judge abdulla mohamed – Minivan News

Chief judge praises criminal court over Nasheed’s trial

Chief judge Abdulla Mohamed has praised judges and staff at the criminal court for the swift conclusion of former president Mohamed Nasheed’s terrorism trial which related to the judge’s arrest in 2012.

The criminal court handed Nasheed a 13-year jail term, sparking international outrage and daily protests across the country.

“The Maldivian military was brought to alert, tents set up at the justice building, scan machines were kept, and the whole country was brought to alert,” Judge Abdulla was quoted as saying by local media.

“A three-judge panel was formed, and a verdict was delivered in 19 days by criminal court judges and staff in a case that couldn’t be concluded in three years,” the chief judge said at a function held last night to mark the court’s anniversary.

Nasheed’s rushed trial was widely criticised by foreign governments, the UN, and Amnesty International for its apparent lack of due process.

Judge Abdulla meanwhile said criminal court judges and staff were awake at night and during weekends while the rest of the judiciary was asleep.

The court proved that the “judiciary is awake” after “matters reached the state where some people believed the judiciary was incapable.”

In addition to Nasheed, his defence minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, then-chief of defence forces Moosa Ali Jaleel, then-Malé Area Commander Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi, and ex-colonel Mohamed Ziyad were charged with terrorism over the judge’s arrest.

Tholhath was found guilty and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Nasheed has meanwhile accused Judge Abdulla of involvement in a “contract killing,” and said he had blocked an investigation into his misconduct by the judicial watchdog, and obstructed the police from carrying out their duties.

Judge Abdulla last night also said unlawful arrests by the state have not come to an end, despite six years passing after the adoption of the 2008 constitution.

Seven cases of unlawful detention were submitted to the court last year, he said.

Judge Abdulla said last year’s cases of unlawful arrest included four expatriates suing the immigration department, and one expatriate suing the police. In addition, three Maldivians sued police and the correctional services.

He also referred to the arrest of then-MP Abdulla Yameen and MP Gasim Ibrahim in 2010.

“There’s no doubt that these matters will become a lesson in Maldivian history,” judge Abdulla reportedly said.

He called for more benefits and additional security to criminal court judges.

Lack of space and facilities at the court posed difficulties in providing lawyers access to their clients and the ability to study case documents, the chief judge said.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

High Court dismisses Nasheed’s arrest warrant appeal

The High Court today dismissed former President Mohamed Nasheed’s appeal challenging the legality of the Criminal Court’s February 22 arrest warrant, after the opposition leader asked for an open hearing.

The High Court denied Nasheed’s request, claiming neither members of the public nor journalists were allowed to observe appeal hearings.

The appellate court dismissed the case after the former president reportedly refused to enter the courtroom.

Hisaan Hussain from Nasheed’s legal team told reporters that the High Court had decided in a circular to hold closed hearings for appeals concerning arrest warrants.

She argued that the decision was in violation of Article 42 of the Constitution and Article 71 of the Judicature Act as circulars did not have the force of either laws or regulations that derived its authority from an act of parliament.

Nasheed’s lawyer, Hassan Latheef, told Minivan News that the legal team has decided to appeal the High Court’s decision at the Supreme Court.

Article 42 of the Constitution states that “trials of any matter shall be held publicly” while the presiding judge could exclude the public in the interest of public morals, order and national security, or where juveniles or the victim of the crime requires, and in cases where public interest would prejudice justice.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) subsequently released a statement contending that the High Court did not have the legal authority to bar members of the public and journalists from observing hearings.

“By carrying out court proceedings in a manner that prevents constitutional rights and protection, the High Court is losing public trust, with the appeal process losing its meaning,” the MDP said.

Following the Criminal Court convicting Nasheed on terrorism charges on Friday night (March 13), Latheef said the legal team has requested the court report in order to appeal the 13-year prison sentence at the High Court within ten days.

A Supreme Court circular in January shortened the maximum appeal period from 90 days to ten days, claiming it would ensure the right to appeal in a timely manner.

“The Criminal Court informed us that the report will be provided in seven to 14 days,” said Latheef, noting that it would leave the defence team two days to prepare for the appeal hearing.

“Every aspect of this trial is very different from normal procedures followed by the courts,” he said.

President’s Office Spokesperson Ibrahim Muaz said yesterday that the government would ensure Nasheed’s right to appeal.

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

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

Nasheed was brought from the Dhoonidhoo detention centre to Malé around 1:30pm.

Hundreds of protesters were gathered near the High Court building, demanding the former president’s immediate release.

Police informed Minivan News that four individuals were arrested from the protest for allegedly obstructing police duties and for trying to harm police officers. Minivan News journalists observed police officers using pepper spray indiscriminately while making the arrests.

Throughout the Criminal Court trial, Nasheed maintained that he had been deprived of basic constitutional rights, including the right to legal counsel, right to appeal, and the right to be provided adequate time to prepare a defence. Judges also refused to hear defence witnesses claiming they did not appear to negate the prosecution’s case.

Delivering the guilty verdict Friday night, Judge Abdulla Didi said the prosecution’s evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that Nasheed as commander-in-chief ordered the arrest or “forceful abduction” of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

The former president was arrested on February 22 after Prosecutor General Muhthaz Muhsin personally sought an arrest warrant from the Criminal Court ahead of the surprise terrorism trial.

Related to this story

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

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

Respect Criminal Court verdict, says President Yameen

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

MDP to launch national civil disobedience campaign to free Nasheed

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

“I was not afforded the rights of the accused,” says Judge Abdulla

Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed testified in a terrorism trial against former President Mohamed Nasheed tonight, stating the former Commander in Chief must bear responsibility for his “unlawful arrest” in January 2012.

“I was not afforded the rights of the accused. My basic human rights were violated. I had no access to a lawyer,” Judge Abdulla told the court.

He claimed he is still unclear as to why he was kept detained from January 16 to February 7.

Nasheed is accused of abducting Judge Abdulla and is standing trial for terrorism. He has denied charges. If convicted, he faces a jail term or banishment between ten and 15 years.

The opposition leader once again reiterated a request for legal counsel and adequate time to mount a defence, pointing out that he had difficulty in appointing a lawyer while detained in Dhoonidhoo.

All four of Nasheed’s lawyers quit yesterday over the Criminal Court’s alleged failure to provide sufficient time to examine the prosecution’s evidence and prepare to defend the former president against new terror charges pressed two weeks ago on February 22.

Nasheed has previously called the Criminal Court’s rushed trial an “injustice” and “the biggest circus the Maldives has seen in constitutional history.”

But presiding Judge Abdulla Didi insisted there was no obstruction to Nasheed appointing a lawyer, and said the former president had been given ample opportunity to obtain legal counsel.

Judge Didi adjourned the hearing after scheduling the next hearing for Friday night (March 13), where the defence and prosecution are to present concluding statements.

Judges could issue a verdict at their discretion afterwards.

“This is what the President wants…”

Recounting his arrest, Judge Abdulla said he had gone home from work late on January 16, and was having dinner with his wife when masked men in military uniform entered his home without a court warrant and “dragged me off to Girifushi.”

In the process, his arm was hurt, he said. Since he had been arrested at 12am, he did not know where he was being taken, and only found out he was in Girifushi much later, Judge Abdulla said.

Senior government officials including former Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, then-Minister of Youth Hassan Latheef and former Presidential Envoy Ibrahim Hussein Zaki visited Judge Abdulla in Girifushi, he said.

Judge Abdulla said the meetings with government officials made it clear to him they did not have authority to make a decision on his detention.

Their use of phrases such as “this is what the President wants,” made it clear the then-Commander In Chief was responsible for his detention on Girifushi, Judge Abdulla said.

Government officials offered him four options, to step down as the Criminal Court Chief Judge, to transfer to another job, to leave Malé or leave the country, he continued.

Judge Abdulla was summoned to court tonight by presiding Judges Abdulla Didi, Abdul Bari Yoosuf and Sujau Usman. He was not listed among the prosecution’s witnesses and neither the state prosecutors nor Nasheed posed any questioned to the judge tonight.

Mount a defence

Nasheed requested ten additional days to appoint new lawyers stating: “You have to give a detainee the opportunity. You know very well the laws and rules you have to follow.”

But Judge Didi said the Criminal Court would not give the former president special access or privileges and said he could appoint new lawyers whenever he wishes.

Nasheed’s legal team had been given access to Dhoonidhoo Island even today, Judge Didi noted.

However, the opposition leader argued the four lawyers had dropped the case due to the Criminal Court’s denial of due process and adequate time to prepare defence, and said he required time to appoint a new lawyer of his choosing.

“Lawyers don’t grow on trees,” he said.

The office of the former President Mohamed Nasheed issued a statement tonight, pointing out defendants in other high profile cases had been given over a month to find legal representation, and the court proceedings last more than a year.

The statement also expressed concern over the Criminal Court’s decision not to hear the witnesses Nashed had submitted in his defence.

The judges said they did not believe the witnesses would negate the testimony of witnesses produced by the state, and were therefore unnecessary.

Related to this story

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

Nasheed’s lawyers quit

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

State prosecutors influencing witnesses, claim Nasheed’s lawyers

Chief of Defense Forces testifies in Nasheed, Tholhath terrorism trials

Nasheed contests credibility of police and military witnesses in terrorism trial

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

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

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

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

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Nasheed trial unjust, says Adhaalath President Imran

The terrorism trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed is unjust, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP) President Sheikh Imran Abdulla has said.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) leader Nasheed is being tried in the Criminal Court for allegedly ordering the arrest of the court’s Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in 2012 while in office. If found guilty of the charge, Nasheed faces a jail term between 10 and 15 years.

At last night’s hearing the Criminal Court judges Abdulla Didi, Abdul Bari Yoosuf, and Sujau Usman rejected Nasheed’s witnesses, saying that they would not counter the state’s claims.

“Nasheed is not being tried fairly. Treating Nasheed fairly and justly is what we believe in,” Adhaalath president Imran told VTV.

On Sunday, the party withdrew its support for President Abdulla Yameen citing “increased violence and corruption” within the government. Although Adhaalath is yet to join the opposition Jumhooree Party (JP) and MDP coalition, they have said the party would be willing to sit down for discussions.

“The tension between [political rivals] should not result in the disregarding his [Nasheed’s] rights.”

Nasheed’s legal team refused to continue with his defence yesterday, claiming the court had not given them adequate time to prepare. The Criminal Court bench presiding over Nasheed’s trial dismissed his request to hire new lawyers stating they had already been given enough time.

At every opportunity Nasheed repeated his request for legal counsel of his choosing, and reiterated his belief that the trial was unjust and unlawful.

Judge Didi was with Judge Abdulla in his home when the military had arrested him. Judge Abdulla had called Judge Bari to inform him of the arrest shortly before he was arrested.

Previously Nasheed’s lawyers had requested that judges Bari and Abdulla Didi step down from the bench. But the Criminal Court bench had ruled they had no conflict of interest which would require them to retire from the case.

Along with Nasheed, former Chief of Defence force and current Defence Minister Moosa Ali Jaleel, ex-Malé area commander for the military MP Ibrahim Didi, ex-colonel Mohamed Ziyad and Nasheed’s Defence Minister Thalhath Kaleyfaanu also face terrorism charges regarding the detention of Judge Abdulla.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

State prosecutors influencing witnesses, claim Nasheed’s lawyers

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s lawyers objected last night to the state’s alleged influencing of witnesses in a terrorism trial over the military detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Prosecutor Abdulla Rabiu admitted state prosecutors had met with witnesses, and shared statements they had provided to two separate 2012 investigations both by the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) and the police in order to “refresh memories. ”

Rabiu stressed the meetings were routine, but Nasheed’s lawyer Hisaan Hussein said refreshing a witness’s memory amounted to influencing witnesses.

Two of three police officers who testified in Nasheed’s trial so far and Judge Abdulla’s sister-in-law Sobira said they had met with state prosecutors and reread their statements before testifying.

If convicted, the opposition leader faces a jail term or banishment between ten and 15 years.

Judge Abdulla’s arrest sparked 22 consecutive nights of violent anti-government demonstrations that culminated in a police and military mutiny on the morning of February 7, 2012, forcing Nasheed to resign in what he subsequently called a “coup d’etat.”

Abducted

Testifying via telephone last night, Judge Abdulla’s wife, Aminath Shareef, and sister-in-law, Sobira, said Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) officers had forcibly taken the judge from his home on January 16.

Despite Judge Abdulla’s mother-in-law’s repeated requests for a court warrant, masked officers pushed the door open and entered the dining room where Judge Abdulla was having dinner.

They took him by the hand, and ordered him to accompany them outside. They refused Judge Abdulla’s request to be allowed inside his room to change clothes, forcing him to change his trousers in the hallway. MNDF officers surrounded him at the time.

Aminath said she refused to let go of her husband’s hand, but an MNDF officer forced them apart.

Sobira said officers did not answer the family’s questions on where Judge Abdulla was being taken.

Despite having said she remembered former Criminal Court Judge and current Prosecutor General Muhthaz Mushin being present during the arrest at their home in her testimony to the HRCM, Sobira last night said she did not remember if he had been present at all. She said she did not know who Muhsin was at the time.

Nasheed’s lawyers objected to witnesses testifying by telephone, but Judge Abdulla Didi said the procedure was routine.

Hatred

Chief Superintendent of Police Abdul Mannan Yoosuf also testified last night, claiming Nasheed said he would never release Judge Abdulla and would not let the judge within 100 meters of a courtroom during a meeting with the police after the judge’s arrest.

Nasheed objected to Mannan testifying, saying the officer harboured deep animosity towards him.

Judges blocked defence lawyer’s attempts at questioning Mannan on his whereabouts during February 7, when he had received his promotion and whether he had called for Nasheed’s resignation.

Judge Didi said Nasheed should have raised objections before a witness was called to the stand, but lawyers countered stating they had not had adequate time to prepare the former president’s defence.

Lawyers argued Nasheed had first been charged with arbitrary detention, but was now facing new terror charges. They once again requested 30 extra days to prepare for the new charges.

The Criminal Court refused saying the same case documents were used for the new charges and said Nasheed’s lawyers had been provided the documents in 2012.

Judge Didi said witness statements only consisted of one or two pages, suggesting lawyers did not require much preparation before hearings.

Nasheed said he preferred an immediate sentence over a trial without adequate time for defense. His next hearing has been scheduled for 4pm today. The state is to present documentary evidence against the former president.

Judge Didi assured Nasheed he would be allowed to view or hear documentary evidence along with his lawyers before the hearing.

Nasheed had previously contested the credibility of police and military officers as state witnesses, and contended the role of the police and military officers in his February 2012 ouster and Judge Abdulla’s arrest raised questions over their trustworthiness.

On March 2, the presiding bench waved away the concerns of Nasheed’s lawyers, who objected that two of the presiding judges, and the Prosecutor General, had provided witness testimony during the HRCM investigation.

The judges also warned President Nasheed’s legal team not to speak to journalists in a “manner that might defame the judiciary.”

Related to this story

Chief of Defense Forces testifies in Nasheed, Tholhath terrorism trials

Nasheed contests credibility of police and military witnesses in terrorism trial

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

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

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

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

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Chief of Defense Forces testifies in Nasheed, Tholhath terrorism trials

Former President Mohamed Nasheed and former Defense Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu must bear responsibility for the military detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, the Chief of Defense Forces Major General Ahmed Shiyam has said.

Testifying in two separate hearings into terrorism charges against Nasheed and Tholhath on Thursday, Shiyam said the Maldives National Defense Forces could not carry out such an operation without the pair’s orders.

“As soldiers, we are obliged to follow their orders,” he told the court at Nasheed’s 9pm hearing.

Both Nasheed and Tholhath have denied ordering Judge Abdulla’s arrest. If convicted of terrorism, they face a jail term or banishment between 10 and 15 years.

According to Shiyam, Nasheed and Tholhath had met with senior MNDF officers after the judge’s arrest, where now retired Brigadier General Ahmed Mohamed spoke out against the long term damage the MNDF might suffer due to the military’s role in the judge’s arrest.

Nasheed then assured officers the military would not have to bear responsibility for the judge’s detention, Shiyam said.

State prosecutors then asked if Nasheed had said he would bear responsibility for the arrest. Shiyam said yes.

Speaking to the press afterwards, Nasheed’s lawyers noted Shiyam had not said the former president had issued the order to arrest Judge Abdulla.

Meanwhile, at a separate 2pm hearing into charges against Tholhath, Shiyam said the former Defense Minister had at the same meeting declared he would bear responsibility for the arrest even if he were to be jailed for forty years.

The words still resound in his ears, Shiyam said.

Tholhath had also told an MNDF advisory council he believed Judge Abdulla must be arrested, a day before the operation—dubbed liberty shield—was carried out, Shiyam said.

Tholhath’s lawyer asked Shiyam if former President Nasheed had given the arrest order, but Shiyam said he did not remember Tholhath saying so.

At yesterday’s hearing, Lieutenant Ali Ihusan, who served as Tholhath’s personal assistant, told the court that he heard the former minister saying he would not release Judge Abdulla even if he faced 30 years in jail as a consequence.

At the second hearing of his trial, Tholhath claimed the operation to arrest Judge Abdulla was initiated by Nasheed and carried out by then-Malé Area Commander Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi, currently opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP for mid-Hithadhoo constituency.

Commander of MNDF’s Medical Services Dr Ali Shahid also testified at Nasheed and Tholhath’s hearings. Shahid had been assigned as Judge Abdulla’s doctor during his 21 days of detention on the military training island Girifushi.

Shahid said he had met with the Judge several times a day, and observed he was under military watch.

Tholhath, Didi and now retired Colonel Mohamed Ziyad called Shahid regularly to monitor Judge Abdulla’s well-being, he said.

At the 2pm hearing, Shahid also said Tholhath had assigned psychologist Aishath Zeena to Judge Abdulla after receiving reports he was not eating at all.

In a statement following tonight’s hearing, the office of former President Mohamed Nasheed said summoning the Chief of Defense Forces to the Criminal Court undermined his dignity and honor.

Nasheed had appealed to the presiding Judges Abdulla Didi, Abdul Bari Yoosuf and Sujau Usman to refrain from asking the Chief of Defense Forces to testify if at all possible.

The judges ignored the plea.

When given the opportunity to cross examine Shiyam, Nasheed declined, saying he had no questions for the Chief of Defense Forces.

Nasheed had previously contested the credibility of police and military officers as state witnesses, contended the role of the police and military officers in his February 2012 ouster and Judge Abdulla’s arrest raised questions over their trustworthiness.

The state has also named Tholhath as a witness against Nasheed.

Nasheed’s next hearing is scheduled for Saturday.

Ziyad and Didi are also standing trial over Judge Abdulla’s arrest.

Related to this story

Nasheed contests credibility of police and military witnesses in terrorism trial

Tholhath vowed not to release Judge Abdulla even if he were to be jailed for 30 years, says witness

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

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

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

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

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

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

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has denied ordering Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s arrest at the second hearing of a surprise terrorism trial.

“As President of the Maldives, I did not order any harm unto or the arrest of any citizen,” the opposition leader told the Criminal Court tonight.

“These are politically motivated charges, an atrocity planned and carried out by the government,” he said.

Nasheed said he had no hope of a free and fair trial, noting that the Prosecutor General (PG) Muhthaz Muhsin and two of the three judges presiding over his trial were among the state’s witnesses.

Addressing Judges Abdulla Didi and Abdul Bari Yoosuf, Nasheed said: “You saw this very closely. You are his [Judge Abdulla’s] colleagues. I do not see how you, by the Islamic Shari’ah, Maldivian laws and international laws, could deliver an impartial verdict.”

Tonight’s hearing ended with the Criminal Court granting Nasheed three extra days to prepare his defence, after his lawyers claimed they had not had adequate time to research and review the state’s charges and evidence.

The opposition leader was arrested on Sunday ahead of a surprise hearing on terrorism the next day. The Criminal Court had denied him legal representation at the time and ruled he be kept in police custody until the end of the trial.

“Politically motivated atrocity”

Before the hearing began, Nasheed and his four-member legal team complained over seating arrangements which separated the former president from his lawyers. The former president requested to be seated among his lawyers to be allowed to confer with them easily.

The three-judge panel refused to change the setup, but did allow lawyers to approach the defence stand and consult with Nasheed throughout the trial.

In his opening remarks, Nasheed pointed out PG Muhthaz Muhsin, a former Criminal Court judge, was Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s colleague. Muhsin had withdrawn lesser charges submitted by former PG Ahmed Muizz and asked Nasheed be prosecuted under a harsher terror law.

Nasheed is now being tried under the 1990 Anti Terrorism Act, which considers abductions, kidnapping and attempts to do so as acts of terror.

Muhsin’s decision to re-prosecute demonstrated the political nature of the charges, Nasheed contended.

The PG raises criminal charges on behalf of the public to ensure public safety, Nasheed continued, stating: “Public support for me during the presidential elections, 49 percent, demonstrate they do not view me as a terrorist.”

“My concern is not on damages I would be caused, but on the dark shadow [this trial] would cast on Maldives’ future,” he added.

Noting the Criminal Court had denied him legal representation at a first hearing, and ruled he be held in pre-trial detention, Nasheed said: “What I’m seeing is that you are unable to or face great difficulty in ensuring a fair trial.”

The three judges did not respond to Nasheed’s statements, and upon his request asked lawyers to proceed with his defence.

Lawyer Abdulla Shaairu then held up a thick sheaf of papers and said the legal team had not had adequate time to prepare a defence. In the three days granted previously, lawyers were only able to skim through documents and needed more time to clarify the exact nature of charges, he added.

Judge Didi agreed, and adjourned the hearing. Judge Sujau Usman is the third member of the Criminal Court panel.

In a statement earlier this week, PG Muhsin said there were no legal obstacles to pressing terrorism charges. Meanwhile, the ruling Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) insists it has no influence over the independent PG and independent courts.

Nasheed’s trial demonstrates “no one is above the law,” PPM MPs have claimed.

Judge Mohamed’s detention in January 2012 triggered three weeks of nightly protests, culminating in a police and army mutiny forcing Nasheed’s resignation.

Manhandled

Nasheed appeared in court on Monday with his arm in a makeshift sling after a scuffle in which police manhandled the former president as he attempted to speak with journalists outside the Justice Building.

The EU, UN, Commonwealth, US, India, Canada and UK have expressed concern over Nasheed’s arrest, subsequent terrorism charges and denial of legal representation.

Current Defence Minister Moosa Ali Jaleel, then-Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim, MDP MP and retired Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and retired Colonel Mohamed Ziyad are also facing terrorism charges over the judge’s detention.

All have pleaded not guilty to charges.

On Tuesday, Nasheed’s lawyers named presiding Judges Abdulla Didi and Abdul Bari Yoosuf as witnesses, noting the pair had been present with Judge Mohamed at the time of his arrest, and requested they withdraw from the bench.

Nasheed’s trial comes shortly after the MDP and former ruling coalition partner Jumhooree Party allied against what they call President Abdulla Yameen’s repeated violations of the constitution.

The allied opposition parties have planned mass demonstrations for tomorrow (February 27) and have pledged to topple Yameen’s administration.

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

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

Police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed ahead of terrorism trial

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Nasheed’s lawyers name Judges Didi, Yoosuf as witnesses, request their withdrawal from terrorism trial

Additional reporting by Mohamed Saif Fathih and Ismail Humaam Hamid

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s lawyers have named two of the three judges overseeing the opposition leader’s terrorism trial as witnesses, and requested the pair to excuse themselves from the bench.

In a letter to the Criminal Court today, lawyer Hassan Latheef asked Judge Abdulla Didi and Abdul Bari Yoosuf to step down, noting that the two were present with Judge Abdulla Mohamed at his residence during his arrest by the military.

The two judges witnessed the conversation between Judge Abdulla Mohamed and military officers, and could testify he had not been kidnapped as charged by the Prosecutor General, Latheef contended.

Nasheed is being prosecuted for the judge’s detention under the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1990, which criminalises kidnappings and abductions. The offence carries a jail term between 10 and 15 years.

At a first hearing yesterday, Judge Abdulla Didi gave Nasheed three days to appoint a lawyer and answer charges. The former president is to be kept in police custody until the end of the trial.

Speaking to Minivan News, Nasheed’s lawyers continued to express concern over bureaucratic delays in both appealing the Criminal Court’s arrest warrant and registering to represent him at the next hearing on Thursday.

The Commonwealth, India, US, and Canada have expressed concern over the former president’s arrest and denial of right to legal counsel and appeal.

Medical attention

A police spokesperson confirmed to Minivan News that Nasheed was brought to Malé at 2:20pm today for medical attention upon his request. But neither his lawyers nor his family were informed.

Nasheed limped into the courtroom yesterday using his tie as a makeshift sling for his arm. He claimed police officers had broken his arm and repeatedly asked for immediate medical attention.

The Maldives Police Services’ Superintendent Hamdhoon Rasheed denied allegations of police brutality last night, claiming Nasheed had staged his own fall.

Rasheed said Nasheed’s fingers and arms were not hurt according to doctors at the Dhoonidhoo Island Detention Center.

Nasheed’s legal team said they are not certain if police had arranged for an x-ray as advised by the doctor.

A police spokesperson declined to comment on the matter, stating: “medical assistance and attention will be given to all detainees under police custody.”

Nasheed’s lawyers have now requested Home Minister Umar Naseer to transfer him to house arrest.

“We are extremely concerned about the safety and security of President Nasheed, especially after what we saw yesterday in front of the court house. The police brutalised President Nasheed in front of the press and he is physically hurt,” Latheef said.

Judge Didi ordered the police to provide Nasheed appropriate medical care while he remains in custody.

Appeal delayed

Lawyers were unable to appeal the Criminal Court issued arrest warrant today as the forms required Nasheed’s signatures and had to be submitted to the Criminal Court before noon.

New appeal regulations state appeals of any court ruling must be first submitted to the court responsible for issuing the ruling. The court would then forward the forms to the appellate court.

Nasheed’s five-member legal team attempted to file an appeal on Monday, but were unable to do so due to the Criminal Court’s failure to provide the forms.

Lawyers said the Supreme Court’s new regulations impede the right to appeal as enshrined in the constitution.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has meanwhile requested the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the police’s treatment of the former president, his arrest and proceedings of the terrorism trial.

HRCM member Jeehan Mahmoud confirmed the commission’s staff had visited the former president at Dhoonidhoo last night, but declined to give further details.

In a statement condemning the police’s unlawful use of force yesterday, the HRCM also called on the police to provide Nasheed with medical attention immediately and ensure he is afforded all constitutional rights.

The Police Integrity Commission was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Speaking to Minivan News, a spokesperson from the Prosecutor General’s Office today insisted the office was following due process in charging Nasheed with terrorism.

The PG’s office had initially charged Nasheed with arbitrary detention under the soon to be outdated Penal Code, but withdrew charges on February 15 for further review.

A statement issued on Sunday said Prosecutor General Muhuthaz Muhsin had decided “the best way [forward] in this case is to change the charges raised against Mohamed Nasheed and the court in which it was filed”.

“Therefore, as the case against Mohamed Nasheed is in the court process, we note that it is not desirable for politicians, some members of the public, political parties, and some media to talk in a way that both creates anxiety among the public about verdicts issued by courts and causes loss of confidence in independent institutions created by the constitution,” read the statement.

Related to this story:

Police deny brutalising Nasheed

Commonwealth, Canada express concern over denial of legal representation for former President Nasheed

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

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

Police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed ahead of terrorism trial

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Former Defense Minister Tholhath pleads not guilty to terrorism charges

Former Minister of Defense Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu has pleaded not guilty to terrorism charges over the January 2012 detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

At a 5:00pm trial on Monday, Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi gave Tholhath three days to appoint a lawyer and answer charges.

Tholhath’s hearing took place right after former President Mohamed Nasheed appeared in court over the same charges. Judge Didi had placed Nasheed in police custody until the end of the trial.

Brigadier General (Rtd) and MP Ibrahim Didi, Colonel (Rtd) Mohamed Ziyad, and current Defense Minister Moosa Ali Jaleel also face terrorism charges over the judge’s arrest. But the three have not been informed of when their trials are to take place.

Jaleel was the Chief of Defense Forces during the judge’s arrest. He was appointed as Defense Minister in late January following the dismissal of then Defense Minister Mohamed Nazim after a controversial discovery of weapons at his residence.

Nazim is currently in police custody over terrorism and treason charges.

Three successive Defense Ministers in the Maldives now face terrorism charges. The offense carried a jail term between ten and 15 years.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)