Tag: human rights

Torture in detention increasing, says Human Rights Commission

The Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) 2013 annual report has revealed that incidents of torture in detention are increasing in the Maldives.

Among the issues noted during the commission’s visits to places of detention – in particular, prisons and police detention centers – and from the cases submitted to the commission were:

  • Detainees being held in cuffs for 24 hours – sometimes for 15 – 30 day – with removal only for using the toilet and for eating
  • Detainees not being provided with necessary items for cleaning themselves, or with pillows and blankets for sleeping
  • Overcrowding of cells
  • Police officers cursing and hurting detainees inside vehicles during transfer
  • Serving of rotten food
  • Not keeping proper records of detainees including medical, search, and solitary confinement records.
  • Not providing family meetings and phone calls
  • Police not providing details of arrested people to HRCM
  • Police entering homes without a court order
  • Addressing underage detainees inappropriately

According to the report, out of the a total 596 recommendations regarding state detention facilities made by the HRCM – including prisons, detention centers and homes for people with special need – only twenty percent have been fully implemented.

The report also noted that the commission faced “huge obstacles” in conducting investigations, resulting in delays the completion of research.

These obstacles included the failure of relevant institutions to provide documents, delays of state institutions in implementing commission recommendations, and the refusal of some government ministries to meet with the commission.

Statistics

With forty cases initiated by the commission, a total of 719 cases were received in the year 2013 – of which 218 were completed. With pending cases from 2000 -2012, the commission completed investigations for total 352 cases within the year.

The rising incidence of torture was reflected in the number of cases submitted,and a total of 72 cases of degrading treatment and torture were submitted within the year.

Among them were cases submitted by victims and their families stating that they were tortured during the police custodial department detention during investigations. Detainees also submitted cases of being denied parole, the detention of persons released under the ‘second chance’ program, and the implementation of sentences which contravened court verdicts.

The highest number of cases – 134 – were submitted regarding the right to a good standard of health care; 77 case related to the right to fair administrative action; 86 cases concerned children, the elderly, and persons with special needs; and 90 cases submitted regarding labour rights violations.

Judiciary

“Citizens had many concerns about the condition of the judiciary in 2013 as well,” read the report, which reported the slow speed at which cases are attended to by the courts and the failure to take action against judges accused of misconduct.

In the report, the HRCM called on the Judicial Services Commission to increase and strengthen it’s role in reforming the judiciary, and for the People’s Majlis to pass important laws such as the penal code, and the criminal procedure and evidence bill.

The HRCM is currently working on an assessment of the Maldives human rights obligations in the judicial sector – with the financial assistance from UNDP – to ensure the judicial system in the Maldives is independent, just, and accessible.

The report mentioned, however, that courts had refused cooperate with the commission’s monitoring programme as the commission “did not get the cooperation of the Supreme Court”.

Freedom of assembly and MP’s behaviour

Notable achievements listed in the report were the passing of a number of bills such as the prisons and parole bill, the anti human trafficking bill, anti-torture bill, access to information bill, the sexual offences bill, the political parties bill, and the freedom of assembly bill.

Regarding the controversial Freedom of Assembly Act, the commission stated that “citizens were relieved” when it was passed and enforced, and that the legislation aimed to minimise restriction of the rights guaranteed by the constitution.

The bill had been criticised prior to its ratification, with local NGOs stating that it impinged upon a number of fundamental constitutional rights and “significantly challenges the entire democratic system of governance”.

The bill was also criticised by the the Maldives Journalists’ Association, Forum Asia – a regional human rights organisation -and the Tourism Employees Association of Maldives. The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) argued that it was a reactive measure against the MDP-led anti-government protests calling for an early presidential election.

The “irresponsible acts” of parliament members throughout the year – including violence within the Majlis premises and demonstrations during 2013 presidential address, were mentioned as an issue of concern. Another issue raised regarding MPs was the proposal of amendments to laws in order to “protect personal interests”.

Other prominent issues concerned the large number of child abuse cases,  including sexual abuse and use of children in crimes, along with an increased incidence of rape and other crimes against women.

Violation of the rights of migrant worker, including non-payment of wages, the withholding of their personal documents, and reports of inhumane abuse by their employers and the public was also noted.

The HRCM Annual Report 2013 can be downloaded here.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: The politics of the death penalty in the Maldives

In a presidential campaign rally in 2008, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom dismissed the issue of death penalty:

“Maldivians won’t accept it. The international community no longer accepts it…this can’t be done in the Maldives.”

Five years’ on, and such a statement from a major politician seems unthinkable. In fact, in 2012, in the aftermath of the murder of Afrasheem Ali, Gayoom stated: “Death penalty is an option.”

Not mainly a religious or human rights issue

Coming from a secular liberal background, a person may conveniently blame the changing nature of this issue to a rise in ‘fundamentalist Islam’, Islamism, or Salafi puritanism.

Without denying the reality of re-Islamisation, this explanation comes partly from a fundamental fear of Islamism by secular liberals. The death penalty goes deeper than religion or liberal human rights.

While none in this debate claim that criminals should be set free, in 2008 Gayoom eloquently argued that forgiveness is more preferred in Islam. The Islamist side has been largely silent on the emphasis of mercy in Islam, thus making it difficult to limit the Islamist calls for death penalty to religion.

Even during President Amin’s time, the execution of the death penalty was not particularly meant to fulfill a religious obligation by a religious state. Amin’s constitution – based on Ceylon’s constitution granting dominion status – was one of the most secular and authoritarian of all Maldivian constitutions. Back then, Ibrahim Shihab claimed: “I could not find in the Republican Constitution any concern for Islamic principles and Divehi conventions’. Amin himself was accused of being ladini (irreligious).

Now take human rights. The right to life is the main basis for rejecting capital punishment under mainstream liberal conception of human rights. Yet, the death penalty has no equal juridical, advocacy, or enforcement status to other basic rights like freedom of religion, which has been completely denied in the Maldives.

In reality, for both sides, death penalty is about the very identity, the very nature of the state. It is indeed one test case for the ‘Islamist state’ – or the ‘secular state’, depending on which side one stands in the debate. The death penalty is about this mutual fear of the perceived influence and control by one side over the other with regards to the nature of the Maldivian state.

A matter of secular yet illiberal politics

While the death penalty may be a life-and-death issue about the nature of the state for liberals and the Islamists, the real actors and the real issues in this debate are neither religious nor liberal – though Islamism and human rights now feed into the background context of this issue.

The real actors who will determine the issue one way or the other are the secular (yet illiberal) politicians.

The real issue is instrumentalisation of religion and Islamo-nationalist sentiments of the people for political gain by ordinary politicians. This has created a vicious cycle in which every politician/party has a high premium to show their religious or Islamo-nationalist credentials, and discount the opponents’ credentials.

The result is what I call the ‘instrumentalist dilemma’ – the situation where a person (or a group) individually or privately holds a position/belief that they collectively or publically can’t hold. The instrumentalist dilemma is at play not only in the death penalty, but also in religion-based discrimination such as citizenship restriction.

Gayoom’s apparent turnaround or Foreign Minister Dunya Gayoom’s position seems to be none other than this dilemma. More clearly, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) chairperson’s recent support for it, or the MDP’s retraction of a statement rebuking the death penalty in 2012 – is this dilemma in action.

Stop the instrumentalist madness

The upshot of these instrumentalist dialectics is the irrational, out-of-hand outcome that the collective don’t necessarily want as individuals. If anything will see the death penalty implemented, it’s such secular, illiberal instrumentalist madness – not Islamism, Salafi puritanism, or religious fundamentalism.

But an outcome of madness neither serves religion nor human rights. And, much less does it address the issue of murder.

As for religion, irrespective of the question whether or not capital punishment is a religious obligation, without personal pious intention (niyah) the act doesn’t become a religious act. As for human rights, saying no to capital punishment is saying yes to the right to life.

As for murder reduction, a 2009 survey of criminologists – people who know the stuff about crimes and crime reduction – revealed that an overwhelming 88% believed death penalty was not a deterrent to murder. Similarly, murder rates have remained consistently lower in non-death penalty states over death penalty states.

Therefore, the religious and the liberals and those who are genuinely concerned about religion, human rights, or crimes should oppose this political madness, not each other.

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)

Corruption, religious freedom, and judiciary biggest human rights problems in Maldives, say US report

The US State Department has described “charges of Supreme Court interference to subvert the presidential elections process,” as among the most significant human rights problems in the Maldives in its 2013 human rights report.

Also highlighted in the report were restrictions on religious freedom, and “corruption of officials in all branches of government”.

No instances of imprisonment on political grounds, unlawful deprivation of life, or disappearance were recorded, while progress was noted with regards to the passage of the anti-torture and right to information bills.

The report accused much of the judiciary of being unqualified and corrupt, and noted that its rulings during last year’s presidential elections had the effect of restricting the independence of the Elections Commission (EC).

The judiciary was described as “not independent and impartial and was subject to influence and corruption”.

It said that a number of judges were “known to base their rulings on cash rewards, and there were reports that lawyers occasionally built the cost of bribes into their fees” while the public generally distrusted the judiciary.

The report estimated that one in four judges have a criminal record, and that two carried convictions for sexual assault.

It was suggested that the outcomes of cases appear to be predetermined, such as the repeated intervention of Supreme Court in the presidential elections where the court directly accepted cases without allowing lower courts to hear them first.

The October annulment ruling and the 16-point guide to conducting elections was reported to have given both the court and political parties veto power over the EC, “curbing its independence and its ability to execute its mandate”.

The report also mentioned the alleged sex tapes of Judge Ali Hameed and his continued presence on the bench.

“Many judges, appointed for life, held only a certificate in sharia, not a law degree. Most magistrate judges could not interpret common law or sharia because they lacked adequate English or Arabic language skills,” read the report.

Police

The report noted that security officials employed practices that fell under what it regarded as ‘torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment’.

While proper arrest procedures were found to be in place, the report noted that police did not fully implement them, particularly in dealing with protests. It was also noted that courts sometimes freed detainees “on the condition that they not participate in protests or political gatherings for a specified number of days”.

In regard to the cancelled October 19 presidential election, it was reported that “Police abdication of their responsibility prevented the elections from occurring”.

It was found that six cases of police brutality were sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office in 2013, but that five of these officers remained with the police – with one of them being promoted – and two cases later dismissed for lack of evidence.

Referring to the Police Integrity Commission (PIC), the report stated that two of three cases where police officers were alleged to have sexually harassed detainees in 2012 were also dropped for lack of evidence.

While the prisons were found to have ‘met most international standards’, it was also found that they were overcrowded.

Flogging, Rape, Domestic Violence and Sexual Harassment

The controversial case of a 15-year-old victim of sexual abuse being sentenced 100 lashes was recorded, detailing the fact that her alleged abuser received no sentence at all. The girl’s sentence was annulled by the High Court following a government appeal due to domestic and international pressure.

The penal code does not classify rape as a separate offense, the report stated, while the PG’s Office lost almost all cases of forced sexual assault due to insufficient weight was given to the testimony of the victim.

Spousal rape is not considered a crime under the law, and according to the report difficulties remain in implementing the domestic violence act due to religious beliefs.

While the Ministry of Health and Gender was said to have received just five cases of sexual harassment, the report stated that various forms of harassment were accepted as the norm in government offices. The protracted removal CSC President Mohamed Fahmy Hassan was noted in the report.

While the law stipulates sentences of up to 25 years in prison for those convicted sexual offenses against children, the report said that “if a person is legally married to a minor under sharia, however, none of the offenses specified in the legislation are considered crimes”.

In 2012, a total of 47 underage marriages were registered at the court, of which 35 involved girls and 12 involved boys.

Civil and political rights

Common to human rights reports on the Maldives, restrictions on freedom of speech and expression in order to protect Islam was noted. Media self-censorship in issues related to Islam – for fear of harassment- and in issues relating to the judiciary were detailed.

One piece of legislation criticised through out the report was the the Freedom of Peaceful Assembly Act, which was said to be restricting freedom of expression and the press along with freedom of peaceful assembly itself.

The report said this law “effectively prohibits strikes by workers in the resort sector, the country’s largest money earner”.

With regards to privacy, the report stated that standards required for court permission to monitor mails and phone conversations was very low.

Discrimination and attacks against Raajje TV, in particular the attack on Ibrahim ‘Asward’ Waheed, were mentioned. As the case of the attack against Asward continued, no arrests were made regarding the attacks against journalist Ismail Hilath Rasheed in 2011 and 2012. Hilath’s blog continues to be blocked.

The government was found to have failed to enforce applicable laws with regards to workers rights, and the report criticised established mechanisms such as the employment tribunal as “cumbersome and complicated” which violators of employment law often ignore.

“According to the Labor Relations Authority (LRA), there were four strikes. In two cases the employer refused to work with the LRA as mediator and strike participants were fired. In two others, the LRA participated by phone but strike leaders and others who persisted with the strike were terminated,” the report said.

It stated that some undocumented migrant workers were subject to forced labor in the construction and tourism sectors, while domestic workers – especially migrant female domestic workers – were sometimes trapped in forced servitude.

Without any laws on refugee or asylum status, a family of four Palestinian refugees from Syria were housed in Hulhulé island without being rehoused upon UNHCR’s request until asylum was granted for them by Sweden.

Read the full report here.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

HRCM introduces benchmark for migrant worker rights

Coinciding with the International Migrants Day, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) has launched a national benchmark for protecting migrant worker rights.

The benchmark was launched by HRCM President Mariyam Azra and Deputy Minister of Human Resources, Youth and Sports Naaif Shawkath at a ceremony held at Nasandhura Palace Hotel today.

Officials from various stakeholder institutions such as the Maldives Police Service and the Immigration Department were present at the ceremony, later taking part in a forum to discuss the utilisation of this benchmark in their work.

According to the commission, the purpose of having such a benchmark is to encourage protection of the rights of migrant workers and to provide a guideline highlighting the basic human rights principles to be followed.

It is based on the constitution of the Maldives, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW) and other human rights conventions to which the Maldives is a party.

While most of these standards are already obligations on the state, the benchmark itself is not something state institutions are obliged to follow, though the commission members noted the government’s willingness to accept it.

Speaking at the launching ceremony, commission member Jeehan Mahmood said she hoped all institutions would use it as a tool for protecting the rights of migrant workers. She noted the positive response from these institutions in meetings held within past few days to discuss the benchmark’s use in their work.

Advising the government in “formulation of laws, regulations and administrative codes concerning the promotion of a high regard for human rights and the protection and sustenance of such rights” is stated as a key function of the commission in the Human Rights Commission Act.

Speaking at the benchmark launching ceremony Deputy Minister Naaif advised all relevant institutions to accept the benchmark, and thanked HRCM for developing it. He said following it will standardise the work of all institutions.

In a press release issued today, the HRCM called on the state to facilitate implementation of  the recently ratified Anti Human Trafficking Act and reiterated their call to ratify and implement ICRMW as as soon as possible. The Maldives has agreed to ratify and implement this convention on various occasions.

The HRCM has cited the issue of healthcare as major challenge for undocumented migrant workers living in Maldives. According to a video presentation given at the ceremony, such workers hesitate to see a doctor even if they can afford to.

The video also showed that, out of all complaints submitted to the commission regarding rights of migrant workers, 68 percent of cases involved non-payment of wages, unfair expulsions, and the failure to provide food and shelter. 18 percent of cases were said to concern health issues while in detention.

Among other complaints received by the commission are the withholding of travel documents and work visas, refusing leave from work, and the termination of employment contracts without prior notice.

While there is no accurate official figures of the migrant worker population in the Maldives, the highest estimates suggest that it crossed the 100,000 mark in 2011, whilst the number of undocumented migrant workers have been placed as high as 44,000.

These numbers indicate that migrant workers might now represent more than one third of the total population.

The country was this year kept on the US State Department’s Tier Two Watch List for Human Trafficking for the fourth consecutive year, with promises that demotion to the third tier would be guaranteed in 2014 without significant progress being made.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Maldives should honor its history by supporting the rights of the Iranian people

In the coming days, the United Nations General Assembly will adopt a human rights resolution passed last month by its humanitarian committee aimed at improving the lives of Iran’s citizens. The human rights conditions of Iranians have been abysmal for three decades now.

This includes entrenched political repression, state-sanctioned gender and religious discrimination, and institutionalised violence and torture of government critics. Today, nearly a thousand political prisoners and prisoners of conscience languish in Iranian prisons due to the exercise of their guaranteed rights to expression, conscience, and religion.

While newly elected President Hassan Rouhani has provided hope to Iranians who voted him in on a platform of citizens’ rights, limits to presidential power are already undercutting his administration’s ability to usher in the human rights reforms he promised during his campaign for president. Policymaking in Iran also rests with unelected officials, so for Rouhani to advance his reform agenda, support from Iran’s Supreme Leader is necessary. What the Iranian people desperately need, therefore, and what President Rouhani can benefit from, is sustained and elevated attention to their situation. This will help Iran’s entire leadership understand that episodic or cosmetic steps will not be accepted as a substitute for genuine, broad-based democratic human rights reforms.

Yet, when the vote on this issue was called at the United Nations in November, the Maldives’ seat was empty.  This is all the more astonishing since the Maldives, itself, recently emerged from authoritarianism following its first multi-party elections in 2008. Meanwhile, the Maldives asked the UN General Assembly not once, but twice, to be elected to the Human Rights Council. It was the UN that called attention to a lack of gender equality in the Maldives’ judicial appointments, which helped the Maldives end gender discrimination within the judiciary, leading to the appointments of the country’s first-ever female judges. In Iran, female judges were unjustly removed from the bench after the 1979 revolution. They should be returned to their rightful posts.

Remembering the role of the international community

It was just eight years ago when in 2005, the UN Special Rapporteurs on freedom of expression, freedom of religion or belief, and human rights defenders sent an urgent appeal to the government of the Maldives concerning the now-defunct Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs’ declared ban on the possession of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

The government responded within a week affirming its support for the UDHR and explaining that the Council’s statement was not legally binding. Moreover, the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs responded a month later to confirm the initial response and to inform the UN experts that the government notified the Council to desist from such pronouncements without prior consultation. For these reasons, and more, the Maldivian people understand firsthand the vital role played by the international community in assisting nations to make human rights progress.

The Iranian people deserve the same support from the international community. They certainly deserve the backing of the Maldivian people who have faced similar challenges and benefitted from the UN’s attention.

The Iran human rights resolution focuses on many critical issues, such as the lack of freedom of expression and assembly in the country – as well as the need to release the hundreds of human rights defenders, activists, journalists, and opposition members in prison. It catalogues how women and religious minorities continue to face severe discrimination in law and practice, sometimes amounting to persecution. It discusses the country’s exorbitant execution rate, the highest per capita in the world. It requests Iran to end the practice of juvenile executions, public executions and other executions carried out in the absence of respect for internationally recognized safeguards, as well as to end inhumane and degrading forms of punishment, including amputation.

Despite President Rouhani’s election, more than 254 hangings have been carried out by Iran’s judiciary since his inauguration in August. The government has surpassed last year’s record by executing 529 people as of the end of November. Finally, the resolution calls on Iran to cooperate with UN human rights special procedures, including the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, who has not been allowed to visit the country since 2005.

The Maldives has the ability again this week to be present when the vote on the human rights of the Iranian people is called at the UN General Assembly. It has another opportunity to honor its own painful and inspirational history, and to honor the hundreds of prisoners of conscience in Iran who continue to fight for their freedom and for their human dignity. The Maldives should vote yes for its own people and for the people of Iran.

Dokhi Fassihian is an international human rights expert. Since 2003, she has led three non-governmental organizations working in the areas of human rights, democracy, and Iranian affairs

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)

Week in review: December 8 – 14

This week saw the repeatedly delayed budget introduced to the People’s Majlis. Coming in at MVR17.5billion rufiya, the budget – purportedly revised to incorporate President Yameen’s austerity measures – eclipses all previous spending programmes.

A report from the World Bank made clear the tough task the new government faces in nursing the economy towards good health. The report stated that the Maldives continues to spend “beyond its means”.

Noted areas of excess include a high civil service wage bill, with the World Bank suggesting that the government’s short term financing measures risked further damaging the economy.

The exploitation of the country’s persistent shortage of dollars by criminal elements was exposed this week as police reported the activity of thieves masquerading as legitimate exchangers of currency.

When accused of illegally obtaining a budget support loan, recently reappointed Finance Minister pleaded desperation. Abdulla Jihad argued that he had sidestepped the onerous approval procedure to avoid a financial catastrophe in May 2012.

Yameen took fitful steps towards fulfilling his campaign’s austerity pledges this week, ordering the reduction of salary for two grades of state minister – though the cut was only around 12.5 percent instead of the 30-50 mooted before the election.

Similarly, the new government appeared to have reneged on its pledge to provide cash-handouts to old-age pensioners – opting for an insurance scheme instead.

Government performance

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, however, appeared pleased with his half-brother’s performance thus far, praising his handling of Indo-Maldivian relations while the Defence Minister discussed enhanced military cooperation with Indian counterparts.

The indistinct ‘National Movement’ this week suggested ulterior motives in the bureaucratic thwarting of its plan to celebrate the eviction of Indian infrastructure giant GMR, whose deal to develop the international airport was prematurely terminated twelve months ago.

Elsewhere, the coalition member Adhaalath Party, quashed rumours that it had parted ways with Yameen’s government this week, despite previous reports that it intended to campaign independently in the upcoming local and parliamentary elections.

The ‘roadmaps’ for the first one hundred days of the government continued to be drawn this week, with comprehensive lists now produced in the areas of  transport, health, and immigration.

Whilst the Transport Ministry has promised finished plans for the redevelopment of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport, the health minister talked of significant changes to the IGMH public hospital.

The police service also joined in the policy pledging, with its own promises to improve its service and to build public trust in the institution. The Police Integrity Commission this week suggested that the prosecutor general assist in this task by prosecuting two officers it had found to have been negligent during the arson attack which destroyed Raajje TV in October.

The vacancy at the head of the PG’s Office did not stop the filing of charges in the 8 year old ‘Namoona Dhoni’ case. Pro-democracy activists – prevented from reaching Malé for a national demonstration – now face fresh charges of disobeying lawful orders.

Trust between the Supreme Court and the judicial watchdog appeared scant this week as the Chief Justice baulked at the JSC’s re-shuffling of a number of senior judges. Members of the JSC were later reported to have rejected Chief Justice Faiz’s legal objections.

Corruption and human rights

Confidence in the transparency of the public in public institutions also appeared to be on the wane this week, as Transparency Maldives’ Global Corruption Barometer (GCB) survey revealed that 83 percent of its sample felt corruption to have increased or stayed the same over the past two years.

Despite only appearing mid-table in the list of organisations perceived as being corrupt, the MNDF reacted disproportionately to the local media’s reporting of the survey, labelling CNM’s article on the survey “highly irresponsible journalism”.

The Anti Corruption Commission announced the discovery of graft in the capital’s largest housing programme. The highest number of bribes reported in the GCB was in the area of land services.

International human rights day was observed by the government and civil society in the same week the president ratified the country’s first anti-human trafficking bill. Whilst welcoming the new law, both the Human Rights Commission and the immigration department suggested that institutional strengthening would need to accompany a successful anti-trafficking policy.

Finally, this week saw the release of a United Nations Population Fund report, calling on the state to review existing practices related to sexual behaviour within the judicial process, law enforcement, education and health sectors.

The report stated reproductive health services ought to be expanded to non-married couples as evidence makes clear that the assumption sex does not, or should not, occur outside of marriage is increasingly out of step with social realities.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Justice elusive for female victims of violence

Violence against women remains one of the greatest scourges of our time. It is disgraceful that even today, for many women and girls everywhere, violence is lurking around street corners, in workplaces or in their very own homes. And too often, justice is elusive.

In Busia, Kenya, in June this year, a 16-year-old girl was gang-raped and thrown into a six-metre-deep pit latrine, breaking her back and leaving her with obstetric fistula. Police chose not to prosecute the men, instead ordering them to cut grass around the police station as punishment. The news unleashed a rare outpouring of public indignation and a petition was signed by 1.4 million people. The “Justice for Liz” campaign led the Chief Justice of Kenya to call for immediate action in the case.

Why did it take agitation by 1.4 million people to begin the process of justice which is the victim’s fundamental human right?

Halfway around the world, in Auckland, New Zealand, when a 13-year-old girl had gone to the police to report that she had been raped by three young men, one of the first questions she was reportedly asked was: “What were you wearing”. This was in 2011. Two years later, after many similar attacks by the same gang, it took a public exposé to rattle the authorities into action. The Independent Police Conduct Authority of New Zealand has been ordered to look into the handling of these cases and police are now finally conducting the investigations they should have begun two years ago.

Sadly, these are not isolated cases. Such crimes occur on a daily basis in countries across the world, but they rarely make headlines or lead to public outrage and action by high-level officials. In most parts of the world, women are too ashamed or fearful to report violence, particularly sexual violence, to the police. And when they overcome various societal barriers and taboos to file a complaint, they are all too often met with callous, insensitive official reactions, effectively blocking all access to justice.

Violence against women and girls has been perpetuated by centuries of male dominance and gender-based discrimination. Building on deeply entrenched social norms that frame women’s worth around discriminatory notions of chastity and “honour”, violence is often used to control and humiliate not only the victims, but also their families and communities. It is essential to challenge such notions, which often permeate the justice system itself, resulting in a vicious cycle of impunity and further violence.

The UN Committee on the Elimination on Discrimination against Women and the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women have been documenting violence against women, its causes and consequences in all parts of the world and recommending measures to eliminate such violence and to remedy its consequences. These recommendations must be taken seriously. States are obliged by international human rights law to ensure that the criminal justice system, at every stage, is free of gender bias, including in investigation, prosecution, interrogation and protection of victims and witnesses, and in sentencing.

The suggestion that women have a propensity to lie and that their testimony must be corroborated or treated with caution should be eliminated from every level of the judicial process, as must the idea that women invite sexual violence by being out late or by dressing in a particular manner.

On this International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, let us do our part to eliminate the harmful gender stereotypes that help perpetuate a climate where violence against women is considered acceptable or “deserved”. Violence is simply and totally unacceptable – no matter what she was wearing.

Navi Pillay is the UN Human Rights Commissioner

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)

“Supreme Court is subverting the democratic process”: UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has released a statement on Wednesday expressing concern about “the dangerous drift in the democratic process in the Maldives largely as a result of the Supreme Court’s repeated interventions in the presidential election process”.

“I am alarmed that the Supreme Court of the Maldives is interfering excessively in the Presidential elections, and in so doing is subverting the democratic process and violating the right of Maldivians to freely elect their representatives,” the statement read.

The Supreme Court immediately hit back today, with Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz describing Pillay’s comments as “poorly researched” and  “irresponsible”.

“The Supreme Court nullified the first round of the Presidential Election of 7 September 2013 on the basis of irregularities in the process, despite the general conclusions by national and international observers that the election was free and fair,” read Pillay’s statement.

Pillay also described the court’s election guidelines as “onerous” and “difficult to satisfy”.

“There have been longstanding concerns about the independence and impartiality of the judiciary in the Maldives, which both the High Commissioner and the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, addressed during official visits to the country in 2011 and 2013,” added Pillay

“I am normally the first to defend the independence of the judiciary, but this also carries responsibilities. Judges should act in accordance with the principles of impartiality, propriety, equality and due diligence, as reflected in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of Judiciary, the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, and Maldives’ own code of conduct,” Pillay stated.

The statement further also expressed concern regarding the court’s threats to charge lawyers, media and civil society groups for challenging its decisions, as well as “the reactivation of old cases to arrest opposition MPs or bar them from Parliament.”

“The Supreme Court appears set on undermining other independent institutions, stifling criticism and public debate, and depriving litigants of the legal representation of their choice,” Pillay stated.

Chief Justice’s response

“I harshly condemn UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay’s  false allegations regarding the Maldives Supreme Court’s work to uphold its constitutional duties and responsibilities. I do not believe she has any authority to speak in such terms,” responded Chief Justice Faiz today.

Defending the court’s neutrality, Faiz argued that Pillay’s statement was unacceptable for an official operating under the UN’s mandate to protect the rights of large and small states alike.

“False allegations by any party on the Supreme Court’s work does not aid strengthening democracy, administration of justice in the Maldives or uphold the rule of law. It does not encourage the promotion of democracy, rule of law or protection of human rights,” read Faiz’s statement.

The first round of the Maldives presidential election – held on September 7 was annulled by the Supreme Court earlier this month, with a fresh round of elections arranged to be held on October 19.

The re-scheduled vote, however, was also cancelled after police obstructed the Elections Commission, citing the Supreme Court’s issued 16 regulation as justification.

As well as condemning the police for the delay, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives has also condemned the police for “acting beyond its mandate”, while a leaked report by the commission questions the credibility of the evidence used by the apex court in its annulment of the first round of elections.

A joint statement by the International Federation for Human Rights and local NGO Maldives Democracy Network has described the court’s verdict as being founded on “materially baseless arguments”, after the first round was “applauded as a success by the international community.”

A new first round is now scheduled for November 9, with the EC President Fuwad Thowfeek maintaining it will not be changed despite requests to expedite the polling date from both the current government and the contesting presidential candidates.

Government-aligned parties go to SC for political solutions

Progressive Party of Maldives lawyer Ibrahim ‘Wadde’ Waheed submitted a case to the Supreme Court on Tuesday seeking a ruling on the motion passed by the parliament to appoint Speaker Abdulla Shahid as interim head of state in the instance that an elected president cannot be installed by the constitutionally mandated date, November 11.

Waheed is quoted in local media as saying the parliamentary motion has been passed against the constitution and the verdicts of the Supreme Court.

On the same day, Wadde has also submitted another case to the court asking it to rule that the MDP MP Ahmed Hamza’s appointment to the judicial watchdog – the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) – was conducted in breach of the constitution.

In this case, Wadde argued that Hamza is a person who works “against the judiciary” and so he finds it “unacceptable that such a man can serve in the JSC”.

Earlier this month Wadde, alongside Jumhooree Coalition member ‘Madhanee Ihthihaadh’ (Civil Alliance) President Sheikh Mohamed Didi, filed a case in the apex court challenging opposition Maldivian Democratic Party candidate and former President Mohamed Nasheed’s candidacy.

The petition gave as grounds Nasheed’s criticism of the judiciary, as well as his “outright criticism towards Islam and iposing Islamic Sharia’ in the Maldives”.

Jumhooree Coalition’s Presidential Candidate Gasim Ibrahim has also this week called on President Dr Mohamed Waheed to seek advice from the apex court on the course of action he should take should there not be an elected leader by November 11.

Speaking at a party rally, Gasim stated that as Waheed has previously written to the parliament for advice, he believes the president should also seek the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Human Rights Commission alleges police intimidation of its staff

The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) has alleged that the police are attempting to intimidate commission staff members following the start of its investigations into what they maintain is police obstruction of the October 19 presidential election.

“The commission believes that what we are facing now is serious, unprecedented and unjustifiable intimidation from the police. We will continue the investigation, while also ensuring that we continue protecting every one of our team members,” HRCM member Jeehan Mahmoodh has told Minivan News.

Jeehan stated that, after criticising the police for acting outside of their mandate when obstructing the Elections Commissions (EC) efforts to conduct the presidential election on October 19, they have been facing what the commission believes to be attempts by the police to intimidate its staff.

Jeehan said that the police had requested the HRCM provide “complete details” of the staff members who witnessed the police’s actions outside of the EC on the morning of October 19.

“In the history of HRCM, we have never before had such a request, where details of individual staff are asked for in relation to an investigation. This just cannot be done,” Jeehan said.

“We responded, invoking Article 27 of the HRCM Act and informed the police that the commission will not compromise the safety of any of our staff members. We also explained that as this is an ongoing investigation we cannot compromise it by providing detailed information regarding the matter,” she continued.

Article 27 of the HRCM Act has two parts, with part (a) stating that, “No criminal or civil suit shall be filed against the President or Vice- President or a member of the Commission in relation to committing or omitting an act in good faith whilst undertaking responsibilities of the commission or exercising the powers of the Commission or the powers conferred to the Commission by a law”.

Part (b) of the same article says “The Commission can only be questioned or a suit can be filed against the Commission in court regarding a component in a report published by the Commission following an inquiry, should sufficient evidence be available to prove the component is false”.

Speaking out on human rights violation is our duty: HRCM

After Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz tweeted saying, “HRCM to seek information after findings revealed!!”, Jeehan’s response echoed the HRCM statement released following the police’s initial suggestions that the HRCM had not made a balanced assessment.

“This is definitely not the first time HRCM has made comments in the instance that we observe a breach of human rights, regardless of who the instigators are. If a human rights violation becomes apparent to the commission, then we have both the right and the responsibility to promptly share this with the general public,” she said.

“For instance, after the events of February 8, 2012, HRCM immediately made a public initial statement on the matter…The police are well aware this is the norm,” she continued.

“Putting it in a different context, let’s say the police see a crime being committed, and arrests a person red-handed at the crime scene. They don’t wait for their full investigation to end, and nor does their investigation end there. But since they saw it happen, they get to make a stand. Similarly, when it is evident that a human rights violation has been committed, the commission will take a stand,” she said.

October 19

Jeehan also spoke to Minivan News about the HRCM’s work on October 19, the date intended for a fresh round of elections after the initial September 7 poll was annulled by the Supreme Court.

“Our team – it’s full strength including the commissioners – was on duty by 5:30am on October 19, as we were ready to carry out election observation. We then received reports of police obstructing EC officials, and immediately dispatched investigators to the EC offices. Our staff spoke with the EC Secretary General Asim Abdul Sattar, as well as a number of police officers there. Thereby, our staff are witnesses to the events that took place that day,” she explained.

“HRCM Vice President Tholal was in charge as Commission President Azra was away on hajj pilgrimage. Tholal tried multiple times to reach the police focal point – incidentally the same as the focal point for the EC – Assistance Commissioner of Police Ali Rasheed by phone, and finally sent a text message. ACP Rasheed did not respond to even the text until nearly midnight,” Jeehan continued.

“Tholal then called the Acting Home Minister [Ahmed Shafeeu], who is in effect the oversight over the police force. He asked the minister, and I quote, “why have police obstructed elections?”. The Minister informed us that the obstruction is not a police initiative or decision, and that they are following orders after much deliberation. Contrary to some media reports, the Home Ministry’s statement did not deny our claims that we contacted him and got this response, but rather confirms it,” Jeehan said.

“Police did not act in their own accord”: Home Minister

A press statement of the Home Ministry reads, “As the letter sent by the HRCM to the Police alleging that the police obstructed the elections scheduled for October 19 reveals that when they contacted the Acting Home Minister via phone and asked him why police had obstructed elections, he responded that the police had not acted out of their own accord but on orders that they had received, this ministry feels we must clarify what happened.”

“On the 19th of this month, in a phone conversation, Vice President of HRCM Ahmed Tholal asked why the police had acted in a manner against the government’s statement that it will provide cooperation to holding the election.”

“In response, the Minister had said that the police had not acted on their own accord, and that it had been in accordance with the advice of the relevant government bodies which was based on the verdict of the Supreme Court,” the statement concluded.

Police asks HRCM to identify officers they spoke with on October 19

Jeehan said that the police had also requested the HRCM provide identification details of the police officers that the commission’s investigators had spoken with on the morning of October 19.

“This is information that the police must have. They ought to know which of their officers they dispatched there, and what they did in their line of duty. That was the commission’s response to them, shouldn’t they know who it was?” Jeehan asked.

Jeehan also said that the commission has requested the police to provide an incident report on the events of October 19, as well as copies of all communication they have exchanged with any other institution after the date of the initial annulled election.

“It isn’t at all like the police are claiming on various media. We are not asking for information after reaching a conclusion. We made that initial statement that police obstructed elections based on our observations, and the fact that our staff were witness to it. We are now conducting a procedural investigation of the matter,” Jeehan explained.

“Furthermore, we have asked for copies of any communication between the police and any other institution from beyond the date of the obstructed election for an investigation that is based on other additional information we have received. We cannot yet reveal the details of this as it may compromise the investigation, but it will be made public upon completion,” she continued.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)