Tag: gayoom

Z-DRP a campaign launched by Gayoom to win 2013 Presidential Elections, says party

The opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) has condemned former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom for causing the DRP to split in two.

In a statement, the party said that it was “very clear to the citizens” that Gayoom’s objective was to win the 2013 Presidential election despite his previous resignation from politics.

Gayoom’s actions had revealed that he would not hesitate to disunite the DRP to serve his political ambition.

‘’The picture we are seeing today is that individuals in the party are declining to follow the democratic decisions of the party and giving priority to their own personal interests,’’ the DRP said.

DRP Z-Faction MP Ahmed Nihan said he could not believe that DRP Leader Thasmeen Ali had issued such a statement against the party’s founder and ‘honorary leader’.

‘’Maumoon is the founder of the party and the party’s charter itself has given him an honorable position of the party,’’ Nihan said. ‘’He is not trying to win or run in the next presidential elections.’’

He said Gayoom himself gifted the leadership and the presidential ticket of DRP, as well as MPs and  supporters, to Thasmeen, but that Thasmeen had failed to handle them.

‘’As the honorary leader of the party it is the responsibility of Maumoon to solve internal disputes in the party,’’ he said. ‘’Imagine how it would feel to keep watching while someone else destroys something you created.’’

Nihan said Gayoom had recently tried many ways to solve the disputes inside the party.

‘’But [Thasmeen] has been very careless, not responding to any calls or replying to letters,’’ he said. ‘’Thasmeen has even violated the party’s charter,’’ he alleged.

He claimed that rather than being concerned about the internal dispute in the party, Thasmeen was more  concerned about the Z-faction using the party’s logo and color.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

DRP’s Thulusdhoo branch threatens to “shift sides” if internal dispute continues

The opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP)’s Thulusdhoo branch has released a statement to the media claiming that supporters of the DRP in Thulusdhoo will “shift sides” if the internal split in the party continues.

‘’We call on former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and DRP Zaeem (honorary leader) to solve the internal dispute within the party,’’ read the statement,signed by the Deputy Head of Thulusdhoo Branch.

The statement acknowledged that DRP supporters were “in turmoil and deeply confused due to the split” and warned that those supporters in Thulusdhoo might have to change sides if the dispute remained unresolved.

‘’The citizens can no longer tolerate watching members leave the party,’’ the DRP branch stated, in reference to the recent defections of several DRP MPs to the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), including Ali Waheed Abdulla Abdu-Raheem. ‘’Consequently it will the ordinary citizens living in the islands that will suffer, due to the unrest and loss of members.’’

The branch added ‘’that as Maumoon was the person who introduced democracy to the Maldives, who led the Maldives for 30 prosperous years and is a person who lives in a democracy, we call on Maumoon to solve the dispute between the leadership democratically.’’

Thulusdhoo is an island with a majority of DRP supporters who voted for the party in the recent local council elections.

Since then, the party has been split after ‘honorary’ leader Gayoom clashed with the party’s leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali over the dismissal of former Deputy Leader Umar Naseer. Gayoom’s supporters have since created a splinter faction they call the Z-DRP, in a move that prompted the defection of several MPs previously loyal to Thasmeen.

DRP MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom said the statement issued by Thulusdhoo’s DRP branch showed that the remaining supporters in the party wished it to be unified.

‘’To do that firstly, everyone in the party must fully respect the party’s charter,’’ Dr Mausoom said. ‘’There are different ways people express concern – some put more effort to solve the dispute, while others leave the party in frustration.’’

He said to uphold democracy in this country a strong, responsible opposition party was needed.

‘’The entire nation believes that the DRP is an opposition party which has to be there to uphold democracy,’’ he said. ‘’Although there are some internal disputes, we will solve them hopefully and by God’s will we will win the 2013 Presidential Elections under Thasmeen’s leadership.’’

Z-DRP spokesperson Ahmed Nihan was unavailable at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP will use majority to cut allowances granted to former President Gayoom, says Moosa

Maldivian Democratic Party (MD) Parliamentary Group Leader and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik has said that an MDP majority will cut allowances granted Maumoon Abdul Gayoom while the former president remains active in politics.

Moosa claimed that the opposition had used their majority to obstruct the government.

”All they did with their majority was increase the expenditure of the government to try an destabilise the economy, while granting allowances for Maumoon.” he said. ”The day that MDP has the full majority of 39 MPs in parliament, will be a day the judges and independent commissions will remember,” he said.

He recalled the day cabinet ministers were dismissed by the parliament after the opposition used its majority to refuse to approve the President’s ministerial appointments.

“That day MMA (Maldives Monetary Authority) Governor Fazeel Najeeb was far away clapping his hands, but I tell you now, when the parliament commences work it will the cabinet ministers who applaud.”

Moosa referred to the corruption allegations against the Deputy Speaker of Parliament and opposition coalition People’s Alliance (PA) MP Ahmed Nazim, claiming that ”Nazim cannot hide from the courts and sit in his chair anymore.”

Moosa said the MDP would give priority to passing the Criminal Procedure Bill, keeping the controversial Sunset Bill aside, and amend the Finance Bill.

Gayoom-faction MP Ahmed Nihan told Minivan News that MDP’s decision to cut the allowances of the former President it would not only harm Gayoom, but President Mohamed Nasheed as well.

”The allowances are granted according to Article 128 of the constitution, so protection and allowances for former Presidents should be granted,” Nihan said. ”That is something given for the hard work Presidents have done for the country and citizens during their time, and we also hope that President Nasheed will remain in the country to serve the people after his administration is over.”

Nihan speculated that the MDP was luring opposition MPs to join the party, seeking a parliamentary majority.

”All Maldivians know that Moosa has personal grudges against Maumoon,” he said. ”It is really an illness that he has, and he needs to find a cure.”

He alleged that Moosa had illegally obtained Rf21 million through a contract with the Thilafushi Corporation – a matter currently being investigated by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) – and questioned why “nobody talks about it today.”

”Moosa was once arrested and found guilty of corruption and imprisoned during Maumoon’s administration, but he wasn’t arrested for praying or reciting salawat, he was arrested on corruption charges for attempting to bribe MPs,” Nihan claimed.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Islam is for tolerance of the Other

It is disturbing and saddening to see that we dare to curtail basic human interests and entitlements of others that some of us take for granted.

What Islam stands for: According to Article 16 of the Madinah Charter (al-mithaq al-madinah) of 622 CE, social, legal and economic equality was promised to all loyal citizens of the state, including non-Muslims.

Similarly, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab’s Covenant following the Arab conquest of Jerusalem reads:

“[‘Umar ibn al-Khattab] has given [people of Jerusalem] assurance of safety for their lives and property, for their churches and their crosses, for their sick and their healthy, and for all the rituals of their religion.

Their churches shall not be used as dwellings, nor shall they be demolished and nothing shall be diminished…”

Now all this has basis in the Qur’anic injunction that “there is no compulsion in religion”. Have we then lost our humanity and humaneness?

It is hypocritical of us to ban and curtail such basic freedoms by saying that the Maldives is a ‘sattain satta muslim qaum’.

How we became ‘sattain satta muslim qaum’

It is true that we have a strong Islamo-nationalist identity. But we must know that identities are artificial and they are constructed through symbols and discourses.

Our national identity is a construction of a discourse largely engineered by President Gayoom.

President Amin may have been behind the initial promotion of nationalism. But his nationalism was not based on an exclusionist Islam. None of his national day statements that I have read promoted such an oppressive conception of of Islamo-nationalism.

The discourse of an exclusionist Islamo-nationalism is found in Gayoom’s speeches, writings and policies. In fact, according to Gayoom’s official biography, A Man for All Islands, Gayoom, from the beginning, ensured that an Islamo-nationalism was a priority of his regime.

Gayoom-controlled radio, TV, and the education system promoted and socialised us into this discourse of exclusionist Islamo-nationalism.

We may not readily realize that we are influenced by and socialized into this mythical discourse of Islamo-nationalism based on ‘sattain satta muslim qaum’. The power of this discourse is so perverse that even the most natural word association for ‘sattain satta’ probably is ‘muslim/Islami qaum’.

And all major oppressive measures in the country have been justified based on the discourse of ‘sattain satta muslim qaum’.

Thanks to the 30-year efforts of Gayoom, today our ‘imagined community’ is thoroughly based on an exclusionist and oppressive conception of Islam.

Islamo-nationalism’s oppressions

According to Daniel Brumberg, total autocracies such as Saudi Arabia spread the idea that the state’s mission is to defend the supposedly unified nature of the nation or the Islamic community.

Gayoom’s regime may not have been a total autocracy. But his stated political justification of the state was his mission of defending a unified community.

We must know that, just like his Arab counterparts, this was just a ploy for political control. Hence, any differences of views to that of his vision are taken as ‘anomalies’ or ‘deviations’ or ‘falsities’ threatening national unity.

Such people must be ‘rectified’, exiled, imprisoned, deported, tortured, or if need be exterminated. Exclusion or extermination can also find more poignant forms such as civil death or suicide.

Gayoom’s discourse of ‘sattain satta muslim qaum’ often oppressed two kinds of opponents: Islamiyyun such as Sheikh Hussain Rasheed Ahmed and non-religious challengers like current president Nasheed.

Islamiyyun were brandished as ‘Islam din rangalah nudanna meehun’. And non-religious political opponents were brandished as either ‘fundamentalists’ or ‘Christian missionaries’.

The outcomes of this oppressive Islamo-nationalist discourse are naturally not limited to Maldivians.

Hence the migrant workers in the Maldives also cannot practice their religions as respectable and equal human beings.

Undoing Islamo-nationalism

Identities cannot easily been undone. But it is not impossible to undo them. As an immediate step, the government must stop spreading Gayoom’s discourse of ‘sattain satta muslim qaum’.

Even the current government spreads the discourse that ‘Maldives is the only 100% Muslim liberal democracy’. While this discourse is presented often to the donors, this is just the same Gayoomist myth. We are neither 100% Muslim nor a liberal democracy.

We are still a borderline democracy according to comparative democratization research. The Freedom House still designates the Maldives as an ‘electoral democracy’, and our donors know this. Instead of promoting Gayoom’s discourse, we must acknowledge our oppressive laws, practices and attitudes, and try to change them.

Secondly, we need to create a Divehi equivalent for ‘tolerance’. Divehi word ‘tahammal’ or ‘kekkurun’ does not fully convey the meaning of the concept of tolerance. Tolerance means accepting people and permitting their differences and practices even when we personally strongly disapprove of them.

We may not want to become Buddhists or Hindus, nor may we approve of Buddhism or Hinduism. But we must accept the Buddhist and Hindu Sri Lankans or Indians in the Maldives and we must permit their religious practices.

Third, our education system must promote tolerance, mutual respect, and a critical-history of the country and Islam in general.

Textbooks must problematize the mythical narrations like Rannamari, which as Maloney said, served to render other historical events peripheral. Instead, the real age and images of Divehis must be re-taught.

The age of the Divehi is not 900 years, but more than 1500 years. The real Divehi is indeed indicative of a far richer adventurism, innovation, cultural practices, linguistic uniqueness, adaptability, and the sheer incredible strength of spirit and survivability in these lands against numerous odds, not least foreign interventions.

The real Divehi is indicative of an incredible story of inclusiveness, of co-existence of political exiles and immigrants from India or Sri Lanka. This Divehi story must be our discourse for re-doing our historical identity.

Gayoom’s mythical unity as found in the oppressive Religious Unity Act is not even our historical reality in the Muslim period. Maliki madhab was dominant until 1573, when Muhammad Jamal Din advocated Shafi’I madhab.

Thus, whether we approve of it or not, we have both intra-religious and inter-religious differences. There is no way to stop this diversity except through despotic oppression.

We cannot remain ignoring this reality and deluding ourselves into a utopian umma. We must embrace the ‘fact of pluralism’ and tolerance as basis of our new national identity.

That, after all, is also what Islam stands for.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former prisons chief interrogated after release of DPRS torture photos

Former Prisons Division Head with the Department of Penitentiary and Rehabilitation Serivces (DPRS) Isthafa Ibrahim Manik has been detained and questioned by police, after disturbing photographs of tortured victims in custody were obtained by the Presidential Commission and leaked to the media.

Manik remains in custody at Maafushi after the courts granted police a 15-day extension of detention.

The photos released so far include images of men tied to coconut palms, caged, and bloodied. One of the photos, of a prisoner lying on a blood-soaked mattress, has a 2001 date stamp.

A senior government official told Minivan News that the photos were obtained by the Commission from the DPRS itself on Monday, and that those released “are just the tip of the iceberg.”

Inspector of Police Abdulla Nawaz confirmed in a statement to the state broadcaster MNBC that the matter involved severe cases of torture and suspected fatalities, and had been passed to police.

“Former heads of the Prisons Division will be interrogated,” he said. “We will also question former ministers if it is believed that they were involved,” he added, claiming that police would withhold the identities of some of those summoned for questioning.

One of the pictures, reportedly obtained from the DPRS

National Security Advisor and former Defence Minister Ameen Faisal, a member of the Presidential Commission, told MNBC that prison records had revealed that inmates were punished without court order “and subjected to inhumane torture and ill-treatment.”

“This commission has received information that some inmates who were tortured ended up dead,” Faisal said.

Many members of the current government, including President Mohamed Nasheed and Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem, claim to have been tortured under the former administration.

“They were limited only by their imagination,” Naseem said, describing the describing the former government’s treatment of prisoners as “medieval”.

Gayoom’s spokesperson Mohamed Hussein ‘Mundhu’ Shareef told Haveeru that the government’s arrest of the former head of prisons was the “the third part of the drama” in a long-plotted lead up to the arrest of the former president.

“The attempt to arrest President Maumoon will only boost his profile. We see this simply as the government’s attempt to divert the people’s attention from the dollar crisis and rising commodity prices,” Shareef told Haveeru.

The Presidential Commission has previously summoned Gayoom, who refused to appear.

In October 2010, President Nasheed’s high profile support of elderly historian Ahmed Shafeeq, who has alleged that 111 people died in custody under the former administration and that he himself had been arrested and his diaries destroyed, prompted Gayoom to write to the British Prime Minister David Cameron.

In the letter, Gayoom appealed for pressure to be placed on President Mohamed Nasheed following “the escalation of attempts to harass and intimidate me and my family.”

The matter, he told the British PM, involved “unsubstantiated allegations by an elderly man by the name of Ahmed Shafeeq that I had, during my tenure as President, ordered the murder of 111 dissidents.”

“In a book authored by this Shafeeq, which was ceremoniously released [on October 10] by Mohamed Nasheed himself, it is accused that I also ordered the man’s arrest and supposed torture in prison. In a country of just over 300,000, it is safe to assume that even one ‘missing person’ would not go unnoticed, let alone 111.”

Men chained to coconut palms

Nasheed’s government had “escalated its attempts to harass me” in the run up to the local council elections, Gayoom wrote, despite his retirement from politics.

“After the government’s defeat in last year’s parliamentary elections, the popularity ratings of the ruling MDP have fallen further in recent months as a result of the government’s failure to deliver on its campaign promises, and its lack of respect for the law.”

“On the other hand,” Gayoom told the British PM, “I continue to enjoy the strong support, love and affection of the people, and have been voted by the public as ‘Personality of the Year’ in both years since stepping down from the presidency.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Z-DRP claims texts of Gayoom’s illness from Dhunya’s number are malicious prank

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s faction of the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) has held a press conference calling on the public to be aware of false text messages circulated in the name of Gayoom’s daughter, Dhunya Maumoon.

Faction member MP Ahmed Nihan said the texts are being sent to different persons using mobile phone applications that can send texts under false numbers without the knowledge of the owner of the number.

“The texts say that Zaeem [an honorific for the former President] has fallen ill and is in a very critical condition.’’

‘’Since yesterday morning the persons who are doing this have been texting to different numbers using Dhunya’s mobile number, and people have been very concerned thinking that it was Dhunya who texted them,’’ Nihan said.

Nihan claimed the fraudsters “have been doing this either to mislead the public or to infuriate senior officials of the Z-DRP.”

‘’We don’t know who is doing this. The [ruling] Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters re most likely to do things like that,’’ he claimed, “But considering the current situation we can’t say, it might even be someone amongst us.’’

Furthermore, Nihan called supporters of Z-DRP faction to clarify with senior officials if they received any sort of concerning text.

‘’We will try to identify those responsible for this and will take action against them,’’ he said, adding that Gayoom was currently in a very ‘’fit and healthy condition.’’

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Handling of economy affects popularity of Maldivian President: Sunday Times

Maldivian authorities have placed a restriction on the repatriation of foreign currency by expatriate workers including Sri Lankans to tackle an acute shortage of US dollars in the market, writes Feizal Samath for Sri Lanka’s Sunday Times, a move that recently triggered protests in the island nation.

“The restrictions, according to rules enforced in a gazette notification by the Maldivian Monetary Authority (Central Bank) on Friday, permits workers to remit their contracted salary and nothing more.

“The foreign exchange crisis in the Maldives has been precipitated by ballooning budget deficits spilling over from the regime of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

“Huge capital expenditure on new development which is not matched by revenue has widened the trade balance and precipitated the foreign exchange crisis. Banks have limited the issue of dollars. Most banks are limiting the issue of dollars against the rufiya (local currency) for repatriation, a move which has also affected tourism, the country’s main foreign exchange earner, and even for local business.

“’There is absolute confusion in the industry about how much can be retained by us in dollars (for our work). There are no clear guidelines,’” said a resort owner, accusing the government of mismanaging the economy.

“New taxes to be enforced in July on income and business profits, for the first time in the Maldives, have affected President Mohamed Nasheed’s popularity and led to a week of protests against cost of living and alleged corruption. Another new tax, Tourism GST was enforced from January.

“Prices of essential commodities have escalated and inflation has sharply risen mainly due to the shortage of dollars in the market. The Maldives imports all its needs except fish. Its main foreign earnings comes from the bed tax from tourism and fish exports while local taxes in the past have been limited to import duties and levies.

“The President’s chief spokesman Mohamed Zuhair, while acknowledging that the new measures have affected government’s popularity, has accused opposition parties and disgruntled businessmen unhappy over the taxes, of instigating the violent protests by youths, and also blamed unscrupulous traders for jacking up prices.

“He said while taxes were inevitable and had been announced a long time ago, the latest round of protests came after Mr Gayoom broke away from the main opposition DRP and formed his own faction.
Opposition spokesman Mohamed ‘Mundhu’ Shareef rejected the claim and said the protests were a natural reaction of the people against rising food prices and what he called ‘a corrupt regime’.”

Full story

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Will the real DRP please stand up?

The Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), the main opposition party of Maldives held their last congress in February, 2010. During this congress there were two main lines of thought regarding electing their presidential candidate.

One group, led by Umar Naseer, proposed the presidential candidate should be elected through a party primary. The other group, led by the DRP council, proposed that such a primary was unnecessary and the leader of the party will be the party’s presidential candidate.

After much heated debate and talks during party meetings and local television, the issue was to be decided by the members of the party, at their upcoming congress. A vote was taken and more than 95 per cent of the attendees of the DRP congress voted in favour of the proposal made by the DRP council to make the elected leader of the party their presidential candidate.

The issue was solved. The presidential candidate of DRP would be its leader. This means Thasmeen will be the candidate from the DRP, for the 2013 presidential elections.

For a while it at least appeared to me, as an outside observer, that the debates were forgotten and everyone was working together. But as time passed, DRP started to show hints of a divide. Before long, the divide deepened and today DRP is split into two unequal parts. There is the main DRP under its leadership, and there is its “Z faction” as they now call themselves.

Z faction seems to be functioning under the leadership of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, the former president of the Maldives. The letter Z in the name of this faction stands for Zaeem, an affectionate reference made to Gayyoom. Zaeem is an Arabic word, translated as ‘the honorary leader’. This honorary position was awarded by the DRP leadership to Gayyoom, who played a major role in founding DRP.

Gayyoom was thought to have resigned from politics for he announced his resignation in January 2010. So people expected him to spend his time away from the local political scenario. But if he did resign at that time, he seems to have re-entered politics and is now seen as an active member of the Z faction of DRP. Some even associate him as the reason why the Z faction was born.

Z faction, as the name indicates, is a faction of DRP. But on Saturday, after returning back to Male’ from a recent trip to India, Gayyoom announced that the Z faction of DRP is “the real DRP.”

My question is can this even be a legitimate faction? I think as long as they call it a faction of DRP, it cannot be legitimate before the DRP approves of its legitimacy. I don’t think the DRP will approve of its legitimacy because no matter what the supporters of Gayoom would like to call it, Z faction is formed of a rebellious group of DRP members.

The main leadership of DRP considers the Z faction as DRP members who do not accept decisions made by the party’s councils and committees. This is except for one person – Umar Naseer, whose name has been struck off the DRP membership register. Even though Umar Naseer and others who belong to the Z faction think Umar is still a deputy leader of DRP, DRP leadership considers him one of their ex-deputy leaders.

It is also worth noting here that most relatives of Gayyoom that I have seen on televised meetings of DRP are now seen in the frontline of the meetings held by the Z faction. So the Z faction is seen mainly as Gayoom, his relatives and supporters.

Representatives of a few minor political parties can be seen in the meetings held in the name of the Z faction of DRP. Many such meetings are solely or partially supported by the People’s Alliance (PA). PA’s leader, Yameen can be seen playing an active role in most of these meetings. Because of this and based on the comments made to local newspapers, until very recently, I was under the impression that Z faction is trying to promote Yameen as their presidential candidate. Like probably everyone else, I too was speculating. But now, I am thinking maybe I was wrong. I am now speculating that Z faction wants to bring Gayoom back as the president of this country.

Z faction has their own leadership which they selected only last week. I am not aware of how they chose their leadership. I only know that they announced the names of their leaders and council members. All of Gayyoom’s children hold posts in this newly announced leadership. This is not surprising to many of us because it is also widely speculated that Gayoom wants to create a dynasty. This will not be easy to achieve in the views of many political analysts.

Last Thursday night, Z faction held a meeting at the Artificial Beach. This was to publicly announce their leadership, amongst other things. In this meeting they tell us that Z faction holds the thinking of Gayoom. They also tell us that it is a democratic organisation. I cannot understand how it can be both. From what I understood, Z faction revolves around Gayyoom. How can an organisation that revolves around someone be democratic? If they love democracy so much, why did they split from the main DRP in the first place?

According to what they said, recently some of the council members of Z faction have even met foreign diplomats in Colombo, as the leading opposition party of the Maldives. They even discussed issues that are of national interest. I wonder what the foreign diplomats will think of this group. I also wonder whether they presented themselves as those belonging to a faction of DRP. If the members of Z faction met the diplomats, as members of DRP, then yes, they are indeed the leading opposition party. If they met as members of Z faction, I disagree.

Z faction is not a registered political party. Z faction is not DRP. Yet the members of this faction claim they are the “real DRP.” If they are the real DRP, why call it Z faction? Why not just DRP? For me, it appears that the Z faction is trying to highjack DRP and then bring a coup to it.

Even though the DRP congress decided that their presidential candidate will be their leader, in the minds of those belonging to Z faction, this issue has not been solved. Z faction does not want Thasmeen to be the presidential candidate from DRP. They want their favourite person to be the DRP presidential candidate. And because, under existing party regulations, this will not be possible, they have to search for an alternative means to do this. The result is the birth of Z faction.

Legitimate or not, the creation of Z faction has hit DRP hard. The biggest opposition party has not disintegrated but is weakened. All because one man wants to fulfil his dreams?

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Gayoom loses defamation case over NYT “looters” article

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom has lost a long-running defamation case against the editor of Miadhu newspaper Abdul ‘Gabey’ Latheef.

Gayoom sued Latheef over an article published on June 13, 2010 which referenced allegations of corruption against the former President made in a New York Times (NYT) report.

That story was based on an audit report of former Presidential palace Theemuge, published by Auditor General Ibrahim Naeem, a damning indictment of the former government’s spending habits.

These, according to the NYT article, included an estimated “US$9.5 million spent buying and delivering a luxury yacht from Germany for the president, US$17 million on renovations of the presidential palace and family houses, a saltwater swimming pool, badminton court, gymnasium, 11 speed boats and 55 cars, including the country’s only Mercedes-Benz.”

“And the list goes on, from Loro Piana suits and trousers to watches and hefty bills for medical services in Singapore for ‘important people and their families. There was a US$70,000 trip to Dubai by the first lady in 2007, a US$20,000 bill for a member of the family of the former president to stay a week at the Grand Hyatt in Singapore. On one occasion, diapers were sent to the islands by airfreight from Britain for Mr Gayoom’s grandson.”

Onus of proof

The Civil Court ruled today that as both articles were based on a state audit report, the information made public by the country’s first independent auditor general should be considered valid unless proven otherwise.

The court judgment added that there was no legal basis for individuals or media outlets to be held responsible for proving the truth or falsehood of an official audit report.

Delivering the judgment, Judge Mariyam Nihayath said that while the court believed the articles in question could be damaging to Gayoom’s reputation, information publicised in an audit report must be considered factual unless proven otherwise.

“Regardless of how damaging statements made or information provided is to the plaintiff’s honour or dignity, if the statement or information is true, [defamation law] states that it cannot be considered defamatory,” she said.

Latheef told Minivan News today that the court case was the first case Gayoom had lost in 32 years, and was a landmark case for freedom of the media.

“The media must be able to report on independent authorities such as the Auditor General’s Office or the Anti-Corruption Commission,” he said. “His lawyers said in court four or five times that they wanted to stop the media writing about these things.”

The court’s ruling meant that Gayoom was obliged to sue the source of the allegations, the Auditor General’s office, rather than the media that reported on it, Latheef said.

“[Gayoom] has been saying for three years he would take the Auditor General to court, but he hasn’t because he knows he will lose. But he thinks that, because I’m just an ordinary man, he can sue me,” he said.

Latheef said that one of Gayoom’s lawyers had approached him to settle out of court, but said he had refused as that would not have resolved the issue of media freedom at stake.

“They also approached me indirectly through some of my close friends to say why didn’t I settle and say sorry in court, and then they could support me. I said it was not compensation I needed.”

Latheef said Gayoom’s lawyers had told him after the verdict that they intended to appeal in the High Court.

“I am ready to go all the way to the Supreme Court,” said Latheef.

Gayoom’s spokesperson Mohamed ‘Mundhu’ Shareef had not responded to Minivan News at time of press.

Head of the Maldives Journalists Association (MJA), Ahmed ‘Hiriga’ Zahir, said he agreed with the ruling and felt that it was a good precedent for the country’s journalists.

“The NYT reported on the audit report and Mr Latheef reported on the NYT story. I agree with the court’s judgement,” Hiriga said, concurring that the media was not under obligation to prove the veracity of official government reports.

“The authenticity of the audit report is a different question, and the accusation is that the Auditor General was biased and that the report was politically motivated. That was the basis of the argument by Gayoom’s lawyer,” Hiriga said.

“Politically motivated”

The opposition have steadfastly maintained that the report was a politically-motivated attempt to sully the then-president’s reputation prior to the election. Naeem was however appointed by Gayoom.

“It is common knowledge that Naeem’s audit reports were both politically-motivated and riddled with inaccuracies. References from such documents are unbecoming of professional journalists, albeit the MDP government utilises them as handbooks to achieve their political objectives,” said the DRP in a statement following publication of the article.

“The MDP government, in an year and a half of searching through its ‘presidential commission’, has failed to find anything that they can pin against President Gayoom to defame his character. The MDP government will continue to fail in their sinister plots,” the DRP statement read.

“The DRP will take all necessary action to alert the international community to the government’s sinister motives behind the allegations against the former president. We condemn the government for its continued attempts to shroud its incompetence in running the country behind cheap propaganda gimmicks.”

Naeem’s tenure following publication of over 30 audit reports, alleging rampant corruption and “organised crime” by the Gayoom administration, was short-lived.

On March 24 last year, Naeem sent a list of current and former government ministers to the Prosecutor General, requesting they be prosecuted for failure to declare their assets.  Naeem cited Article 138 of the Constitution that requires every member of the Cabinet to “annually submit to the Auditor General a statement of all property and monies owned by him, business interests and all assets and liabilities.”

He then held a press conference: “A lot of the government’s money was taken through corrupt [means] and saved in the banks of England, Switzerland, Singapore and Malaysia,” Naeem said, during his first press appearance in eight months.

Five days later he was dismissed by the opposition-majority parliament on allegations of corruption by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), for purportedly using the government’s money to buy a tie and visit Thulhaidhu in Baa Atoll.

The motion to dismiss Naeem was put forward by the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC), chaired by Deputy Speaker and member of opposition-allied People’s Alliance (PA), Ahmed Nazim, who the previous week had pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy to defraud the former Ministry of Atolls Development while he was Managing Director of Namira Engineering and Trading Pvt Ltd.

Nazim was today dismissing claims from opposition MPs that he has dodged Criminal Court summons regarding the matter eight times to date.

The parliament has meanwhile yet to approve a replacement auditor general, with the finance committee refusing to endorse any of the candidates put forward so far by President Mohamed Nasheed.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)