bari Yousuf, and Shujau Usman dismissed the opposition leader’s repeated requests for legal representation. The judges also refused to hear defence witnesses, claiming they could not negate the prosecution’s evidence or witness testimony.

“I want a lawyer. This is not a court of law. This is injustice. This is the biggest circus this country has seen in its constitutional history,” Nasheed said.

Sit-in

Continuing its daily protests since Nasheed’s arrest, the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) began a march at the ‘Usfasgandu’ area of Malé around 4:30pm today with thousands of supporters.

After walking down Majeedhee Magu, protesters split into two groups and staged a sit-down behind police barricades at Orchid Magu and Fareedhee Magu. Both roads lead to the Criminal Court building.

bacc78bf7f793f202624dbed3f21de0f63e68a718bd4d0db8798067f3bf13b4f

Police escorted Nasheed to court around 8:00pm for the last hearing of his trial. The opposition leader attempted to talk to journalists assembled outside the building, but was blocked by police.

Nasheed told the journalists to “stay strong.”

Around 8:40pm, according to a live blog on the police website, police said the Criminal Court complained to police of loud noise from loudspeakers on a pickup used by the protesters.

Police said protesters were repeatedly advised to turn down the volume, but refused to comply.

Specialist Operations (SO) officers confiscated the loudspeakers after “giving a last warning.”

Moreover, police said protesters threw objects at riot police and “some people who obstructed police duty were taken into police custody.”

A Minivan News journalist near the Salsa restaurant on Orchid Magu observed police using pepper spray indiscriminately and arresting at least six protesters.

When SO officers pushed back protesters with their shields and attempted to take over the pickups, protesters threw bottles at the riot police.

Violent clashes erupted between SO officers and protesters.

One protester was seen bleeding from the head after the clashes. However, SO officers took the pickups away, pushed back protesters and withdrew behind barricades.

Meanwhile, a group of about five young men hurled crude oil at a protest pickup at Fareedhee Magu and vandalised equipment. Police have also confirmed the incident.

The five men were reportedly arrested at the scene.

Police also said a protester was taken to hospital after being pepper sprayed and released after treatment. Police did not specify the nature of the injury.

According to an update on the police blog at 11:40pm, two police officers were attacked near Salsa restaurant and their vehicle was damaged during the assault. A cameramen was also injured and protesters threw bottles at journalists, police said.

The sit-in protest was continuing at the time of publication.

Related to this story

Nasheed trial “not free or fair,” says Maldivian Democracy Network

“This is not a court of law. This is injustice,” Nasheed tells the Criminal Court

Nasheed’s lawyers quit

Nasheed’s lawyers stage no-show citing insufficient time for preparation

State prosecutors influencing witnesses, claim Nasheed’s lawyers

Chief of Defense Forces testifies in Nasheed, Tholhath terrorism trials

Nasheed contests credibility of police and military witnesses in terrorism trial

Judges Didi and Yoosuf refuse to step down from Nasheed’s terrorism trial

Nasheed denies ordering Judge Abdulla arrest, granted three days to answer charges

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

Nasheed denied right to appoint lawyer and appeal “arbitrary” arrest warrant, contend lawyers

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Indian Prime Minister Modi cancels Maldives trip

Indian Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has dropped the Maldives from an upcoming tour of Indian Ocean neighbours.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs announced in a statement yesterday that the prime minister would visit Seychelles, Mauritius and Sri Lanka from March 10 to 14, but gave no explanation for the omission of Maldives from the itinerary.

The cancellation comes amidst nightly anti-government protests and heightened tension sparked by the arrest and prosecution of former President Mohamed Nasheed on February 22.

The Maldives Foreign Ministry claimed in a statement yesterday that the prime minister’s visit “has been postponed to a later date by mutual agreement.”

“The dates for the visit were being discussed between the Maldives and India and both countries have decided to postpone the visit to a later date to give more time for both countries to prepare well for the visit. New dates will be announced once finalised between the two countries,” reads the statement.

President’s Office Spokesperson Ibrahim Muaz Ali insisted that there was “no connection between Nasheed’s trial” and the postponement.

However, President’s Office Minister Mohamed Hussain Shareef ‘Mundhu’ told the Associated Press (AP) that Maldives had been on Modi’s itinerary and the country had made extensive preparations for the maiden visit.

Mundhu said the Indian government informed the Maldives the visit was cancelled because the “local environment is not conducive.”

“He says India was not more specific,” AP reported.

Local media had reported last month that Modi was due to visit the Maldives on March 15 during the regional tour whilst Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon announced the trip following a meeting in New Delhi with External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has welcomed the prime minister’s decision, characterising the cancellation as “a clear sign of Prime Minister Modi’s commitment to democracy and stability in the Maldives.”

“The people of the Maldives will always welcome the Prime Minister of India to the Maldives. The MDP regrets the authoritarian actions and confrontational nature of President [Abdulla] Yameen that has resulted in the Indian PM Modi cancelling his first visit to the Maldives,” said Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor.

“The MDP has always believed in strong regional partnerships to ensure stability and security of the Indian Ocean. India has been our closest friend, and we hope that Yameen takes swift action to restore the Maldives-India relationship.”

Domestic issues

Indian media reported diplomatic sources as saying that the Indian government did not want to be seen “involved in domestic issues” of the Maldives.

“Sources said the government was taken by surprise over the treatment of former President Mohammad Nasheed, who was arrested and charged with treason and roughed up by the police on the way to court,” reported The Hindu newspaper.

A day after his arrest, Nasheed appeared in court for the first hearing of his trial on terrorism charges with his arm in a makeshift sling after police manhandled and dragged the opposition leader into the court building when he attempted to speak to reporters.

The incident prompted official spokesperson at the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, Syed Akbaruddin, to express concern over the developments, “including the arrest and manhandling of former President Nasheed,”

“But our concerns haven’t been heeded, and in this situation it makes little sense for the Prime Minister to visit,” a senior Indian official told The Telegraph.

“His trip would be pitched by the Male government as an endorsement of its policies.”

Shortly after Nasheed’s arrest on February 22, the Maldives foreign ministry tweeted: “The impending visit of PM Modi is a clear reflection of the warm friendship between India and President Yameen’s Government – FM Dunya.”

The Telegraph meanwhile quoted a second Indian official as suggesting a Chinese role in the recent developments.

“Without a concrete commitment from the Chinese, there is no way the Maldives would take on India the way they have,” the official was quoted as saying.

“I’m not saying the Chinese are orchestrating this, not at all, but the Maldives government is using China’s support to challenge us.”

Asked at a regular press conference on February 25 about China’s view on the situation, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Spokesperson Hong Lei said the issue was “a domestic matter of the Maldives.”

“China upholds the principle of non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. We believe the Maldivian side can deal with its domestic affairs properly,” he said.

Foreign Minister Dunya had meanwhile dismissed statements expressing concern with Nasheed’s prosecution by the Commonwealth, India, Canada, UN and the EU.

“The Government of President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom will not take instructions from a foreign government on any issue in governing the country,” she declared.

In his address to the nation on the occasion of Republic Day (November 11) last year, President Yameen slammed “Western colonial powers” and declared his administration was “looking East” towards China.

Related to this story:

Asking Maldives to abide by commitments “not undue interference,” says UK High Commissioner

EU, UN join international chorus of concern over Nasheed’s arrest, terrorism trial

Foreign Minister Dunya slams Canada, Commonwealth statements on Nasheed prosecution

Nasheed calls for Indian protection in state of emergency

Chinese documents show silk route was discussed with India: Foreign ministry

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“A brutal government will not last too long,” says Sheikh Imran

Adhaalath Party President Sheikh Imran Abdulla has said a “brutal government will not last for too long” in a tweet this morning.

The tweet follows a statement from the Adhaalath Party last night in which the party said its council has decided to “remain in the path of speaking the truth and calling on the government and state institutions to reform actions that are against the laws and regulations, as well as Islam.”

The party currently holds the Islamic Affairs portfolio in President Abdulla Yameen’s cabinet. The new statement appears to be an indication it might join the opposition Jumhooree Party (JP) and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) alliance.

Despite the Adhaalath Party’s reluctance, Sheikh Imran has been highly critical of President Yameen following the arrest of former Defense Minister Mohamed Nazim over a controversial weapons find at his apartment during a midnight police raid on January 18.

In an appearance on Villa TV on Tuesday night, Imran said it was time “for the people who value our nation’s freedom and peace to stand up for the country.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament accepts bill on discontinuing state benefits to convicted ex-presidents

The People’s Majlis today accepted for consideration an amendment submitted to the Privileges and Protection For Former President’s Act proposing discontinuation of state benefits for convicted ex-presidents.

The amendment bill proposed by government-aligned Maldives Development Alliance (MDA) MP Mohamed Ismail was accepted with 38 votes in favour and 11 against and sent to the Economic Affairs Committee for further review.

Opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs did not participate in the vote and gathered in front of the secretariat desk, blowing on whistles and calling for the release of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

While yesterday’s sitting was called off amidst opposition protests, Speaker Abdulla Maseeh Mohamed continued today’s sitting after the parliament cut off the live feed for television broadcasts.

In a video shared on Facebook by MDP MPs Rozaina Adam of the MPs’ protest, MDA MP Mohamed Ismail could be heard calling for Nasheed to be hanged.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)