Tag: gayoom

Elections Commission demands Gayoom explain allegations of “vote rigging”

The Elections Commission (EC) has forwarded a letter to the Former President Maumoon Abdul requesting he clarify his claim that “election results do not turn out the way people vote”, as the remarks have raised public concerns over the commission’s integrity.

Elections Commission President Fuad Thaufeeq said on Sunday that the commission was “shocked” to hear the remarks and wanted to understand the reasons as to why Gayoom made such a claim.

Fuad said that the comments implying vote rigging have “provided reason for people to look at the commission with doubt” as it came from the former President, who had many supporters and currently leads the third largest political party in Maldives.

“So we have sent a letter to Gayoom today requesting he clarify his remarks” Fuad said.

Gayoom made the remarks at a meeting of the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) on Thursday, after reiterating the PPM interim council’s decision to advice against MP Abdul Raheem Abdulla’s intention to resign and contest for the Laamu Fonadhoo seat on a PPM ticket.

“I know that if he resigns he will be re-elected on a comfortable majority on a PPM ticket,” Gayoom said. “I don’t doubt that at all. However, we know the state of affairs in the country right now – election results do not turn out the way people vote. So what are we going to do?”

Under parliamentary rules of procedure, only parties that contested and won parliamentary elections can be officially represented in parliament.

He added that PPM would be officially recognised by parliament when it resumes in March.

MDP

The ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) meanwhile released a statement yesterday condemning Gayoom’s remarks, contending that it was an attempt to “bring the Elections Commission, an independent institution, into disrepute, turn the public against it and plunge the nation into a pit of discord and conflict.”

The statement noted that former Elections Commissioners were directly appointed by Gayoom while island chiefs “hovered around ballot boxes.”

Speaking at the MDP headquarters Haruge last night, President Mohamed Nasheed recalled that he was jailed for two years under the previous government for writing about alleged election fraud in a Sri Lankan newspaper.

Nasheed explained that the article pointed out irregularities in the results for a parliamentary election contested by current Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed and former minister Ilyas Ibrahim, brother-in-law of President Gayoom.

In another election where Nasheed contested a seat in parliament in the late 1990s, “after the ballot box was kept in [presidential retreat] Aarah for three days, the results were announced with 300 votes between myself and [former minister] Abdulla Kamalludeen.”

Under the former government, Nasheed continued, there were cases where “more than double the population was supposed to have voted” and “people whose death had been confirmed was said to have voted.”

PPM rally

At Thursday night’s rally, Gayoom urged supporters to intensify efforts to double party membership ahead of its inaugural national congress in April.

While the EC currently lists the number of PPM members as 13,859 as of December 25, Gayoom revealed that the party was in the process of correcting administrative errors in forms returned by the commission, adding that “the true number of PPM members is over 20,000.”

PPM “is the future of the Maldives,” Gayoom continued, as it is the only party that could foster national unity and “get rid of the conflict, discord and enmity among the people.”

“Our only purpose now, and the focus of all our thought and capabilities, should be winning next year’s presidential election,” he said.

A PPM government would restore national unity, revive the spirit of working together and ensure economic prosperity, Gayoom said.

“Our government will not be one that takes revenge or offers opportunity to only certain people,” he continued. “[Our government] will not defame persons for political ends and expose them in parliament and media. Our government will not give over state assets and property to foreigners. Our government will serve the public in line with Islamic principles and through the democratic process.”

The number of days left “for the formation of this government” is now “765 days,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Intolerance growing in the Maldives: Asia Times

The rising tide of religious intolerance in the Maldives is threatening the country’s young democracy, writes Sudha Ramachandran for the Asia Times.

Monuments donated by Pakistan and Sri Lanka were vandalised last week as they were seen to be “idolatrous” and “irreligious”.

Member-countries of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) donated monuments to mark the just-concluded 17th summit of the regional grouping that the Maldives hosted.

The monument gifted by Pakistan consisted of an image of its founder, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, and also featured figures, some of them drawn from seals belonging to the ancient Indus Valley Civilization. Historians have argued that these figures of animals and human beings point to early religion. The Sri Lankan monument was of a lion, the country’s national symbol.

On the eve of the unveiling of the Pakistan monument, a mob reportedly led by the opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), the party of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, toppled the bust of Jinnah. A day later, the monument was set ablaze and the bust stolen. The Sri Lankan monument was found doused in oil with the face of the lion cut off.

Sources in the Maldivian government told Asia Times Online that the vandalisation was driven by political motivations rather than religious beliefs. “This is the opposition’s way of damping the success of the SAARC summit,” a member of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) said.

The PPM has hailed the vandals as “national heroes” and promised to “do everything” it can to secure the release of the two men arrested over the incidents.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Islamic Affairs has ordered the government to remove the monuments as they “breach the nation’s law and religion”. Islamic Affairs Minister Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari told the local media that the Pakistan monument was “illegal” as it “represented objects of worship of other religions”.

Adhaalath Party president Sheikh Imran Abdulla told Minivan News that the monument “should not be kept on Maldivian soil for a single day” as “it conflicts with the constitution of the Maldives, the Religious Unity Act of 1994 and the regulations under the Act” as it depicted “objects of worship” that “denied the oneness of God”.

Sunni Islam was declared the official state religion of the Maldives under the 1997 constitution. This was retained in the 2008 constitution. Article 9-d says that “a non-Muslim may not become a citizen of the Maldives”. While the constitution allows non-Muslim foreigners to practice their religion privately, they are forbidden from propagating or encouraging Maldivians to practice any religion other than Islam.

The island nation in the Indian Ocean is formed by a double chain of 26 atolls has a population of about 314,000. It is the smallest Asian country in both population and land area. With an average ground level of 1.5 meters (4 foot 11 inches) above sea level, it is the planet’s lowest country.

Although religion plays an important role in the daily lives of Maldivians, the kind of Islam practiced here has never been puritanical or rigid and it is suffused with local cultural practices. Faith in Islam has co-existed with belief in spirits and djinns. Traditionally, Maldivian women did not veil their faces or even cover their heads and men did not grow beards. That is now changing with a puritanical version of Islam taking root.

Religious conservatism has grown dramatically in recent years, as has intolerance. A small but vocal group of religious radicals espousing Wahhabi or Salafi Islam has campaigned for inclusion of sharia law punishments like flogging and amputation in the penal code, used intimidation to force women to veil themselves and declared listening to music as haram (forbidden).

Maldivians who are atheist, agnostic or profess the milder Sufi Islam have been hounded by radicals. In May last year, 37-year-old Mohamed Nazim, who professed in public to be non-Muslim, was threatened by the Islamic Foundation of the Maldives, a non-governmental organisation.

Three days later, he went on television and asked for forgiveness. Two months later, 25-year-old Ismail Mohamed Didi, who admitted to being an atheist and had sought political asylum abroad, was found hanging at his workplace.

Some blame the recent spurt in religious radicalism on the country’s nascent democracy. A Maldivian political analyst who Asia Times Online spoke to in 2009 pointed out that “unlike Gayoom, who jailed people like [controversial religious preacher] Sheikh Fareed for their views, under the new democratic government extremists are able to advocate their version of Islam without fear of being arrested and detained.”

Others blame what they describe as President Mohamed Nasheed’s “appeasement of religious elements”. Indeed, not only did Nasheed create a Ministry of Islamic Affairs but he also put it in under the control of the Adhaalath Party, a party of religious conservatives.

Although Adhaalath parted ways with the ruling MDP in September, Nasheed has retained Bari, who is a member of Adhaalath, as his minister of Islamic affairs.

Nasheed’s reluctance to take on religious radicals has eroded his support among young Maldivians who voted for him not only because they wanted to see the end of four decades of Gayoom’s authoritarian rule but also because they expected him to put in place real freedom, including the right to religious freedom. Their hopes seem to have been dashed by the government’s flirting with the fundamentalists.

Full story

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: ‘All religions guide to the path of God’

Like all Maldivians, I have always known that former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom articulated an Islam that he calls a ‘meduminuge’ (moderate) religion, or in Quranic terminology a religion of wasatiyyah. But until recently, when I immersed myself in Gayoom’s speeches and books for my Master’s thesis, I could not have fully articulated this Islam. I have only space to use material from three important speeches. (All quotes of Gayoom are from their original English versions.)

Progressive face or phase

The best place to start is Gayoom’s paper in 1985 on the ‘Flexibility of Islamic Shari’ah’ presented at a seminar in Kuala Lumpur. In this paper, Gayoom laid out his broad outlook on Islam:

Gayoom’s understanding of Islam is fundamentally ‘progressive’. He argued, ‘the message of Islam was never meant to be limited to the confines of a backward nomadic community of fourteen centuries ago’.

For him, the use of ijtihad (independent reasoning) should be wide-ranging: ‘there might be many problems, albeit already covered in traditional works on Islamic law, which need reconsideration in light of the changing circumstances’. This means, according to Gayoom, ijma (juristic consensus) can be overturned.

Gayoom maintained that ‘[t]he so-called closing of the door of ijtihād [is] quite alien to [Islam’s] encouragement of scientific and intellectual research and the attaining of knowledge in all fields’.

Thus, he concludes reflecting on the importance of ‘reason’ to Islam by saying: ‘Islam does not exclude a reasoned and diligent attitude to change; it does not instruct us to impede the flowing stream that is essential to human nature and its development.’

If this is Gayoom’s jurisprudential outlook, his substantive views are equally ‘progressive’ or even more radical than many of us might have thought.

Universal message of equality, love and tolerance

Thus, in an address in 1983 at Aligarh University of India, Gayoom laid out a radical message of tolerance, mutual love, and equality among people of all faiths.

On tolerance and love, he says:

The tolerance and magnanimity shown by the great Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him), the Second Guided Khalīfā, Umar ibn al-Khattāb, Salahuddin al-Ayyūbī and other renowned Muslim rulers of all times towards not only non-Muslims but also towards those who had waged war against the Muslim state will bear witness to the spirit of love and human brotherhood inherent in the teachings of Islam.

On equality, Gayoom argues there is no distinction whatsoever to be made with regard to the equality of rights between Muslims and non-Muslims:

The Holy Quran clearly establishes the right of every individual to follow whatever religion or creed of his choice when it says: ‘There is no compulsion in religion; surely right has become distinct from wrong.’ Islam safeguards the rights of non-Muslims…to no less a degree than it safeguards the right of its own followers.

For Gayoom, the tolerance and equality of all people is premised on the equal normative status of all religions:

No religion preaches hatred, jealousy or animosity. Religious intolerance, which inevitably leads to friction and conflict, and more often than not to bloodshed, is therefore an unforgivable departure from the path of God.

The path of God, according to Gayoom, is not a unique possession of one religion. Therefore, even more radically Gayoom points out that:

All religions guide to the path of God – the path of love, understanding and peace.

Subjecting the message to politics

Now, of course, this deeply anti-authoritarian, even radical, ideology contradicts the authoritarian political policies of president Gayoom. I am here referring to his discourse of nationhood. His nationhood discourse, which is now our taken for granted background national self-understanding, is based on the mythical and authoritarian motif of ‘100% Muslim nation’.

In another speech in 1983 at the ‘Seminar on the Call for Islam in South and South East Asia’, held in Male, president Gayoom again acknowledged that Islam provided for complete equality of rights for all humans. Nonetheless, he implied that the ‘unique’ national self-understanding overrides even the commandments of Qur’an:

The real essence of Islam, as you know, is that it is non-discriminatory. Its tolerance of other beliefs and religions is clearly established in the Holy Quran, the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon him!)…We Maldivians, as true believers of Islam, hold freedom of belief as sacred and we abhor discrimination between man and man on any grounds whether of creed, colour or race.

In spite of this, he continues, because:

[w]e are such a homogenous and closely-knit society based on one national identity, one language, and one faith…we are convinced that the preservation of this oneness in faith and culture is essential for the unity, harmony, and progress of the country.

It is this homogenising political discourse that underpins the dominant national self-understanding. But this discourse is not an Islamic discourse. In fact, as we saw above, it is at odds with Islam’s universal messages outlined by Gayoom.

A degree of godliness

Whether or not we will seriously uphold Islam’s anti-authoritarian universal messages as Gayoom so clearly laid out and whether or not we will rethink the authoritarian national self-understanding, are some of the most crucial questions we must address individually and as a society.

This task of serious self-reflection has become even more urgent under an increasingly interdependent and pluralistic world. This task has become socially necessary with the pluralisation and fragmentation of religious discourses, and with the increasing diversity in the society, not least because of migrant people of different faiths.

The task at hand is a transformation of ourselves as subjects and citizens: this task ultimately is one of inculcating a degree of godliness – mercy, compassion and love – in all of us.

This is indeed a more transcendent endeavour than the selfish, materialist politics that has always spread fear about a non-existent Other conspiring to destroy Islam. We all really deserve a better politics.

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)

MDP appeals for international assistance over “intolerable situation” of judiciary

The ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has appealed for assistance from the international community over the “increasingly blatant collusion between politicians loyal to the former autocratic President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, and senior members of the judiciary – most of whom were appointed by Gayoom during his thirty years of power.”

In a statement by the MDP forwarded to diplomatic missions and United Nations offices by the Foreign Ministry concerning the events of October 20, the ruling party explained that a protest was launched against “an ongoing, highly-politicised Supreme Court case” contesting the eligibility of MP Mohamed Musthafa for the May 2009 parliamentary elections.

“The Supreme Court case is the latest installment of an ongoing attempt by Gayoom to secure a parliamentary seat for his son, Gassan Maumoon,” the statement alleged, noting that Gassan was defeated by the MDP MP for Thimarafushi constituency.

The High Court however ordered a re-vote after Gassan challenged the result, which was won again by Musthafa.

“Having lost two votes – both recognised as free and fair by the independent Elections Commission (EC) – the Gayoom family again turned to the courts for help,” the statement continues.

“Umar Naseer, a senior member of Gayoom’s political party [Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM)], lodged a case at the Supreme Court claiming that Musthafa had not been eligible to run for parliament because of an outstanding debt owed to the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) – a bank which became insolvent and had its loans and debts taken over by the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA).”

Musthafa at Supreme Court

After the MMA clarified to Musthafa that he did not have an outstanding debt, the EC decided that he was eligible to stand for the Thimarafushi seat.

However, Umar Naseer told Minivan News in May 2010 that Musthafa “has to pay US$31,231.66 (Rf401,326.83)” to the MMA and that the Civil Court ruled on August 28, 1997 that the debt should be paid by MP Musthafa and his company Seafood International Private Limited.

“We raised the issue at the Elections Commission (EC) during the parliamentary elections and the former president of EC said that there was no debt which should be paid by Mustafa,” Umar said.”That’s why I took it to the Supreme Court.”

Before Musthafa was summoned to court last Thursday – which prompted the MDP national council to pass a resolution to launch a protest – the Supreme Court last conducted a hearing on the case on March 17 this year.

At last Thursday’s hearing, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz said the apex court wished to “clarify a few points after reviewing the case.”

The Supreme Court Justices asked Musthafa a number of questions regarding the case, including if he had issued a personal guarantee for the loan.

Musthafa said he had not given any personal guarantee and insisted that the loan was issued to Seafood International Pvt Ltd.

“Politicised”

Following the MDP’s protest alleging that the judiciary and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) were subject to political manipulation by the opposition and members of the former government, opposition parties accused the ruling party of attempting to exert undue influence over the judiciary by “intimidating judges,” warning of “dangerous” consequences for the nation.

The MDP statement meanwhile contended that Musthafa’s case “fits a pattern whereby cases filed against MDP supporters and those who sympathise with the MDP are fast-tracked while more serious cases against family and friends of Gayoom never reach court.”

On August 29, Independent MP Ismail Abdul Hameed was abruptly summoned to the Criminal Court and sentenced to one year and six months banishment about 30 minutes before a crucial vote on the government’s Goods and Services Tax (GST) legislation. The Kaashidhoo MP had been voting with the ruling party on the economic reform bills.

The statement also referred to the corruption trial of Deputy Speaker of Parliament Ahmed Nazim, charged with multiple counts of defrauding the former Atolls Ministry, which remains “indefinitely delayed.”

In the statement, MDP Chairman ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik accused senior judges of being “intent on defending the political and economic interests of their erstwhile friends and former paymasters from the regime of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.”

In May this year, the JSC, the watchdog body charged with overseeing the judiciary, abolished its Complaints Committee citing “efficiency”, with complaints against judges subsequently forwarded for review by the legal section and Chair Adam Mohamed Abdulla, a Supreme Court Justice.

Last year the JSC received 143 complaints concerning the conduct of judges. By its own statistics none were tabled in the commission, and only five were ever replied to. Chair of the former complaints commission, Aishath Velezinee, was meanwhile stabbed in the street in January this year.

The JSC also failed to table or even acknowledge receipt of a report on the judiciary produced by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), which questioned whether the JSC’s possessed the technical ability and knowledge to investigate complaints and hold the judiciary accountable, as well as its independence.

Moosa went on to accuse the judiciary of “using the sanctity of judicial independence to protect the status quo and to remain unreformed. Nearly every judge appointed by Gayoom has retained his place on the bench – despite the fact that many of them have no legal qualifications whatsover.”

“We therefore look to our friends in the international community to help us address this difficult situation, and to support efforts to secure that which we all want – a strong, independent, professional judiciary, responsible to the needs of the society it serves,” the statement concludes.

Meanwhile in a statement released yesterday, the party revealed that its Councillor AbuBakr Fulhu “was unexpectedly called to the High Court for sentencing in a case originally brought in 2009 under Article 88(a) which contended that he had encouraged his brother to argue with a magistrate.

“The Criminal Court originally acquitted him, however, the local MP (an ally of Gayoom) has been pressing for a review by the High Court. Today, two years after the last hearing on the case, the High Court has suddenly summoned Aboo Bakr Fulhu for sentencing.”

The ruling party contended that the move was “clearly part of a concerted campaign, and we thus call on the international community to be vigilant. For example, senior members of Gayoom’s party, such as Umar Naseer, are informing the public about the outcome of cases against MDP supporters – before the verdicts have even been handed down, and are publicly predicting that many more MDP MPs will be brought before the courts and will be stripped of their seats”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police summon Gassan Maumoon for questioning

Police summoned Gassan Maumoon, son of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, for questioning today concerning disturbances outside his residence Endherimaage on Thursday during a protest by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

A 17-year-old boy was struck on the head with a wooden plank allegedly thrown from Endherimaage while protesters led by MDP MPs, councillors and senior members were marching by the former President’s residence.

Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam told Minivan News today that Gassan was among a number of people police were questioning regarding Thursday’s events.

Police were investigating complaints of damage caused to the former President’s property as well as the injury caused to the 17-year-old, Shiyam explained.

Police had received information that suggests the wooden plank that injured the 17-year-old was hurled or dropped from the building, he said.

However, said Shiyam, police could not divulge further details at this stage of the investigation.

Minivan News journalists at the scene on Thursday observed gravel, stones, hot water and sharp metals raining down on the protesters from Endherimaage. A number of reporters at the scene were also hit by the pouring gravel.

MDP protest October 20Several MDP activists claimed that the wooden plank was hurled from the second floor balcony of Endherimaage. After the victim was rushed to hospital by MPs on the front line of the march, MDP activists clashed with Gayoom supporters blocking the entrance to Endherimaage and threw stones at the building, smashing a window on the first floor.

MP Ali Waheed, who defected to the ruling party in May, told state broadcaster MNBC that the boy was behind MP Alhan Fahmy when the object struck him straight on the head.

The 17-year-old, identified as Hussein Hassan, was rushed to the Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) by the MPs on a passing pick-up, he said.

Speaking to MNBC One outside IGMH, Waheed displayed blood stains on his shirt resulting from the head injury caused by the impact.

Other eyewitnesses who spoke to the state broadcaster corroborated the MPs’ account of the incident.

The brother of the injured boy told Minivan News Thursday night that according to doctors “his skull was damaged and parts of the skull have gone inside his brain.”

The boy underwent surgery to remove wood particles from his brain.

IGMH media coordinator confirmed today that the boy was conscious and his “condition is now stable.”

The spokesperson refuted media reports that the boy’s left side was paralyzed. “His left side is very weakened, but that is not paralysis,” she explained.

A family member outside the ICU told Minivan News that the family was certain the object that struck Hussein Hassan “came from above.”

“Everyone who was there said that that was how it happened,” he said.

Right to remain silent

Gassan Maumoon meanwhile told reporters outside police headquarters this afternoon that he exercised the right to remain silent after “it appeared from some of their questions that they were accusing me.”

Gassan was accompanied by the former President’s lawyer Mohamed Waheed Ibrahim ‘Wadde’ and former Attorney General Aishath Azima Shukoor.

The former President’s newly-formed Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) held a protest at artificial beach last night in response to the ruling party’s “intimidation of judges.”

Hundreds of supporters participated in the protest, where they called for the resignation of Chief of Defence Forces Moosa Jaleel and Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh for failing to provide security to the former President.

Asked by MP Ilham Ahmed if they should march to the presidential residence Muleeage, the protesters unanimously supported the notion.

PPM Interim Council Member Umar Naseer – former deputy leader of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party – however announced around 10:45pm that the protest march was to be cancelled after police sent a summons to Gassan.

Meanwhile, after text messages were circulated on Friday claiming the PPM was preparing to attack and “smash Haruge [MDP camp],” a large number of ruling party supporters gathered at Haruge for a hastily arranged rally at 9pm last night.

Speakers at the rally, including Presidential Commission Spokesperson Abdulla Haseen, President’s Advisor Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail, MP Ahmed Easa and former Attorney General Dr Ahmed Ali Sawad, severely criticised the judiciary for lack of competence and integrity.

An egg was thrown into Haruge during Ibra’s speech.

In an interview with private broadcaster DhiTV shortly after Thursday’s protest turned violent, Gayoom claimed that damage was caused to his residence and adjoining houses in “a terrorist attack” orchestrated by the government.

“They came with their activists and attacked my home,” Gayoom said. “They attacked nearby houses as well.”

Moosa Jaleel and Ahmed Faseeh should “personally bear responsibility” for the damage to his residence because riot police were not present to intercede, the PPM figurehead said.

Appearing on private broadcaster VTV later that night, Gayoom said he would file criminal complaints with police, the Prosecutor General and pursue civil action against the protesters.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP protest turns violent outside Gayoom’s residence

A protest launched by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) turned violent today after party activists clashed with supporters of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom in front of his residence Enderimaage, in the Maafanu ward of Male’.

MDP MPs and activists gathered outside the Supreme Court at 3pm this afternoon in anticipation of a verdict in a case filed by Umar Naseer – an interim council member of Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) – challenging the legitimacy of Thimarafushi MP Mohamed Musthafa’s candidacy on the grounds that he had a decreed debt.

Earlier in the day, the MDP national council conducted an emergency meeting and approved a resolution to launch a protest against the judiciary, claiming judges were unduly influenced by the former President and his half-brother MP Abdulla Yameen.

However a verdict was not delivered by the Supreme Court today, which said the hearing was called “to clarify a few points after reviewing the case.”

After Musthafa emerged from the hearing, the protesters marched towards Endherimaage, where violent clashes erupted between MDP activists and a few Gayoom supporters blocking the entrance to his residence.

The clashes occurred after a large piece of wood allegedly thrown from Endherimaage struck a 17-year-old demonstrator or bystander, who was immediately rushed to hospital on a passing pick-up.

Minivan News journalists at the scene observed gravel, rocks, hot water and sharp metal raining down on protesters from the top floors or terrace of Endherimaage.

Several activists claimed they saw Gassan Maumoon, former President Gayoom’s son, throw stones and pour boiling hot water on the protesters.

MDP activists meanwhile threw large stones at Endhirmaage and attempted to break down the door.

Some windows of the house were smashed while a car parked outside was damaged.

The 17-year-old is currently undergoing surgery at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) at the Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH). A number of MDP MPs and senior members are waiting at the hospital.

MP Ali Waheed told state broadcaster MNBC that the boy was behind MP Alhan Fahmy when the piece of wood struck him straight on the head.

MNBC One showed blood stains on the MPs’ shirt, which Ali Waheed said resulted from the injury to the boy. The state broadcaster also reported that other people at the area were hurt from falling objects.

Speaking to Minivan News outside IGMH, the brother of the injured boy said that according to doctors “his skull was damaged and parts of the skull have gone inside his brain.”

“He was hit in the right side of his head and the left side of his body is now paralysed,” the relative said.

Doctors could not predict how long the surgery would take, he added.

”The doctors said the surgery was to remove the particles from inside his brain,” he said.

Some of the MDP supporters outside the hospital claimed the boy was hit by a wooden door hurled from the terrace of Endherimaage by Gassan Maumoom.

Police spokesman Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam confirmed to Minivan News that police were investigating reports that the object was thrown from the Endherimaage building.

“We are questioning the witnesses to try and determine how this happened,” Shiyam said.

“This is a very serious issue. Because of this there might be other problems and we do not want there to be political violence.”

Meanwhile in an interview with private broadcaster DhiTV this evening, Gayoom condemned the protest and claimed the violence was organised by the government.

Gayoom said he saw senior MDP members such as Male’ City Mayor ‘Maizan’ Ali Manik and Executive Services Secretary at the President’s Office Mohamed Ziyad. Minivan News also observed Ziyad and Maizan Alibe at the protest.

“They came with their activists and attacked my home,” Gayoom said. “They attacked nearby houses as well.”

As riot police were not at the scene to intercede, said Gayoom, Chief of Defence Forces Moosa Jaleel and Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh should “personally bear responsibility” for the damage.

Gayoom said he would inform foreign governments of today’s events.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

DRP accuses PPM of using cash incentives and development funding to poach members

Spokesperson and Deputy Leader of the Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP), Ibrahim ‘Mavota’ Shareef, has alleged that the breakaway opposition party of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom has been offering cash incentives and development funds to island groups, in a bid to persuade them to join the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM).

“There are many social clubs in the Maldives with the purposes of developing islands. Many have been offered cash incentives and funds for development activities if members join the party. Even individual members have been offered,” said Shareef, who has made similar claims to local media this week.

PPM Spokesperson Ahmed Mahlouf was not responding to refute the allegations at time of press.

“We’re not about to file a court case, but this is happening on a wide scale. If the clubs involved need funding, members are inclined to accept. We couldn’t afford to lodge so many cases,” Shareef said, when asked if the party had any evidence to back the claims.

Prior to the PPM’s inaugural convention on October 15, the EC verified and approved the membership forms of 3,019 party members.

Several thousand people attended the convention at Dharubaaruge, including at least one prominent ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) activist.

The 971 delegates present elected Gayoom interim leader unopposed, while his half-brother MP Abdulla Yameen was elected acting parliamentary group leader.

Yameen’s party, the People’s Alliance (PA), recently split from the main opposition DRP which remains under leadership of Ahmed Thasmeen Ali. The relationship between the PPM, formerly known as the Z-DRP faction of the opposition, and the DRP leadership remains strained.

Shareef expressed surprise at the large numbers of people who attended the convention, and acknowledged that support for Gayoom’s party had the potential to affect the DRP’s membership base.

“This was a 30 year regime and we have to accept that there are pockets of support everywhere. During Gayoom’s time he did a lot a lot of work and has many supporters, and we have to recognise this,” Shareef said, but questioned the PPM’s “ability to work together as a party.”

“I don’t see any future for PPM. They are saying that 99 percent of [DRP members] are joining the party but we don’t see any such thing happening. At the same time there are a lot of people who have remained steadfast and believe the DRP has a future, and that the leadership has the experience and qualifications to run the country,” Shareef said.

The breakaway faction consisted of Gayoom’s immediate family and “former DRP members who failed in elections while they were in the DRP,” Shareef said. “PPM is a family enterprise, promoting a private hidden agenda in the name of the national interest.”

Gayoom had capitalised on growing dissatisfaction with the government, Shareef contended.

“At the grassroots level, people are very unhappy, and the swing voters have been moving away from the government. This is why Gayoom chose now to form his new party. In 2008-2009, and even midway through 2010, there was no political space.”

The division was as much ideological as it was acrimonious, Shareef explained.

“Many people do not believe the DRP is able to hold the government accountable, because we do not create violence or street protests. Many people think the opposition should make the country ungovernable, even the media and opinion leaders. I’m not sure if they understand it themselves, but it makes it very dangerous, as it risks the whole society falling and becoming a failed state,” Shareef said.

“We believe we are a responsible opposition and we oppose the government’s polices where they are wrong, and support them when they are right. There is nothing personal and we are not out for revenge, and we do not see the ruling party as personal enemies.

“Gayoom’s family and his inner circle view them as personal enemies and are out for revenge, using chaos and anarchy to try and stop the government from doing any work. We are clear we want a stable government, and to change it through elections, but the immediate family of Gayoom has a different idea. They want street action, so that every day the government is under pressure, while we voted for a presidential system of government that gives the President a free hand to run the country [while he is elected].”

Beyond the poaching of its member base, the DRP faced new financial challenges with the departure of the former President, Shareef said.

“Finance is a great challenge. The current DRP leadership is not as rich as PPM’s top leadership. It presents a challenge, but I like to believe money is not everything.”

Road to 2013

Shareef was a founding member of the MDP, Deputy Parliamentary Group Leader in Nasheed’s shadow cabinet, then later a deputy to Gayoom, and now a deputy to Thasmeen.

With the split in the opposition, and the collapse of all the MDP’s coalition agreements, Shareef predicted that “given current trends” the 2013 presidential election would effectively be a replay of the 2008 election in which Nasheed won power in a run-off election against the incumbent Gayoom, due to the support of coalition partners.

The MDP would need to gain 51 percent of the vote in the first round to secure a clean win, while “none of the opposition parties will secure enough votes to reach the 51 percent mark,” Shareef said. “Meanwhile the MDP has chased away all its coalition partners, and they cannot now turn around and say ‘We can work together’, because nobody will believe them.”

Faced with a run-off, the disparate opposition groups would temporarily unify over the common ground of ousting the MDP, Shareef predicted, giving power to the largest opposition party.

“Look at the last three elections. In the first round of the 2008 Presidential election Gayoom got 40 percent, while the rest of the then opposition got 60 percent. In the second round the opposition totaled 54 percent. The MDP lost ground in the parliamentary elections, and the majority of the islands voted for the DRP in the local council elections,” he claimed.

“The incumbent government has the resources of the state to get votes, and can get at least 20-30 percent just by being in power. At present trends, the 2013 will be a replay of 2008, and as things stand now, whoever is in opposition will go to the second round. But we need a leader who is not out to take revenge.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

DRP condemns Gayoom’s remarks on losing ground to MDP

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) has condemned its erstwhile ‘Honorary Leader’ and former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom for saying the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) outpaced the main opposition party while it was “in a slumber.”

Speaking at a rally in Thaa Atoll Guraidhoo on Saturday, Gayoom reportedly said that the MDP became both the largest political party and the majority party in parliament after the new DRP leadership took over.

In a statement put out yesterday, the DRP said Gayoom’s remarks concerning the party were misleading and “contained serious lies.”

Among the alleged falsehoods, the statement noted that the MDP came to power in 2008 after defeating Gayoom, who was DRP’s presidential candidate and ‘Zaeem’ at the time.

“One of the main reasons for DRP having to face one of its biggest defeats and MDP coming to power and causing despair for most citizens was the fact that the whole presidential campaign was run by Gayoom’s eldest son Farish Maumoon as a family matter,” it reads.

It adds that while the DRP under the leadership of Ahmed Thasmeen Ali emerged successful in the past two elections, “we note with regret that the party was unable to win a single election under President Maumoon’s leadership when it was in the government.”

On the loss of MPs in parliament, the statement noted that former President Gayoom lost majority control in the past despite the presence of eight appointed MPs after brother Abdulla Yameen left the DRP with a number of MPs.

Moreover, the statement continues, it was “questionable today” whether the Z-faction’s public criticism of the DRP leadership and “pointing accusatory fingers at the DRP, the party’s leadership, MPs, councillors, senior members sweating to enliven the party in the islands and the party’s common members” was in the service of “the nation and religion.”

The statement concludes by saying that since infighting among the opposition would benefit the ruling party, “it has become clear to the public today that such actions shows the lack of truthfulness and sincerity of the people around President Maumoon.”

Gayoom meanwhile returned to Male’ today after visiting islands in Laamu and Thaa atolls to promote the incipient Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and recruit new members.

The former DRP Zaeem was quoted in local media as saying that the DRP lost ground to the ruling party because of “lack of effort and attention” by the new leadership.

“We cannot achieve anything in the political arena in such a state,” Gayoom said. “That is why we are forming this party. We are forming PPM for a noble purpose.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

ICC membership expected to reform Maldivian judicial system

The Maldives has become the 118th country to adopt the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the world’s first and only permanent international court with jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, crimes of aggression, genocide and war crimes.

The Maldives is the third state in South Asia to become an ICC member, following Bangladesh and Afghanistan. It is the ninth in the south asian region alongside Cambodia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mongolia, the Philippines and Timor-Leste; plans to ratify the statute are advancing in Malaysia and Nepal.

Asia has been slower than other regions in adopting the ICC regulations, allegedly because they maintain the death penalty which is prohibited by the ICC. William R. Pace, Convenor of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, said the Maldives’ decision to accede to the Rome Statue was a significant step for the region.

“It is vital that the momentum towards increasing respect for the rule of law and accountability for those responsible for the most serious crimes is seized by other states in the Asia-Pacific region, many of whom are close to joining the ICC,” Pace said in a press release. “Joining the Court represents a strong deterrent effect that will contribute toward the prevention of gross human rights violations in the Asia-Pacific region and to the global fight against impunity.”

Acceding to ICC regulations as defined by the Rome Statute has been a long process for the Maldivian government. In 2003, the Maldives took steps to reject its judicial authority.

Wikileaks cables published on 1 September 2011 cite the Maldivian government’s intent to “never turn over a US national to the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Maldivian government would not sign the ICC treaty and would not respect its claim to universal jurisdiction.” Other cables indicate that then president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom was seeking approval for a visit with then US President George W. Bush, allegedly to improve his chances of re-election.

Speaking to Minivan News today, the President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said ratification of the ICC statute highlighted the different values of the current administration.

“For us, it’s transparency that is at the top of our priorities. So right now, our highest priority is to improve the judicial system of this country.”

The ICC covers major crimes which are widespread, systemic and of concern to the international community. The ICC does not deal with small cases, even if the victims may be in the hundreds.

Among the criteria for the ICC to take on a case in the Maldives is doubtful willingness and capacity of the country’s own judiciary to handle the case in question.

Zuhair said it was important for Maldivians to have access to an international judicial system. “Individuals who feel they have a complaint, even against a leader, could refer the complaint to the Maldivian judicial system or to the ICC. This is a big step for a country whose previous leaders have been accused of human rights violations. I believe their cases would be fairly addressed in the ICC,” he said.

Evelyn Balais-Serrano, Asia-Pacific Coordinator for the ICC’s advocacy NGO Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) told Minivan News that ratification would support domestic legal reform, and that heads of state would face new levels of accountability.

“The ICC only deals with the big fish. In the past only the small fish may have been sacrificed to show a semblance of justice – but the ICC targets the highest level of responsibility: the head of state, generals, kings,” she said previously.

The Debate

In October 2010, the debate to join the ICC created sparks in Parliament.

MDP MPs condemned the “unlawful and authoritarian” practices of the previous government. Group Leader “Reeko” Moosa Manik referred to 2009 legislation protecting former presidents who he considered “the worst torturers in the country’s history,” and said the purpose of the international criminal court was to “arrest torturers like Maumoon [Abdul Gayoom], people like Ilyas Ibrahim [brother-in-law of the former president] who stole state property and funds, and Attorney Generals like Hassan Saeed who tried to hide it.”

MPs from opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party-People’s Alliance (DRP-PA) said MDP MPs were overlooking the fact that Gayoom had never been reprimanded in a court of law, and accused the current administration of disregarding rules of law. MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom accused the MDP government of formulating policies only to “benefit certain people”, which he argued could be “considered a crime in international courts.”

The question of religion was also inflammatory. DRP MP Dr Afrashim Ali said convention should not be signed if it could lead to “the construction of temples here under the name of religious freedom.” Other MPs pointed out that several Muslim countries had not joined the ICC, and the MPs were concerned that ratification would “shatter Islamic principles” and encourage gay rights.

Shari’a experts in ICC signatories and Muslim countries Afghanistan, Jordan and Malaysia have not found conflict between the Rome Statute and Sharia.

On 14 June this year, Parliament voted almost unanimously to sign the Rome Statute of the ICC.

The Effects

Speaking to Minivan News today, Balais-Serrano pointed out that ratification of the Rome Statute was well-timed.

“As a chair of the SAARC summit, Maldives will have quite an influence on south asian countries attending this year’s event,” she said. “It will certainly be constructive in reviewing human rights, a key point we plan to address at the summit.”

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit is scheduled for Addu City in mid-November this year.

Balais-Serrano also pointed out that by ratifying the Rome Statute, governments are committing to adapt current domestic legislation to meet international standards. She said ICC members could receive “training of local judges and prosecutors and other officials responsible for lawmaking and implementation”, and hoped the Maldives would forward with judicial reform.

“The judicial system in Maldives can benefit from the rules and procedures by which the ICC operates, for example, in the nomination and election of judges, in the protection of witnesses and victims and in ensuring due process,” said Balais-Serrano.

She said that ICC membership would expand Maldivian court procedures. “One of the motivations of joining the ICC is to let go of a commitment to include the domestic judicial system alone. Now, Maldivians can also refer to the ICC provisions and regulations. This is a timely event for the Maldives to review domestic law while making the ICC a reference point.”

As an ICC member, the Maldives will be able to send judges and lawyers abroad for internships and exchange programs in member countries. Balais-Serrano said that all member countries are obliged to send employees to the ICC to learn and assist with proceedings.

International liability

ICC membership could affect international relations. The Maldives recently made news headlines by supporting the Sri Lankan government, which is facing war crimes allegations by international human rights groups. A report from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has raised the likelihood of an investigation by the Human Rights Commission.

A Relationship Agreement between the ICC and the United Nations calls the UN “potentially the most important partner of the ICC on various levels,” and suggests that investigations by the UN are based on the same human rights standards put forth by the ICC.

“The Maldives cannot do anything if the ICC decides to investigate and put into trial the perpetrators of crimes in Sri Lanka,” said Balais-Serrano. “If suspected criminals from Sri Lanka seek refuge in the territory of the Maldives, as a state party to the ICC, the government is obliged to cooperate to the Court by arresting  the criminals.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)