Indian comedy of errors in the Maldives: Deccan Herald

The Maldives — with a predominantly Sunni population of 400,000, the ending of President M.A. Gayoom’s 30-year rule and the US war on terror post-9/11 — was ripe for the emergence of radical Islamists and their convergence with Gayoom loyalists, writes for K C Singh for India’s Deccan Herald.

Mr Nasheed’s election convinced New Delhi that the Mal­dives was on a path of self-correcting liberal democracy. But even wh­en warning signals began emanating that the tourism industry was being targeted on narrow principles of faith and that Mr Nasheed was alienating his alliance partners, corrective measures were not taken.

Firstly, India erred in quickly endorsing the transfer of power from Mr Nasheed to Mr Waheed without ensuring that the latter ex­cluded sympathisers of radicals from critical Cabinet posts (the home minister went to a Pak­istani religious school), announced early elections and struck a truce with the outgoing Pre­sident.

The unseemly haste in India’s Prime Minister writing to the new Pre­sident lost that opportunity. The next mistake was in neither anticipating the attack on the Indian company GMR, to whom the awarding of the contract to run the Male airport was a showpiece decision of the Nasheed government, nor defending it when a clear motivating factor was the business interests of Mr Waheed’s coalition partner.

Finally, the Nasheed affair has been handled without political fine­s­se. Resting Indian interests on the fate of one ob­viously flawed personality, exposing his Indian links by having him sit cowering in India’s mission and thus letting anti-Indian and pro-Islamic sentiments swirl is foolhardy. Gayoom has positioned himself cleverly. He has neither supported India nor criticised it. His daughter, who is in the run for presidency, benefits fr­om the division between Mr Nasheed and Mr Waheed. We should not have abandoned Mr Na­sheed in 2012, and having done so not got stuck with him.

Disraeli, as Prime Minister in 1877, frustrated by his maladroit diplomats wrote, “They seem quite useless. It is difficult to control eve­nts, but none of them try to.” His ambassador in Berlin he felt was “… rep­o­rting all Bismarck’s bravado… in an ecstasy of sycophantic wo­nder”. Perhaps our Pri­me Minister needs to ask the same question to his diplomats and his nati­onal security adviser.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court issues second arrest warrant for Nasheed

The Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has issued a second arrest warrant for former President Mohamed Nasheed, an official from the Judiciary Media Unity has confirmed.

Five days after Nasheed sought refuge inside the Indian High Commission, the Judiciary Media Unity confirmed to Minivan News that Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has now issued a new arrest warrant, ordering police to produce Nasheed at the court on February 20 at 4:00pm.

Police Spokesperson Sub Inspector Hassan Haneef also confirmed that the Maldives Police Service had received the court order for Nasheed’s arrest.

The former president has been taking refuge inside the Indian High Commission building in Male’ since February 13 to avoid arrest, after Hulhumale’ court previously ordered police to produce him at his scheduled trial.

Nasheed and his party have maintained that the charges put forward against him – of illegally detaining Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed during his final days in office – are a politically-motivated attempt to prevent him from contesting presidential elections scheduled for later this year.

The latest arrest warrant comes after Nasheed failed to attend the last two scheduled trial hearings on February 10 and February 13.

An official from the Indian High Commission told Minivan News they were waiting to see the arrest warrant and are “watching the current situation”.

The situation has contributed to an escalation in diplomatic tensions between India and the Maldives, which has accused the former of interference in internal Maldivian affairs.

High Commissioner D M Mulay was summoned to the Foreign Ministry on Sunday and presented with a protest note from the government.

On Monday the High Commission released a statement “denying in entirety” allegations that it was being used by the former President “for political meetings and instigating street violence”.

Thousands of supporters of the former president have been protesting in the capital Male’ since Nasheed moved into the Indian High Commission last Wednesday.

On Saturday (February 16) over 5000 supporters marched through the streets of Male’ clashing with police, which resulted in 55 arrests during the night.

Nasheed’s decision to seek asylum in the Indian High Commission caught the attention of the international community last week. The US, UK, EU, UN and Commonwealth have since urged the Maldivian government to show restraint, whilst calling for “inclusive, free and fair elections” in September.

Arrest warrant is a threat to Nasheed’s life: MDP

Following the news of the latest warrant, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said that the party are “firmly” against the former President from standing trial in an “illegitimate court”.

“The party firmly believes that he should not go [to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court] and we firmly believe that the arrest warrant threatens his life.

“The moment he steps out of the Indian High Commission, that will be the end of him. Even the international community have recognised this as a witch hunt,” Ghafoor told Minivan News.

When asked as to whether former president will comply with the court order, Ghafoor said “it is Nasheed’s call”.

“The question is, what do the Indians do now? The Maldives authorities will now have to approach the Indian High Commission and ask them to hand him over.

“The minute the Indian government gave him refuge, they took a position. I can’t see the Indian government dropping Nasheed like a hot potato,” Ghafoor added.

The MDP spokesperson claimed the government had alienated itself from the international community given their stance on the matter. Ghafoor further claimed that foreign governments and organisations “can see” that attempts to arrest Nasheed “are nothing more than a witch hunt”.

India’s involvement criticised by Maldives officials

India’s involvement in the political dispute has been criticised by members of the Maldivian government, with the Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed tweeting last week: “What’s happening now gives us an indication of the extent and level of interest some countries prepared to take in our internal matters,” he said.

“I would strongly urge everyone to let our institutions deal with the challenges, and allow the Maldives to uphold rule of law,” he tweeted.

President of the Maldives, Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik released his own statement yesterday condemning Nasheed’s actions on Wednesday.

“I am dismayed that the former President Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission in Male’ when he was summoned to the court. The court order which required the Police to arrest Nasheed and have him appear before the court was due to his refusal to attend court hearing. It had expired at 1600 hours on the 13 February 2013, and there is no reason for him to remain in the High Commission and to instigate street violence.

“The court order has nothing to do with my government. Upholding the rule of law means nobody is above the law. I would like to assure the people of Maldives that the law and order will be maintained,” the President’s statement read.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Further protests as MDP calls for international community to be “mindful” of Maldives judiciary

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has called for the international community to be “mindful” of the status of the Maldives judiciary, claiming it to be systematically flawed and biased.

The party’s sentiments were echoed in last night’s (February 16) protest as thousands of supporters of Nasheed once again took to the streets of Male’.

The former President has been inside the Indian High Commission since Wednesday afternoon after he sought refuge from a court warrant ordering police to present him before the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Nasheed and his party have maintained that the charges – of illegally detaining Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed prior to his controversial resignation on February 7, 2012 – are a politically-motivated attempt to prevent him from contesting presidential elections scheduled for later this year.

In contrast to Friday night’s protest, where 55 people were arrested following clashes with police, demonstrators last night took part in a “seated protest” in the intersection between Majeedhee Magu and Chaandhanee Magu.

Maldives Police Service (MPS) Spokesperson Sub Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News today that while there had been no arrests made, a vehicle belonging to the Police Family and Child Protection Department was set on fire.

Police also allege that protesters set fire to a police barricade in the early hours of the morning.

However, MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor claimed the circumstances surrounding the barricade fire were suspicious.

“There had been reports that a police barricade was set on fire by protesters. However police tweeted about the fire two minutes before it actually happened,” Hamid claimed.

Minivan News observed around 4,000 demonstrators at last night’s gathering and witnessed multiple charges at the crowds by riot police.

MDP concern over Nasheed’s trial

statement released by the MDP yesterday expressed concern regarding the trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed, adding that the status of the judiciary and rule of law in the country was not conducive to ensuring a fair trial for the former president.

The statement accuses judges within the Maldives judiciary as being “under qualified, of dubious moral character, corrupt with political bias, and unduly influenced by members of the former regime”.

“When international actors refer to rule of law and due process, it is only a presumption that rule of law exists in the Maldives,” Ghafoor stated.

“When calling for rule of law in the Maldives our international partners must bare in mind the current state of the judiciary, and its ability to conduct a fair trial.”

Speaking to Minivan News on Thursday, trial observer Stephen Cragg, who compiled a report on Nasheed’s trial, said it was clear the former president was concerned he would not receive a fair trial with the current judges on the case.

Cragg visited the Maldives last year on behalf of the Bar Human Rights Committee (BHRC) to observe the hearings of former President Nasheed’s trial.

“I think it is clear that Mr Nasheed is concerned that he will not get a fair trial if the case goes ahead with the current judges due to hear the case, and his action is likely to highlight those concerns internationally,” Cragg said.

The report compiled by Cragg notes: “BHRC is concerned that a primary motivation behind the present trial is a desire by those in power to exclude Mr Nasheed from standing in the 2013 elections, and notes international opinion that this would not be a positive outcome for the Maldives.”

In the statement, the MDP welcomed calls from India, United Kingdom, United States, the Commonwealth, United Nations and the European Union for a free, fair and inclusive presidential election in the Maldives.

On Friday, EU High Representative Catherine Ashton said she was following the latest developments “with concern” and “called on all parties to refrain from actions or statements which are liable to inflame the political climate in the country”.

“I underline the urgent need to resume dialogue between the parties, so as to ensure that the presidential elections set for September 2013 are credible, transparent, inclusive and fully representative of the wishes of all Maldivians, and so that the reforms identified by the Commission of National Inquiry in August 2012 can be rapidly implemented,” she said in a statement.

President of the Maldives, Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik released his own statement yesterday condemning Nasheed’s actions on Wednesday.

“I am dismayed that the former President Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission in Male’ when he was summoned to the court. The court order which required the Police to arrest Nasheed and have him appear before the court was due to his refusal to attend court hearing. It had expired at 1600 hours on the 13 February 2013, and there is no reason for him to remain in the High Commission and to instigate street violence.

“The court order has nothing to do with my government. Upholding the rule of law means nobody is above the law. I would like to assure the people of Maldives that the law and order will be maintained,” the President’s statement reads.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Elections Commission Head warns a compromised Nasheed trial could create doubt over election integrity

President of the Elections Commission (EC) Fuad Thaufeeq has expressed concern over former President Mohamed Nasheed’s decision to take refuge in the Indian High Commission.

Former President Nasheed sought refuge last Wednesday claiming his security was compromised and that the government was intending to arrest and convict him to prevent him contesting the 2013 presidential elections.

Speaking to local media, the elections commission chief said it was deeply concerning to see the presidential candidate of the largest political party seeking refuge from a diplomatic office.

Thaufeeq said Nasheed was a former President and ought to receive the privileges entitled to a former president as stipulated in the law.

“Firstly, Nasheed is a former president, secondly he a presidential candidate of a political party. Thirdly, he represents the largest political party in the country. Each of these factors carries significant weight,” Thaufeeq said.

He said the Elections Commission would do everything it could to find a solution for all the parties involved, including the former president.

Thaufeeq said Nasheed should get a fair trial in accordance with the constitution and the law, and that such a trial should not be politically motivated.

The President of the Elections Commission warned that if Nasheed’s trial proved to be a tool to bar him from contesting the scheduled presidential elections, it would cast doubt over the integrity of the election.

“Even if it is Abdulla Yameen or Umar Naseer or Gasim Ibrahim or Mohamed Nasheed or even Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, these people have all announced they will contest the elections. If one of them happens to be on trial, that trial must be free and fair,” he told local newspaper Haveeru.

The Elections Commission has announced that the election will take place on September 7.

Nasheed is being tried for his controversial detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed, during his final days in office in January 2012.

Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission ahead of the second hearing of his ongoing criminal trial, after an order was issued by the magistrate court to place him under police custody.

After entering the High Commission, Nasheed tweeted: “Mindful of my own security and stability in the Indian Ocean, I have taken refuge at the Indian High Commission in Maldives.”

Rumours of Nasheed’s imminent arrest began to circulate on Tuesday (February 12) ahead of the scheduled hearing, prompting his supporters to camp in the narrow alley outside his family home in Male’.

Following the Indian High Commission’s decision to take Nasheed in, police failed to produce him stating they did not have the jurisdiction to enter the premises, citing the protections of the Vienna convention to which the Maldives is signatory.  The hearing was subsequently cancelled in his absence.

The government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik expressed concern over the move and accused India of meddling with its domestic affairs.

Speaking to local newspaper Haveeru on Thursday (February 14), Home Minister Mohamed Jameel said attempts by any country to prevent a person from facing charges pressed by an independent Prosecutor General (PG), could be described as interfering with domestic matters of a sovereign state.

In a tweet on Wednesday, Jameel implied that India was meddling in the Maldives’ internal affairs: “What’s happening now gives us an indication of the extent and level of interest some countries prepared to take in our internal matters,” he said.

“I would strongly urge everyone to let our institutions deal with the challenges, allow Maldives to uphold rule of law,” he tweeted.

statement released by India’s Ministry of External Affairs following the development called on the government of Maldives to facilitate an inclusive election in which all political party leaders could take part.

“Now that the President of the Election Commission of Maldives has announced that Presidential elections would be held on 7 September 2013, it is necessary that the Presidential nominees of recognised political parties be free to participate in the elections without any hindrance. Prevention of participation by political leaders in the contest would call into question the integrity of the electoral process, thereby perpetuating the current political instability in Maldives,” read the statement.

The United States, United Kingdom, UN, EU and Commonwealth have all followed India‘s lead and stressed the need for the next presidential election to be an inclusive election.

Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has maintained that the charges are a politically-motivated attempt to prevent him contesting the 2013 elections.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: India an unreliable friend

On 7 February 2012, somebody in the Indian High Commission – located barely a few meters away from the scene where mutinying cops brought down the first elected government in Maldivian history – gave some astoundingly poor advice to somebody in New Delhi, and what followed was one of the worst diplomatic blunders by India in recent memory.

The tear gas clouds had barely settled when Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh sent his ‘warm felicitations’ and became the first country to recognise Vice President Mohamed Waheed’s newly installed government – a coalition of radical Islamists and far right nationalists led by former dictator Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s party.

The United States and other Western powers would follow India’s lead in recognising the new regime, and – even as Maldivian democrats watched in disbelief – a major wrong that should have been straightened out was instead set firmly crooked.

The next day, the regime police continued targeted attacks on MDP leaders and activists. MPs were beaten half to death and lay unconscious on the pavements. Mohamed Nasheed, the first elected President of the Republic, was roughed up on the streets by uniformed men and was seen bleeding from the forehead. Scores of civilians were publicly brutalised and hundreds of pro-democracy demonstrators were arrested while India naively pursued relations with the new regime.

Over one year later, the cycle of violence and unrest continues on the streets of Male’, as pro-democracy protesters clash with regime police. The latest confrontations started after President Nasheed, in a dramatic turn of events last Thursday, sought refuge inside the Indian High Commission following the Waheed regime’s renewed efforts to arrest him and convict him in what is essentially a kangaroo court.

Once again, all eyes are on India, keenly observing if there will be a repeat of the ghastly diplomatic miscalculations of last year.

A series of unfortunate decisions

The gamble in 2012 was this: in return for the recognition of his regime, Waheed had pledged to honour major Indian investments in the Maldives, including the $500 million investment by Indian infrastructure company GMR in the country’s main international airport. As senior Indian diplomat G Parthasarathy confirmed in a recent televised debate, India had also been given assurances that there would be inclusive, free and fair elections.

Once again, somebody in India’s MEA should have easily flagged that Waheed, being a political nonentity, could hardly be held to his word. As the tinpot leader of a party whose very existence – with merely 3000 odd members – is an exercise in vanity, Waheed hasn’t a prayer of being nominated, much less winning an election, and is destined to be discarded into political oblivion before the end of this year.

And yet, India went with his assurances even as the the regime’s extremist allies took out motorcades around the streets of the capital, demanding GMR’s exit and, for the first time in recent Maldivian history, spreading radical anti-Indian propaganda over loud megaphones.

Sure enough, with the same belligerence and arrogance that characterised their early diatribes against the CMAG and EU, the regime thumbed their nose at India, and the GMR deal was scrapped without the slightest courtesy and amid a barrage of heavy anti-Indian rhetoric propagated by radical regime allies like the DQP and the Adhaalath Party.

India’s big gamble failed, and the aspiring superpower was left with egg on its face as Waheed’s spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza publicly slandered the Indian ambassador, calling him a ‘traitor’ and an ‘enemy of the Maldives’. Furthermore, the regime that was legitimised with Indian support would proceed to cozy up to rival power China, with regime actors going so far as to lambast India while on Chinese soil.

Eliminating Nasheed

In the bargain, India also lost favour with former ally Nasheed – whose government had gone out of its way to align with them. From plugging the Maldives into the Indian coastal security grid, to seeking Indian investments in his much celebrated environmental, energy and infrastructure projects, to unilaterally sharing intelligence on religious radicals operating in the country, Nasheed was thoroughly a friend of India in every imaginable sense until India, with remarkable urgency, dumped him and rushed to Waheed’s aid in 2012.

Having scrapped the GMR deal in an ugly fashion, the Waheed regime also backtracked on the second assurance of conducting early, inclusive elections.

Observers of Maldivian politics would recollect that Umar Naseer, Vice President of Gayoom’s political party, had specifically stated in an interview immediately after the February 7 coup d’etat, that Nasheed would not be a part of the next elections.

The regime’s Home Minister Mohamed Jameel has been unable to hide his deep frustration over the overwhelming international pressure that has so far thwarted his concerted attempts to eliminate Nasheed from the political scene ahead of the elections.

Mohamed Nasheed, the lifelong democratic activist, is easily the only MDP leader who commands popular nationwide grassroots support and absolute loyalty of his party activists, making him the last remaining obstacle for the Gayoom network – of which Waheed is the nominal puppet head – to permanently dismantle the country’s nascent democracy and reestablish the old order.

It would be pertinent at this moment to recall that the Waheed’s former Human Rights Minister Dhiyana Saeed, as well as former Military and Police Intelligence Chiefs have independently revealed the existence of opposition plots to assassinate President Nasheed while he was still in power.

With the change of guard on February 7 last year, that has become unnecessary. With the country’s runaway judiciary and security forces firmly under their grip, there is not much to stop the Waheed regime from eliminating him ‘legally’ and ‘by the book’. And this, evidently, is the plan that is currently in place.

Your friendly neighbourhood democracy

Simply put, there is a zero percent chance of an inclusive, fair or free elections being held in the Maldives with the current regime in power.

Faced with this conundrum, Maldivian democrats as well as Indian analysts appear to be looking towards India as the saviour to back Nasheed, who – in a frantic Hail Mary move – is now holed up at the Indian Embassy.

The question is: Why should Maldivian democrats trust India?

There is little reason to expect India to step into the internal affairs of the Maldives for the sake of grand concepts like freedom or democracy in the neighborhood.

One feels that despite the rise of nationalist and Islamist radicals, and the runaway judiciary, and the reversal of democracy in the neighbourhood, and the creation of a police state in the Maldives, what really inspired India’s change of heart about the Waheed regime was the loss of its economic investments. In other words, had GMR not been thrown out, India would have likely continued to turn a blind eye to the regime’s systematic dismantling of democracy in the Maldives.

Perhaps, having been rudely rebuffed by the Waheed regime that has now chosen to align with China, India is merely invoking the patron saint of lost causes by turning to Nasheed.

For the average Maldivian, however, the power struggles between the two large regional powers are a matter of less importance than having a working economy, a functioning judiciary, an expectation of justice, a representative government, and freedom from a familiar brutal police state that has reared its head again after a 3 year slumber.

The solution to these problems have to necessarily be local. Far from relying on foreign intervention, the MDP needs to campaign and educate and rally the public behind the goals of judicial overhaul and peaceful civil disobedience for change.

While one must acknowledge the invaluable assistance from theiInternational community in forcing the iron-fisted Gayoom to bow down before the people and ushering in the democratic transition in the last decade, the truth is that sustaining a democracy is a task that is best accomplished at home.

Not India’s war

The playwright George Bernard Shaw said in the early 1900’s, “Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve”.

The harsh truth is that the Waheed regime has survived for over an year – despite the reckless trampling over citizens rights, the outright hostility towards the free media, the excessive brutality and the total impunity – only because the Maldivian public has allowed this injustice to take place.

Appearing on The Daily Show, President Nasheed quipped about the Americans following India’s lead in legitimising the coup: “I wonder if it is an intelligent thing to outsource your foreign policy”

Likewise, it is perhaps lazy and counter-productive for Maldivians to outsource the task of nation building to a neighbouring country that has its own vested interests. Indeed, this is perhaps one of the primary lessons that Maldivian democrats should take away from the experience of the February 7 coup. What has been stolen from the Maldivian citizens must be reclaimed by the Maldivian citizens. The responsibility for safeguarding our democracy remains ours and ours alone.

While India intervention could certainly make the task of restoring democracy exponentially easier, it nevertheless remains an objective that needs to be met regardless of India’s stand on the matter.

And yet, as a liberal, democratic Maldivian citizen, one hopes that New Delhi might one day realise that propping up military and Islamist backed anti-democratic forces in its immediate neighborhood will never serve India’s interests – either in the short term or the long term.

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)

US, UK, UN call for restraint, “inclusive” presidential elections

Foreign governments and international bodies have taken India’s lead, expressing concern over the political instability in the Maldives and emphasising the importance of all parties being able to put forward the candidates of their choice in the upcoming elections.

“Now that the President of the Election Commission of Maldives has announced that Presidential elections would be held on 7 September 2013, it is necessary that the Presidential nominees of recognised political parties be free to participate in the elections without any hindrance,” stated India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) on Wednesday, after former President Mohamed Nasheed sought refuge in its High Commission.

“Prevention of participation by political leaders in the contest would call into question the integrity of the electoral process, thereby perpetuating the current political instability in Maldives,” the MEA stated.

The United States Embassy in Colombo urged “all sides to remain calm, reject the use of violence, and avoid rhetoric that could increase tensions.”

“Former President Nasheed must be accorded due process under the law regarding his pending court cases,” the US Embassy said in a statement.

“We urge that the Presidential elections scheduled for September 7, 2013 be free, fair, credible, transparent and inclusive. The integrity of and public confidence in the Maldivian electoral process must be maintained.

“Accordingly, we note that all parties participating in these elections should be able to put forward the candidate of their choice. We continue to urge all parties to chart a way forward that respects Maldivian democratic institutions, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms,” the US added.

The UK issued a statement similarly calling for calm and restraint.

“During FCO Minister Alistair Burt’s recent visit to Maldives, he said it was vital that the country move decisively towards free, fair and inclusive Presidential elections. He also stressed the importance of all parties being able to participate in elections with the candidate of their choice. It is important for all parties to avoid taking action which could lead to doubt over the integrity of the electoral process and contribute to continuing instability,” the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office stated.

The UN Secretary General’s office stated that it was “monitoring the developments with concern”, and urged “all political actors to exercise restraint, renew their commitment to the constitution and work toward creating conducive conditions for fair, peaceful and inclusive elections.”

“All parties contesting the September 7 presidential elections should be able to field the candidates of their choice in accordance with the rule of law and the constitution,” the UN stated.

Transparency Maldives (TM), which will locally be conducting an extensive program of election monitoring, meanwhile expressed “deep concern over the continuing political polarisations and tensions that have strained the democratic gains from the past elections,” and called for all sides to “guarantee and sustain an environment conducive for free and fair and fully inclusive elections.”

“As such, there is an immediate need for the political and State leadership to resort to a process of negotiations towards addressing the challenges for free and fair and fully inclusive elections. At the heart of such a process should be showing leadership and a spirit of compromise that we saw during the pre-election and post-election period of the 2008 Presidential Elections,” Transparency stated.

Government speaks to India

Following India’s initial warning that a failure to allow all political leaders to contest the elections would call into question the integrity of the electoral process and perpetuate instability, the Maldives Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry declared it was “unfortunate that the Government of India has decided to comment on the types of candidates that could contest the upcoming Presidential Elections in the Maldives scheduled for September 2013.”

“The independent Elections Commission has not, as of date, announced the candidates for the elections. Furthermore the Government firmly believes that the Elections Commission of Maldives is fully capable of evaluating and deciding eligibility of nominees in the elections and carrying forward a credible electoral process. To presume otherwise would be undermining the democratic institutions of the country and the progress achieved by the Maldives in consolidating its democracy,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Nasheed’s on-going trial “is a matter handled by two independent State institutions, namely the Prosecutor General and the judiciary. Like any other democratic country, the executive branch of the Government of Maldives cannot, under the Constitution of the Maldives, interfere with the independence of the judiciary, and will indeed ensure that the independence of the judiciary is always upheld.”

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel was more direct, telling local media yesterday that any attempts by another country to prevent a person from facing charges pressed by an independent Prosecutor General, could be described as interfering domestic matters of a sovereign state.

Jameel – formerly Justice Minister under Gayoom’s government – maintained that the charges levied against the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate were serious as they involved the “abduction of a senior judge”.

India’s Minister of External Affairs Salman Khurshid meanwhile spoke to his Maldivian counterpart Dr Samad Abdulla on Thursday (February 14).

Samad told Khurshid there were no court summons pending for Nasheed “but in the instance that such a summons is issued, Nasheed will have to attend the hearing.”

“Samad also said that it is unacceptable for any person to speak against this, as this is in accordance with the constitution of the Maldives,” read a translated statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

According to the MEA, Khurshid told Samad that India “has broad based contacts with all political parties and democratic institutions in the Maldives, without interfering in the internal affairs of the country”, as part of its “commitment to multi-party democracy.”

“India has stressed in the past that it would like to see free, fair, credible and inclusive elections leading up to a stable, peaceful and prosperous Maldives. India would be happy to work with the Government and all political parties in the facilitation of this objective,” the MEA stated.

Samad had assured Khurshid that the Maldivian government “would do its utmost to prevent any precipitate act that adversely affects the atmosphere for a free and fair democratic process and rule of law,” the MEA added.

Situation on the ground

Some protests took place on Thursday evening and there were reports of three arrests, less than those recorded the previous evening, which saw 16 arrests from a crowd of 1500 people.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said the party was planning protests on Friday evening from 9:00pm.

Nasheed has called for an interim caretaker government in the lead up to the elections. He remains inside the Indian High Commission, despite the government’s insistence he is free to move around after a warrant for his arrest issued by the Hulhumale Magistrate Court expired with the cancellation of Wednesday’s trial hearing.

“It is difficult to say [how long Nasheed will remain inside] because the situation is so fluid,” said Ghafoor.

“I don’t think he will stay any longer than he needs to. The focus is on finding an interim solution. The party has advised him not to leave. It is unthinkable for him to step outside, as he will be killed. None of us feel safe right now. We have no other choice,” he said.

Ghafoor said the party did not consider the Hulhumale’ court’s independence from the government or its independence, despite the government’s insistence to the contrary.

The Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was created by the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) in violation of the Judicature Act, the MDP contend. The JSC has also appointed the three-member panel of judges hearing Nasheed’s case at the court.

“We do not trust warrants from this court,” Ghafoor said. “During the Supreme Court’s 4:3 decision favouring the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Magistrate Court, Supreme Court Judge Adam Mohamed went to the Supreme Court as an appellant. He is head of the JSC, he threw the casting vote in the Supreme Court decision, and the judiciary accepts this,” Ghafoor said.

“[Government-aligned] Jumhoree Party leader and resort owner Gasim Ibrahim is also a member of the JSC, which appointed the panel of judges. Gasim is a rival presidential candidate to Nasheed,” Ghafoor noted.

“This country is set to explode unless India helps us.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nasheed gives India a second chance to correct diplomacy: Firstpost

Having played a stupendously bad hand in the diplomatic game with Maldives a year ago, when former President Mohamed Nasheed was ousted in a coup, India has been given a rare second chance to get its priorities right in the Indian Ocean island, writes Venky Vembu for India’s Firstpost publication.

On Wednesday, Nasheed sauntered into the Indian High Commission in Male and sought refuge there from imminent detention by the police. An arrest warrant had been issued in his name for failing to appear before a local court in connection with events that preceded the coup that displaced him in 2012.

India has done right by giving Nasheed shelter, even at the risk of incurring the wrath of the government of President Mohammed Waheed, which is now preparing to use “non-lethal chemical agents” to disperse Nasheed’s supporters outside the Indian High Commission. Police are gathered in force outside the Indian High Commission, waiting to nab Nasheed, should he step out.

The situation is very volatile, and although the court appears to have rescinded the requirement for Nasheed to appear before it, it seems clear that the government is hell-bent on ensuring that Nasheed, who retains immense mass popularity even a year after his ouster, does not get to contest the upcoming presidential election, scheduled for 7 September.

On Wednesday, a statement issued by India’s external affairs ministry also signaled its support for Nasheed’s candidacy in the election, and urged the Maldivian government not to disqualify candidates – as that would impinge on perceptions of how free and fair the elections are. The Maldivian government has responded petulantly, urging India to respect Maldives’ judiciary and not interfere in internal political matters. The gloves, it appears, are coming off.

All these expressions of Indian solidarity with Nasheed come as a sharp contrast to the events of a year ago, when India ended up backing the wrong horse. It gave tacit backing to Mohammed Waheed, the coup leader, who replaced Nasheed, the island’s first democratically elected leader.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

India should stop meddling with Maldives’ domestic matters, says Home Minister Jameel

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has expressed his disappointment over the Indian government’s decision to provide refuge to former President Mohamed Nasheed in the Indian High Commission.

The former President was due to attend a hearing regarding his detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Instead of appearing in court, Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission, claiming his trial was politically motivated and an attempt to bar him from running in presidential elections scheduled this year.

Speaking to local newspaper Haveeru, Jameel said that attempts by any country to prevent a person from facing charges pressed by an independent Prosecutor General (PG), could be described as interfering domestic matters of a sovereign state.

He said the charges levied against the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate were serious as they involved the “abduction of a senior judge”.

In January 2012 while in power, Nasheed’s Home Minister Hassan Afeef wrote to the Defense Ministry requesting the judge be detained as he posed a threat to both the country’s national security and the criminal justice system.

The judge had previously obtained an injunction from the Civil Court against his further investigation by the judicial watchdog, which had complied.

The Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) subsequently arrested Judge Abdulla and placed him in military detention on Girifushi – a military training centre near Male’, also used for Nasheed’s famous underwater cabinet meeting in 2009.

In an attempt to give a legal justification for the involvement of the armed forces during the arrest, the former Home Minister alleged the judge had “taken the entire criminal justice system in his fist”, and posed a threat to “public order, safety and national security”.

After his sudden resignation on February 2012, Nasheed is now facing criminal charges for violating Article 81 of the Penal Code, which states that the detention of a government employee who has not been found guilty of a crime is illegal.

Jameel – a former Justice Minister under President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s 30 year autocracy – has previously said it was “crucial to conclude the case against Nasheed before the approaching presidential elections, in the interests of the nation and to maintain peace in it.”

“Every single day that goes by without the case being concluded contributes to creating doubt in the Maldivian people’s minds about the judiciary,” the home minister said at the time.

Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s contended that the charge against its presidential candidate was a desperate attempt by the government to destroy its political opponents and bar Nasheed from contesting the scheduled elections.

The UK Bar Human Rights Commission – which is has been observing Nasheed’s trial – concurred in its recent report, agreeing that the trial was politically motivated.

“BHRC is concerned that a primary motivation behind the present trial is a desire by those in power to exclude Mr Nasheed from standing in the 2013 elections, and notes international opinion that this would not be a positive outcome for the Maldives,” the report stated.

However Home Minister Jameel has disputed the MDP’s claims, arguing that the trial was not politically motivated but a sincere attempt by the current government to uphold the rule of law.

Expressing his frustration over Nasheed’s presence in the Indian High Commission, Jameel said he had “never previously seen the international community trying to protect a convict or an individual who is being tried in a court of law”.

“I describe this action [by Indian High commission] as very unusual,” he said. “For example, it would be very unusual for a murderer to seek refuge in a diplomatic office.”

Jameel said the country needed assistance from the international community to look into the arrest of the judge, and “not to protect an individual who stands charged with a serious crime”.

Tweeting last night, the Home Minister implied that India was meddling in the Maldives’ internal affairs: “What’s happening now gives us an indication of the extent and level of interest some countries prepared to take in our internal matters,” he said.

“I would strongly urge everyone to let our institutions deal with the challenges, and allow the Maldives to uphold rule of law,” he tweeted.

Jameel was not responding to calls at time of press.

In a statement released by Ministry of External Affairs, the Indian government called on its regional counterpart to strictly adhere to “democratic principles and the rule of law, thereby paving the way for free, fair, credible and inclusive elections”.

“Following the arrest warrant issued against him by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, the former Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed, who is a candidate for the Presidential elections in Maldives scheduled for September 2013, is in the Indian High Commission and has sought India’s assistance. We are in touch with the relevant Maldivian authorities to resolve the situation,” the statement read.

“Now that the President of the Election Commission of Maldives has announced that Presidential elections would be held on 7 September 2013, it is necessary that the Presidential nominees of recognised political parties be free to participate in the elections without any hindrance.

“Prevention of participation by political leaders in the contest would call into question the integrity of the electoral process, thereby perpetuating the current political instability in Maldives,” it added.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs concluded its statement by contending it was “not in the interest” of the Maldives or the region to prevent any candidate from contesting the country’s presidential elections later this year.

“India would call upon the government and all political parties in Maldives to avoid any actions that would vitiate the political atmosphere in the Maldives,” its statement read.

In a statement released by the office of the former President, Nasheed welcomed the Indian statement.

“The events of the past year – the mass arrests, the police brutality, the politically motivated trials – demonstrate that Dr Waheed cannot be trusted to hold a free and fair election. Waheed should do the right thing and resign from office. An interim, caretaker government should be established that can lead the Maldives to genuinely free and fair elections, in which all candidates are freely able to compete,” he said.

Nasheed in the statement also reiterated his belief that that his trial was “a politically motivated sham” and said the Hulhumale Magistrate Court – established to hear his case – was illegal and created “with the sole purpose of disqualifying me from standing in the presidential elections”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police arrest 16 protesters during demonstrations by Nasheed supporters

Protesters supporting the former Maldivian President gathered last night at an intersection near the Indian High Commission where Mohamed Nasheed has sought refuge from police seeking his arrest.

Riot police took up position outside the diplomatic premises shortly after 1:00pm yesterday, blocking the street outside to pedestrians and placing checkpoints in adjoining streets.

The street outside the High Commission was clear aside from a small group of police, including Special Operations officers and piles of riot shields.

Down the road, the crowd at the Sosun Magu junction were blocked by a line of police, and had reached an estimated 1500 people by around 10:45pm. Police entered the crowd and arrested several protesters, after glass bottles and temporary barricades were thrown into the police line.

As the day’s protests drew to an end last night, the area surrounding the Indian High Commission building on Ameer Ahmed Magu was in near silence after being cordoned off by police.  Minivan News observed at the time a minimal police presence across the street,  despite the diplomatic drama earlier in the day that had been covered throughout international media.

Further down the road towards the opposition demonstration, remnants of glass bottles that had been hurled at police earlier in the evening were the only visible sign of scuffles between law enforcement officers and Nasheed supporters.

Meanwhile, shortly before the protests concluded at around midnight, protesters who attempted to force their way through to the parliament building were met by police charges.

Police later announced they had arrested 16 people during Wednesday’s protests, including one minor and one female.

According to police, 11 of those arrested were on charges of obstructing police duty, breaking police cordons, entering closed areas and threatening police.

Authorities said the woman and one man arrested were intoxicated and had tried to enter restricted areas, as well as throwing water bottles and stones at police. No injuries were reported.

The courts had released two of those detained at time of press.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs and protest leaders called a halt to the protest around midnight, vowing to gather in the area every night while the former President remains in the High Commission.

Meanwhile, from inside the commission, former President Nasheed issued a statement calling on President Mohamed Waheed to step down from office and make way for an interim government that would oversee free and fair presidential elections.

“The events of the past year – the mass arrests, the police brutality, the politically motivated trials – demonstrate that Dr Waheed cannot be trusted to hold a free and fair election. Waheed should do the right thing and resign from office. An interim, caretaker government should be established that can lead the Maldives to genuinely free and fair elections, in which all candidates are freely able to compete,” said Nasheed.

He labelled his ongoing trial “a politically motivated sham” and said the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court – established to hear his case – was illegal and created “with the sole purpose of disqualifying me from standing in the presidential elections.”

“The fate of Maldivian democracy hangs in the balance. The Maldivian people must not be robbed of their democratic right to elect a leader of their choosing,” he added.

In a statement, police accused Nasheed’s supporters of “voicing out their hatred towards police and spreading untruthful rumors of police trying to arrest Nasheed unlawfully, despite the Hulhumale’ Court’s court order.”

“The Maldives Police Service strongly condemns the spreading of incorrect rumors and assures the general public that police will stand to implement lawful court orders,” the statement read.

Sub Inspector Hassan Haneef would not confirm whether police would arrest the former President were he to step outside the Indian High Commission, and was unclear as to whether the court warrant to present the former President was still valid after the trial hearing was cancelled yesterday in Nasheed’s absence.

“Ex-president Nasheed is inside the Indian High Commission. It is not a question of arresting him, but making sure he is secure,” Haneef said, adding that school children were being allowed to move freely through the area this morning.

Correction: An earlier version of this article included a tweet from a Twitter account attributed to PPM MP Yameen Abdul Gayoom. Minivan News has been unable to establish the authenticity of this twitter account, and has removed the quote.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)