Tag: maldives news

Civil Court reinstates policeman dismissed on witness statement dispute

The Ciivl Court has ordered the reinstatement of a police officer who was dismissed for allegedly attempting to modify witness statements.

Police Constable Ahmed Haisham was dismissed from the police force in 2009 after he confessed to calling two Lance Corporals and asking them to change witness statements against a man suspected of stabbing another police officer.

However, the Civil Court said Haisham cannot be dismissed from his job unless he is found guilty by a court of law.

The ruling referred to the Supreme Court ruling 2012/SC-C/35 which reinstated the Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Fahmy Hassan who was dismissed by the parliament after he allegedly sexually harassed a female staff working at the commission.

The Supreme Court said Fahmy cannot be dismissed unless found guilty by a court of law, claiming that if Fahmy was dismissed from the position without being investigated and proven guilty, as per the criminal justice procedure, then his dismissal was to be considered as double jeopardy.

Referring to Fahmy’s case, the Civil Court said Haisham must be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Further, the ruling said the Employment Act does not apply to Haisham as he is a police officer.

The ruling noted that although the police had carried out investigations, a case had not been forwarded to the Prosecutor General (PG) for prosecution.

The Civil Court has ordered the police to compensate Haisham for lost wages since December 2009, clear his record and grant him promotions he may have received had he remained with the police force.

In October 2013, the Civil Court also ordered the reinstatement of a police offices and a soldier who were dismissed on criminal charges.

Civil Court Judge Maryam Nihayath said that the Supreme Court (ruling 2012/SC-C/35) had brought into existence important procedures to follow when dealing with such cases.

The court ordered former Intelligence Chief Mohamed ‘MC’ Hameed to be reinstated in 2013. He had been dismissed from the police after the controversial transfer of power on allegations that he had abused his authority as the chief of police intelligence for the benefit of a certain political party and that he had leaked secret information obtained by the police.

An MNDF officer Ahmed Althaf who was dismissed from the force on allegations that he lost a compressor valve and asked a lower rank officer to replace it with an older one was also ordered to be reinstated in October 2013.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Drug kingpin Shafaz must return from Sri Lanka in May, says Home Minister

Convicted drug kingpin Ibrahim Shafaz Abdul Razzak must return from medical treatment in Sri Lanka by May 20, Home Minister Umar Naseer has said.

Shafaz’s temporary release in early February has garnered controversy with the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) confiscating the passport of an expatriate doctor who signed the medical report recommending that Shafaz be sent abroad for medical treatment.

Shafaz is serving an 18 year prison sentence and was fined MVR75,000 (US$4,860) for drug trafficking in November 2013.

Speaking on Villa TV (VTV), Naseer said Shafaz’s authorized period to stay abroad will expire on May 20 and that the Home Ministry will seek assistance from the Interpol to find any inmates who flee.

Naseer defended the Maldives Correctional Services (MCS), claiming a prisoner will only be sent abroad on the recommendation of two specialist doctors. The MCS would only provide inmates with a temporary travel document instead of a passport, he claimed.

Shafaz has now appealed his 18 year jail term at the High Court.

Commissioner of Prisons Moosa Azim has previously told Minivan News that all due procedures had been followed in Shafaz’s release.

“A medical officer does not have to accompany the inmate. He was allowed to leave under an agreement with his family. Family members will be held accountable for his actions, including failure to return,” Azim told Minivan News at the time.

Shafaz was arrested on June 24, 2011 with 896 grams of heroin from a rented apartment in a building owned by ruling Progressive Party of the Maldives MP Ahmed ‘Redwave’ Saleem.

Former head of the Drug Enforcement Department, Superintendent Mohamed Jinah, told the press at the time that police had raided Henveiru Fashan based on intelligence information gathered in the two-year long ‘Operation Challenge’.

Jinah labeled Shafaz a high-profile drug dealer suspected of smuggling and supplying drugs since 2006.

He claimed that the network had smuggled drugs worth MVR1.3 million (US$84,306) to the Maldives between February and April 2011.

Since the formation of the new government late last year, the Home Ministry has made the combating of illegal drugs its top priority, culminating in the confiscation of a record 24kg of heroin.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Alhan alleges involvement of senior government officials in stabbing

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Alhan Fahmy has said that he believes senior officials of the current government was behind a knife attack on February 1 that left the opposition MP’s left leg paralysed.

Speaking at the last sitting of the 17th People’s Majlis today, the outgoing MP for Feydhoo noted the violent attacks on MPs during the past five years of multi-party politics and fledgling democracy, including the brutal murder of Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Dr Afrasheem Ali.

Both MPs and the public were left in a state fear by the attacks on parliamentarians, Alhan said.

Alhan was stabbed in Malé on the evening of February 1, 2014, while at the Breakwater cafe in the artificial beach area of the capital.

The results of the final MDP parliamentary primaries were officially revealed the same day, with Alhan losing the Feydhoo constituency seat to Mohamed Nihad, who received 316 votes to the incumbent’s 154.

After the results of the primary contest emerged, Alhan alleged irregularities in the vote via social media, declaring his intention to challenge the outcome.

Two suspects – Mohamed Sameeh of Shiny, Fuvahmulah, and Mohamed Naseem, of Ulfamanzil, Hithadhoo – were arrested by the police in connection with the case.

The case against the two suspects have since been forwarded to the Prosecutor General’s Office for prosecution.

Alhan has had a chequered recent past with the MDP, rejoining the party in June last year after an apparently acrimonious departure in April of the previous year. Then party vice president, Alhan was ejected – alongside then party President Dr Ibrahim Didi – after the pair publicly questioned the party’s official interpretation of the February 7 ousting of President Mohamed Nasheed.

The Feydhoo MP subsequently organised a rally – sparsely attended – calling for the freeing of the MDP from its talismanic leader Nasheed. Alhan’s soon joined the government-aligned Jumhooree Party,

Alhan was initially elected to parliament on a Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) ticket, making him one of the few MPs to have been a member of almost every major political party represented in parliament, barring the DRP’s splinter party, the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM).

He was dismissed from the DRP in 2010 for breaking the party’s whip line in a no-confidence vote against then Foreign Minister, Dr Ahmed Shaheed

Last August, Alhan was summoned by police in connection with the alleged blackmailing of Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed, using footage of the judge having sex with two foreign women said to be prostitutes.

The MP tweeted a screenshot of a text message he claimed had been sent to his mobile phone by Superintendent of Police Mohamed Riyaz. The text read: “Alhan, will make sure you are fully famed (sic) for blackmailing Justice Ali Hameed. You don’t know who we are.’’

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Operation Anbaraa

This article first appeared on Dhivehi Sitee. Republished with permission.

A lot has been written about the music festival on the desert island of Anbaraa attended by local and international DJs, some tourists and 198 partygoers. According to the event organisers, Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb and certain officials of the Yameen government allegedly approved the event in an unofficial capacity. Most of what has been said in the Dhivehi media is framed to make it appear that these young people at the music festival were engaging in an orgy of illicit activities on the island, and that the authorities acted rightly by raiding the event and arresting one female minor, 19 women and 59 men present at the festival.

Unfortunately, the susceptible majority of the Maldivian public do not see the political and unconstitutional underpinnings of these arrests, and most often than not, wholeheartedly accept such narratives. This proves beneficial for certain politicians in the Maldives, known for garnering support along ultra-nationalist and Islamist lines, as the Anbaraa incident provides an opportunity to generate just such rhetoric. Their understanding is that the youth are to be blamed for testing the limits of an increasingly conservative society. The awful truth is that people in positions of power indulging in similar behaviour, and much worse, are not subject to the same laws.

The Maldives Police Service claims it raided the island around midnight on Friday night. Detainees have described the operation as a hypocritical, aggressive and excessive display of brute force and psychological warfare. Many of the detainees claim the police used stun guns, grenades, tasers, taser guns, batons, guns and rubber bullets during this operation. Initially flares were shot and the authorities used amplifiers to announce – “you will all be killed if you don’t calm down” while charging at the partygoers. “They shot stun grenades at the centre of the dance floor in front of the main stage”, one of the detainees said. “Rubber bullets were shot in the air and a lot of people were tased with tasers and taser guns,” he continued.

Many detainees said they were all verbally abused and humiliated. Talking of the religious and cultural undertones of this operation, one female detainee said an officer yelled at her, “Are you a European?” A male detainee alleged that two officers grabbed him by the neck and called him an infidel. Another female detainee claimed she was pulled by the hair and ear, and hit on the back. Some of the male partygoers intervened when police resorted to sexualised violence against women – these men are now being detained separately from other detainees, although not in solitary confinement. Some detainees allege they were beaten and showed visible scars. Many detainees note disturbing police actions such as some officers allegedly stealing detainees’ belongings and, in the presence of some detainees, consuming illicit substances found on the island.

After the island came under police control, the detainees were rounded up and brought to the main stage. They were cuffed using plastic clips and kept kneeling down. The island did not have enough water and the Maldives Police Service did not bring any food or water with them for the detainees. When the detainees asked for water it was not provided to all, and some were humiliated for requesting for water. At this point, detainees were allegedly asked to go to sleep. On Saturday morning around 6-7am the police allegedly ordered the catering service to provide food for 198 detainees while the island was under police control. Even at this time, the Maldives’ police did not facilitate rights afforded to those accused or detained under Article 48 of the Constitution. Although police claim that the detainees were informed of their rights, the fact that these men and women were kept incommunicado for about 14 hours proves that the authorities failed to facilitate their inalienable fundamental rights to acquire legal counsel or information regarding the arrest.

Another factor that deviates from standard police practice in such cases is that, according to the detainees, belongings and persons on the island were searched on Saturday afternoon, and none of this was done in the detainees’ presence. Most detainees claim their tents were searched or dismantled while they were handcuffed. And, they claim, not only were their belongings rummaged but articles of clothing and money went missing after the police went through them. Article 161 of the 2011 Drugs Act requires police to split urine samples into two — one sample is to be tested by the Maldives Police Service while the other is to be tested by an institution stipulated by the National Drug Agency. This procedure was not followed, nor were the urine samples collected or processed according to the Urine Specimen Collection, Transportation and Testing for Illicit Drugs Regulation 2012, meaning that many detainees’ urine samples were taken after their remand hearings. Another irregularity is one that contravenes the Judicature Act – detainees were brought to the Criminal Court in Malé even though the alleged offences occurred in Vaavu Atoll. According to the male detainees, only female detainees were given lifejackets while they were being transferred to Dhoonidhoo Custodial Centre from Anbaraa.

During the remand hearings the police claimed that 119 people present at the island were released because they did not find any illicit substances on their person or belongings. This argument does not make sense as the police claimed that the entire island was a crime scene. The argument is further weakened by the fact that some of the detainees currently in custody did not have any illicit substances on their person and only have urine tests as evidence against them. Such contradictions in the claims made by the police suggest that the 119 were released because the police would not have been able to process all detainees within the specified time limit. Law requires all detainees to be brought before a judge within 24 hours of arrest.

These events are reminiscent of infighting among cabinet ministers during ex-dictator Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s regime, which then spills over into the public sphere. If the Yameen government – even if in an unofficial capacity – gave assurances to the organisers of the music festival that it could go ahead, why has the Home Minister Umar Naseer vocally reacted to this incident as if to say the police were working under his orders? The feud between the current president Abdullah Yameen Abdul Gayoom; half brother of ex-dictator and Umar Naseer; the current Home Minister, has been at the forefront since the onset of the presidential election campaign in early 2013.

Some of the detainees are also of the impression that the government may have raided the event to create a distraction from the arbitration proceedings being held at the Singapore Court of Appeal regarding the cancellation of the GMR agreement during the coup appointed presidency of Dr. Mohamed Waheed, which ended in December 2013. In early 2010, the Indian infrastructure company GMR was contracted to build Ibrahim Nasir International Airport by the Mohamed Nasheed administration, which was toppled by his deputy Dr. Waheed and Gayoom loyalists. If the infrastructure giant GMR wins the arbitration case, the Maldives’ government will be subject to approximately US$1.4 billion in compensation.

All these factors create the public perception that current government is not fully in control of the security forces due to infighting, or that the security forces can be mobilised by the current government to carry out politically motivated attacks that have very little to do with morality, crime prevention, implementing the law, or protecting the youth from illegal drugs. Neither perception creates trust or confidence towards the current regime in power, but both highlight the human rights abuse and inconsistency of the implementation of law in the Maldives.

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(1)Dislikes(0)

Commonwealth’s future “lies in celebration of diversity”: former President Gayoom

The future of the Commonwealth lies in the celebration of the diversity that exists within the organisation, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom said last night at an event held in Colombo, Sri Lanka, by the Commonwealth Chair-in-Office and President of Sri Lanka Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa.

President Gayoom was the chief guest at the event organised to celebrate the cultural diversity of the Commonwealth.

Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon – daughter of the former president – also attended the event whilst in Colombo on an official visit, during which she paid a courtesy call on the Sri Lankan president.

The Maldives joined the Commonwealth under President Gayoom’s leadership in 1982.

“In his speech, President Gayoom said that the diversity within the Commonwealth makes the organisation one of the strongest international bodies in the world today. The former President, also highlighted the importance of mutual respect, tolerance, and understanding between the countries of the Commonwealth, in order to foster peace and create an environment conducive for development to happen. The Commonwealth brings together, to the same table, countries of different cultures, development levels and political ideologies, as equals. This, President Gayoom, said, must be celebrated and respected,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement today.

Former President Gayoom’s remarks were echoed in a message to President Rajapaksa by President Abdulla Yameen today, in which he said that the diversity of the Commonwealth was a source of strength.

“The President expressed his hope that the common beliefs shared by the Commonwealth countries will guide us towards finding mutually beneficial solutions to the global problems facing the world today,” the Foreign Ministry said.

“The President further conveyed his appreciation to the Sri Lankan Government, for hosting a special event in its capacity as Chair-in-Office of the Commonwealth to celebrate the cultural diversity of the organization, in which former President of Maldives, His Excellency Maumoon Abdul Gayoom participated as the Chief Guest.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Fatwas against registering marriages a huge challenge: Family Court chief judge

Fatwas claiming that registering marriages at the court is unnecessary and un-Islamic are posing serious challenges to the Family Court, Chief Judge Hassan Saeed has said, suggesting the formation of an official state institution to issue fatwas.

“As Maldives is a 100 percent Muslim country, legally mandating some people to issue fatwas officially will encourage people to follow the law,” Saeed was quoted as saying by newspaper Haveeru.

Registration of marriages was a common practice in all countries, he observed, calling on religious scholars to publicly discuss and clarify such issues.

“Is there any basis in law or Sharia to say that [registering marriages] is not an Islamic requirement? You cannot say it is okay to perform a marriage hiding inside a room with two random witnesses [to whom] you give some treat,” Saeed was quoted as saying.

The Family Court issued a statement last week announcing that it will not register marriages performed by individuals without the court’s involvement, which would be in contravention of the Family Act.

Complaints regarding the refusal to register such marriages will also be rejected by the court, the statement noted.

As such marriages have come to the court’s attention, the Family Court noted that it could not accept cases related to divorce or other disputes as the marriages were not registered officially.

The rights of couples and their children could only be protected through wedlock within the bounds of law, the court said, insisting that marriages could only be performed or sanctioned by the state.

Marriages performed outside the Maldives are registered by the Family Court upon submission of legal documentation.

The penalty for violating the Family Act is meanwhile a fine of up to MVR1,000 or banishment to another inhabited island for a period less than six months.

The issue of unregistered marriages was raised by the court in 2010 as well.

Religious extremists in the Maldives have both endorsed and performed such marriages, claiming that even private, out-of-court marriages should be treated as legal as long as the minimum Shariah requirements for marriage are met.

Some cases of out-of-court marriages include child marriages, which are to a large extent illegal in the Maldives.

Under the Family Act, children under the age of 18 can get married at the court if he or she has reached puberty and has received a special permission from the court.

The Child Sex Abuse (Special Provisions) Act however states that engaging in sexual activity with a child through a marriage performed in accordance to Islamic Shariah principles shall not be considered child abuse.

In October 2009, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives looked into a case involving the marriage of a nine-year-old by religious preachers, whilst police investigated a similar case earlier that year.

In 2007, local media reported that a 14-year-old girl was married privately to an older man on Himandhoo island – a hotbed of religious extremism at the time.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

Criminal Court refusing to accept serious cases, Deputy PG tells MPs

Deputy Prosecutor General (PG) Hussain Shameem has told MPs on parliament’s independent institutions committee that serious cases are pending at the PG office due to Criminal Court’s procedure on accepting cases.

Serious cases of corruption, drugs and child sex abuse had not reached trial because the Criminal Court was refusing to accept the cases, he said.

The court was informing the PG office that cases should be filed at the magistrate court on the home island of the accused, Shameem explained, noting that magistrate courts could not hear drug cases and that in most cases the suspect was residing in the capital.

The Criminal Court in December last year suspended all ongoing cases and decided not to accept new cases filed by the PG office, claiming the court cannot proceed with trials in the absence of a PG.

In February this year, the Criminal Court started accepting new cases after the Supreme Court issued a second ruling ordering the court to uphold the rule of law.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed asks High Court to expedite case concerning Hulhumale’ magistrate court bench

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has asked the High Court to expedite the case filed by his legal team challenging the legitimacy of Hulhumale’ magistrate court’s bench.

Speaking to Minivan News today, former Human Resource Minister Hassan Latheef – a member of Nasheed’s legal team – said that the case has remained stalled at the High Court for over a year now.

“We filed the case at the High Court after we noticed that there were many issues regarding how the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has composed the bench,” Latheef explained.

“For one thing, the JSC does not have to bring selected judges from throughout the country and compose a bench to conduct the trial of a specific individual, that is not the normal procedure.”

The original case filed at the Hulhumale’ court – concerning the military’s controversial detention of Criminal Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012 – needed to be concluded soon because former President Nasheed did not wish to have pending criminal charges, Latheef said.

“But the case at the Hulhumale’ Court can only be continued when the High Court concludes this case we have filed at the High Court,” he noted.

“’When we filed the case at the High Court, on April 1, 2013 the court issued an injunction ordering Hulhumale’ court to halt the trial against Nasheed until the court concluded the case we have filed.”

The case filed by Nasheed’s legal team challenging the legality of the magistrate court bench was stalled after the JSC suspended the former High Court Chief Judge – who was presiding over the case – pending an investigation over a disciplinary matter.

During the hearings held at the High Court, the JSC contended that the High Court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case as the panel of judges presiding over Nasheed’s trial was appointed based on counsel from the Supreme Court

Nasheed said at the time that he was  “prepared” to justify the reasons for the arrest of Judge Abdulla, and said he was ready to appear in court to defend the decision.

Nasheed also dismissed accusations of the High Court, the Supreme Court and the prosecutor general that he had ordered the military to arrest Judge Abdulla unlawfully.

“I did nothing unlawful during my tenure,” he insisted.

Nasheed also urged the public to attend the trial and witness proceedings, alleging that the case was politically motivated.

Judge Abdulla’s arrest sparked three weeks of anti-government protests in January, leading the Nasheed administration to appeal for international assistance from the Commonwealth and UN to reform the judiciary.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Parliament approves hiking airport service charge to US$25

Parliament today approved legislation to raise the airport service charge from departing foreign passengers to US$25 from July onward as part of the current administration’s revenue raising measures.

The amendment bill submitted on behalf of the government by Progressive Party of Maldives MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abubakur was passed with 32 votes in favour.

The government anticipates over MVR100 million (US$6.4 million) in additional revenue from the increased departure tax.

Parliament has also approved other revenue raising measures proposed by the government, including hiking import duties, reintroducing the bed tax until the end of November, raising the Tourism Goods and Services Tax (T-GST), and introducing GST for telecommunications services from May 1.

A proposal by the administration of former President Mohamed Waheed to raise the service charge to US$30 was narrowly defeated in April 2013.

The 1978 law imposing the airport service charge on departing passengers was first amended under the Maldivian Democratic Party government and raised to US$18.5 for foreigners.

The imposition of a similar Airport Development Charge (ADC) of US$25 by Indian infrastructure group GMR was previously a major point of contention for the Waheed administration, which terminated the concession agreement with the GMR-led consortium to modernise the airport in December 2012.

Other bills

A raft of other bills were also passed at today’s sitting of the People’s Majlis, including a bill on the state wage policy that was vetoed by former President Waheed in December 2012.

The legislation proposes the creation of a five-member National Pay Commission chaired by the finance minister with part-time members to determine salaries and allowances for the public sector and authorise pay rises.

The bill stipulates that the commission must consider the cost of living, inflation and the consumer price index in determining wages.

Moreover, salaries should incentivise government employees to work in islands with small populations.

The commission would also formulate standards and rules for determining the state’s pay scale or appropriate salaries based on qualifications and nature of employment.

Legislation on sole proprietors and business registration submitted by the administration of former President Nasheed in 2011 as part of an economic reform package was also passed today.

According to the draft legislation on business registration, the bill seeks to ensure that businesses, partnerships and cooperative societies operating in the Maldives are properly registered; specify what kind of businesses must be registered along with procedures for registration; and oblige businesses to submit information to the Registrar of Businesses.

The bill was also vetoed by President Waheed in April 2012 citing “socio-economic” concerns.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)