Police have arrested three men with 58 packets of illegal drugs on the island of Funadhoo in Shaviyani Atoll.
Police said that on May 1 they received a report that a group of people were using drugs in a house on the island. Police officers attended the scene and two of the men tried to flee, however all three were arrested.
Police are currently investigating the case.
(0)Dislikes
(0)Deposed Vice President of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), MP Alhan Fahmy, today announced that he would be launching a campaign to “free” the party from former President Mohamed Nasheed, and to advocate reform of the party.
Speaking at a press conference this morning, Fahmy alleged that Nasheed was behind his ousting, and the ousting of Party President Dr Ibrahim Didi.
On Monday MDP’s National Council declared a lack of confidence in the party’s leadership and removed Didi and Fahmy from their positions, in a near-unanimous vote: 69 of 73 votes cast (almost 95 percent) were in support of the no-confidence motion for both Didi and Fahmy’s leadership. Four members abstained from voting for either motion.
The motion was proposed by MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, who alleged that Dr Didi and Fahmy had made public statements contradicting the party’s official position on the illegitimacy of the new government and Dr Waheed’s presidency, a position passed in a resolution on February 8.
Fahmy today stressed that the motion of no confidence taken against him was in contrary with the party constitution, and referred the move as a “coup” within the party.
“This [motion of no confidence] was a pre-planned attempt to defame certain figures of the party instigated by former President Nasheed and those who blindly follow him,” Fahmy told the press. “Nasheed is behind all this,” he claimed.
Fahmy criticised Nasheed claiming that the MDP could not be saved or liberated if members of the party allowed Nasheed to ‘rule’ the party according to his wishes, and sit back applauding him.
He also alleged that Nasheed had not once entered the party office since his fall from the presidency, and that he had been driving the entire party from his own residence at Kenereege.
“When you start running the party inside Kenereege, that is not democracy. No single person can take the fruit from the hard work of many like that,” Fahmy claimed.
Fahmy further alleged that Nasheed had given statements to the international media which were contrary to Islam and Sharia law, and that allowing Nasheed to become the party’s presidential candidate would “destroy the party”.
He further claimed that he would have challenged Nasheed in the presidential primary party if he had been old enough to compete.
He also claimed that Nasheed was the only MDP member permitted to meet President Mohamed Waheed Hassan or the Vice President, Waheed Deen: “When a certain person wants to he can, but if we do so, it becomes a huge problem,” Fahmy claimed.
However, Fahmy acknowledged that Nasheed had contributed a lot to the democracy of the country during his tenure as President.
Fahmy’s campaign began this afternoon at 4:00pm in the Raalhugandu Area near the tsunami monument. A small group of 15-20 of the MP’s supporters were quickly outnumbered and heckled by a large group of MDP members, as they made their way to Majeedee Magu.
One of Fahmy’s supporters told Minivan News that the campaign would call for the party to be “freed” from forces that had “hijacked” it.
“The MDP is the largest political party in the country, and it is also funded by the state like all other parties. No one person or a group can hijack a party like that. We are coming out to call for the party to be freed, and reformed,” the official told Minivan News.
Fahmy was elected as a Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) MP, but switched sides in early 2010 after facing the DRP’s disciplinary committee for voting against the party line in a vote of no confidence against then-foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed. The DRP had accused Dr Shaheed of fraternising with Israel.
MDP response
Speaking to Minivan News, the party’s international spokesperson, MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, said he was “disappointed” by the Fahmy’s comments.
Responding to the claim that Nasheed was behind his ousting from the deputy leadership, Ghafoor said that MDP was “full of people who can think for themselves” and Fahmy’s comment was “outright disregard”.
” The MDP is full of people who can think for themselves, in fact I am the sponsor of the motion and I can assure you that I forwarded it in my own capacity and nobody had any influence on me,” said Ghafoor.
In response to claims that Nasheed was driving the party from his personal residency, Ghafoor stated that the party secretariat still worked in the party office and that for security reasons, when there was an issue that had to be discussed with Nasheed, members came to his residence.
Ghafoor also added that MDP was run by committees and some committees met at venues other than the party secretariat office, because it lacked space.
Regarding Fahmy’s claims that Nasheed made ‘unislamic’ statements to foreign media, Ghafoor claimed that this was “just the usual rhetoric” to discredit political opponents on religious grounds “when one switches ship.”
“It seems like Alhan [Fahmy] has taken an Islamist position. It is not something new to the Maldives. The rhetoric of religion and foreign influence has always been played down in the Maldives for political reasons. It is not something we worry too much about,” Ghafoor said.
“Let’s see the political weight of that event. It is rather ironic for someone to believe that they have room within the party to call for room after they’ve been voted out with such large majority,” Ghafoor told Minivan News.
” MDP is always in process of reforming and will continue to do so. All I’ve got to say to Alhan [Fahmy] is ‘good luck’,” added Ghafoor.
The MDP has maintained that as the transfer of power on February 7 was illegal, former President Nasheed and his cabinet should continue to sit in the National Council as senior members of government.
The motion was forwarded by Ghafoor, citing that the issue was “political” rather than “personal”.
The ousting of the party’s leadership was “a solemn occasion and I took no pleasure in it,” Ghafoor said. “But it was a good day for the party and a good day for democracy. We have shown that the largest party in this country can act democratically,” said Ghafoor.
(0)Dislikes(0)President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has today said that the “will to make a difference” – both by political and private sector bodies – was vital to ensure more effective environmental protection in the future.
Speaking at the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation’s (CANSO’s) 2012 Asia Pacific Conference being held this week at the Kurumba Maldives resort, the president addressed delegates over the “evident” toll on the global environment from unsustainable practices.
At part of a keynote address given this morning during the conference’s final day, President Waheed claimed that technological developments in air traffic management were a good example of the measures available for cutting down on the wider civil aviation industry’s carbon footprint.
However, Dr Waheed stressed that “the will to make a difference” was more essential to sustainable development than purely technical advances, according to a President’s Office statement.
The president added that private organisations like CANSO had an important role to play alongside governments in addressing “environmental damage and neglect”.
Former President Mohamed Nasheed, who Dr Waheed controversially replaced in February, has in recent years became a high-profile advocate for carbon neutral policies in the Maldives.
Nasheed’s government had committed to an ambitious plan to try to become carbon neutral by 2020, with the former president being an outspoken figure on the potential environmental impacts facing the Maldives should the world fail to adopt more sustainable practices.
During his speech today, President Waheed claimed that the Maldives had been a strong advocate for responsible global environment policy since 1989.
He added that his government was committed to protecting the environment and would develop new institutions to help oversee these goals, as well strengthening existing environmental bodies, according to the President’s Office.
(0)Dislikes(0)“The public’s thirst for improved local facilities and services such as harbours for our islands or free healthcare seems to be unlimited,” writes Dr Hassan Saeed for local newspaper Haveeru.
“There is nothing wrong with this. We do need to listen to people’s hopes for the future. However we also need to recognise that we cannot do everything at once,” adds Dr Saeed, currently the leader of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) and Special Advisor to President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan.
“Like any household or business, our country also needs to live within its means. However up until last February our government was portrayed by some as a provider of unlimited funds often provided through international donors. Irresponsible politicians were happy to make the most of this with no thought for the future.
We were and continue to be in the position of a typical Maldivian who goes from one businessman to another businessman asking for help with medical treatment. This is exactly what the Maldivian government has been doing for years with international donors and the development institutions.
This generosity has been good for us; just as at a local level a Maldivian will be very grateful for the support for that medical condition I described. However the government and that person has to be aware that the generosity may not last forever.”
(0)Dislikes(0)Speaking at an International Labor Day rally, ousted President Mohamed Nasheed raised fears over a military dictatorship emerging in the Maldives and vowed to see Defense Minister Mohamed Nazim and Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz arrested.
Nasheed resigned from office on February 7, but later claimed he left office “under duress” in a coup d’état orchestrated by remnants of the former dictatorship, funded by several resort interests and carried out by mutinous police and military units.
Nasheed gave his speech in front of the historic shrine to Abu al-Barakath-ul Yoosuf al-Barbari on Medhuziyaaraiy Magu. The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) had gathered on Medhuziyaarai Magu after police and military blocked an MDP rally from marching towards the area encompassing the President’s Office, Republican Square and the police and military headquarters.
Dozens of police and military in riot gear watched Nasheed speak from behind barricades. Minivan News observed water cannons on standby.
“Do not worry. We will arrest traitor Nazim and Abdulla Riyaz. We will do it. Do not worry. It will be the Maldivian police and the military that will do it for us,” Nasheed told hundreds of supporters.
Video footage on February 7 show Nazim addressing mutinous police and military units gathered in Republican Square, saying he had delivered an ultimatum on their behalf demanding Nasheed’s resignation. Another clip shows Riyaz meeting senior politicians inside police headquarters to brief them on Nasheed’s resignation.
Former VP Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s first appointments as president included employing Nazim as Minister of Defense and Abdulla Riyaz as Commissioner of Police.
In his speech, Nasheed laid blame for the change of government on senior police and military officials, claiming they had accepted bribes from business tycoons and distributed bribes among the lower ranks.
“Even though senior police and military officials, specifically Abdulla Riyaz, Nazim and the Chief of Defense Forces Shiyam took bribes and sold their institutions, we, as citizens or as a responsible political party cannot declare the two institutions to hold no value,” he said.
The military as a 117 year old institution had not seen an internal attack on its leaders and barracks in all of its history until February 7, Nasheed claimed.
“We are in this situation today because very few senior military and police officers took bribes from the wealthy and distributed the money within the two institutions,” he alleged.
“They [security forces] will now have to sustain the coup. Because their leaders, in fear of what may happen to them if the coup ends, will until their dying breath force the lower ranks to maintain military rule,” Nasheed said.
Nasheed was summoned to the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) today to be interviewed about his treatment by police on February 8, during the police crackdown on MDP supporters that followed his resignation.
International partners have privately expressed concern over how a re-elected Nasheed administration would handle the police and armed forces, given their role in his ousting.
Nasheed raised concern over military rule in the Maldives and said “I call for an election in 2012 because I fear we may never hold an election again.”
“We learn from other countries’ experiences. When a middle-ranking military officer overthrows a civilian government, he will have to complete the revolution, the coup. The last colonel we saw was Colonel Gaddafi. Now we are seeing Colonel Nazim,” he continued.
“I note with concern that Nazim will try to complete his coup. Then, all political leaders including Abdulla Yameen, myself, and Thasmeen Ali will try to arrest him. Because [Nazim] will try to establish a military dictatorship. This is what we must be most concerned about. As long as our hearts continue to beat, we must not allow a military takeover of the Maldives. The police and military must not become political. They are technical staff,” he said.
Nasheed pledged to continue the MDP’s campaign for early elections in 2012. The Commonwealth and EU have supported the call.
“I feel pain when I get hit. I get scared when people come at me with anger. I get melancholic when I have to sit in a cell for long. I get sad when I have to leave my wife and children. But I will not give up. I will not step back,” Nasheed said.
Nazim today responded to Nasheed’s statements, claiming that the military was not empowered to arrest people.
“I always operate within the constitutional laws of this nation. I will not do anything that violates the laws governing this country. If and when an order to arrest political figures is issued, I will no longer remain in this position,” local media reported Nazim as saying.
Nazim and Riyaz had served in the security forces under former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, but resigned after Nasheed took office in 2008.
(2)Dislikes(0)The following open letter was sent by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Eva Abdulla, also a member of the IPU’s Coordinating Committee of Women Parliamentarians, to Emmanuel Tchividjian, Senior Vice President and Ethics Officer at US public relations firm Ruder Finn. The company recently won a three-month contract to represent the Maldivian government.
Dear Mr Tchividjian,
On 7th February 2012, elements of the police and army loyal to the former autocratic leader of the Maldives, Mr. Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, threatened the democratically-elected President of the country, H.E. Mr. Mohamed Nasheed, his family and his supporters with physical harm unless he resigned by a certain time that day. Those elements of the police and army then escorted President Nasheed to the President’s Office and stood over him as he wrote a ‘resignation’ letter, while others forcibly took control of the country’s main television station. A new Government has since been constituted, dominated by allies of former President Gayoom – even though the country clearly rejected him and his thirty-year dictatorship through the ballot box in the 2008 presidential election.
As a member of the governing council and the Women’s Wing of the Maldivian Democratic Party, and an elected representative, I am therefore writing to express our surprise and disappointment that Ruder Finn decided to tender for and sign a contract with this clearly undemocratic and illegitimate government, a contract under which you will be asked to act as public apologist and public advocate.
We note that you claim to be Ruder Finn’s ‘Ethics’ Officer and that you once argued in an interview that “ethics is essentially an issue of values”. We put it to you however that both you and Ruder Finn, by accepting this contract, have demonstrated a complete lack of both values and ethics.
You justify your decision on ‘ethical’ grounds by saying that you have studied the “complex political situation” and have concluded that the current government is legitimate according to the country’s constitution but that if the National Commission of Inquiry determines that the government came to power illegally you will resign the contract. This position is so riddled with contradictions that it is difficult not to conclude that your ‘ethical’ analysis is nothing more than a fig leaf disguising a policy of ‘profit-at-any-cost’.
How can Ruder Finn have determined that the government is constitutional and legitimate when the national mechanism established to answer that very question, the NCI, has not yet presented its findings? Do you have the power of foresight?
Having already prejudged the conclusions of the NCI, you then claim Ruder Finn will resign the contract if the NCI demonstrates foul play. And yet if you had indeed “closely examined” the complex situation you would know that the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the Maldives’ largest political party – the MDP, and the country’s civil society have all stated that the NCI, chaired by President Gayoom’s former Minister of Defence, is neither independent nor credible.
Also in interview, you have argued that “the starting point of using one’s values to make an ethical choice is, one would presume, to have a clear and accurate understanding of the facts”. If this is the case, one wonders which facts you are basing your ethical choices on. You are the only organisation outside the Maldives, which has already decided that the current government is legitimate. Both the Commonwealth and the European Union, the two organisations most closely following events in the Maldives have both said the opposite – that there are clear questions marks over the legitimacy of this government and it can only demonstrate its legitimacy through an independent and impartial national commission of inquiry, and through early elections. Does Ruder Finn have a political analysis capability greater than that of the Commonwealth and the EU?
Which brings me to perhaps the most damning indictment of your company and your claim to conduct “ethical public relations” – that in your public statements on this issue you have knowingly issued untruths and sought to mislead. You claim in your interview with the Holmes Report on 27th April that “accusations of a coup have been dismissed from many international organizations and governments, including the United Kingdom government who has said that they do not recognize the transfer of power in the Maldives to be a coup”. Yet this is a clear misrepresentation of the position of the UK and the European Union, both of which have consistently made clear that there are serious questions about the legitimacy of this government and thus (taken from a Declaration by Baroness Catherine Ashton on behalf of the European Union on 22nd February 2012 ): “The EU is of the view that the legitimacy and legality of the transfer of presidential power in the Maldives should be determined by an impartial, independent investigation as agreed by all parties in the Maldives”. Both the EU and the Commonwealth – which is working in close cooperation with the United Nations on this issue – have also clearly said that in the medium-term legitimacy can only be conferred through a popular vote expressed through early elections in 2012.
Thus one can only conclude that, if ethical public relations is indeed a case of having a clear and accurate understanding of the facts, and then applying one’s values, it would seem that Ruder Finn practices a deeply unethical form of public relations because you lack a clear grasp of the facts, and, it would seem, have no values beyond a wish to make money.
On this point, it has been reported that your contract with the current government is worth almost $150,000 a month ($1,800,000 or Maldivian Rufiyaa 28 million annually). To provide you with some “clear and accurate facts.” If in the Maldives:
The Ruder Finn contract, per annum, with the current Maldivian regime is then equivalent to:
I invite you to apply your ‘values’ to these facts and to reach an ‘ethical’ conclusion.
Finally, I would like to remind you that while you are fortunate, in countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom to enjoy stable democracies which allow for the full enjoyment of human rights, with those rights come certain duties and responsibilities. Among those duties, I would hope, is to use your freedoms to promote the rights of other people in other countries and not knowingly work towards the suppression of those rights. President Gayoom presided over extrajudicial killings in our jails, and over hundreds of documented cases of torture. Since the overthrow of President Nasheed, cases of Police brutality have again begun to resurface – including against Members of Parliament (cases have been lodged with the Inter-Parliamentary Union), as have cases of State-sponsored sexual and gender-based violence against women, arbitrary detention and police brutality. Ruder Finn has now unwittingly made itself a vehicle through which he and his associates are defying the democratic right of people in the Maldives to choose their government and are instead reasserting the old autocracy.
If you continue down this path, then you will be party to one of the greatest injustices ever inflicted on the people of the Maldives. It is difficult to understand how Ruder Finn or you personally would be able to call such a choice “ethical”. We also wonder whether your corporate clients, such as Israeli Airline El Al (which Members of Parliament of the current regime voted to ban from landing in the Maldives) Reuters, Acca, Lexus, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Ricoh, Michelin, Four Seasons, Johnson & Johnson, Manpower, would be able to understand.
Yours sincerely,
Eva Abdulla
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]
(0)Dislikes(0)President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza has given assurances that the government coalition of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan remained strong, despite a differing of opinions between pro-government parties regarding the bill proposing the Maldives’ withdrawal from the Commonwealth.
“The coalition is strong, there are no issues with that. It shows that even on issues on which we disagree, we can work together. That’s what being in a coalition is all about,” said Abbas.
“Nasheed’s coalition split within 21 days – we are already passed this date. There are no long term issues,” he added.
A bill to withdraw the Maldives from the Commonwealth was submitted to the Majlis on April 29 and has been labelled in the local media as “not responsible” by the leader of coalition member Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Ahmed Thasmeen Ali.
Speaking with local newspaper Haveeru, Thasmeen criticised the decision not to consult with other parties within the coalition. The bill was submitted by Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) MP Ahmed Ilham and Dhivehi Qaumee Party, also a part of the coalition, (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed.
Deputy leader of the DRP, Ibrahim Shareef, today said that the party was in general support of the government: “But we cannot give in where the party’s core values are at stake.”
“We will try to run the ministries allocated to us and will support the government on matters we agree upon. On matters we disagree we will vote against,” he said.
When asked about the core values that divide the PPM from the DRP, Shareef said that he was unsure of the specific values of the PPM.
He said that the core values of the DRP were an open economic policy, private enterprise, equality and justice, democracy and the protection of law for everyone equally.
Leader of the DQP and Special Advisor to President Waheed, Dr Hassan Saeed, wrote an opinion piece for Haveeru on April 26 entitled: “Voters need to know what the party stands for”.
In the article he wrote: “We need political parties with clear political platforms. But before this we need to understand where those policies come from. What are the values that underpin them?”
He argued that clearer differentiation between parties would enable voters to make informed choices. Otherwise, Dr Saeed argued that voters fall back on reasons such as personality politics.
He argued that this was “the most dangerous because it can lead to a crude populism where big personalities attempt to outbid each other with unkeepable promises.”
The PPM, headed by the former President of thirty years Maumoon Gayoom, was formed in October 2011 following acrimonious divisions within the DRP. Gayoom had previously announced his retirement from politics but has become increasingly active in 2012.
The decision to forward the bill followed comments by Gayoom criticising the recent Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) statement. The statement criticised the government’s apparent failure to establish an impartial body to investigate the events that led to Nasheed’s resignation. It also repeated prior calls for fresh elections to end conjecture over the legitimacy of the current government.
Days before the submission of the withdrawal bill to parliament, Gayoom was reported as having questioned the necessity of the Maldives’ Commonwealth membership.
Gayoom became the Maldives’ third President in 1978 and the country joined the Commonwealth in 1982.
Gayoom was reported by Haveeru, however, to have argued that the nature of the body had changed since that time, resulting in a situation that no longer benefitted smaller nations.
“The actions of the Commonwealth have changed since then, to a point where we now have to have a rethink about the whole situation. That’s how much the world has changed now,” he claimed.
Gayoom’s said his comments were also based on the fact that the country had never itself been a former colony unlike neighbours such as India and Sri Lanka.
Earlier in the month, on the eve of the CMAG meeting, Gayoom warned PPM supporters that the country must be wary of foreign attempts to “intervene in our internal affairs”.
A PPM MP spoke to Minivan News following the announcement of the bill, saying: “From my view it is not something that has been discussed within the PPM yet,” the MP said yesterday.
“I have previously expressed my concern that [leaving the Commonwealth] is not the best way to solve this issue. It is not really a choice we can take,” said the MP who wish to remain unnamed.
The DRP’s Ibrahim Shareef said that DRP’s united stance was, “Categorically, we would not support a withdrawal from the Commonwealth.”
(1)Dislikes(0)President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has said that the government is seeking a “solution” to the deduction of US$8.1 million from concession fees paid by GMR, the Indian infrastructure giant which has been developing and operating Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) since it was awarded the concession by former President Mohamed Nasheed’s administration in November 2010.
The government received only US$525,355 out of an expected US$8.7 million in concession fees for the first quarter of 2012, after GMR deducted the Airport Development Charge (ADC) chargeable under its contract but which was thrown out after a Civil Court case on the matter was filed by the opposition during Nasheed’s tenure.
The ADC was intended to be a US$25 fee charged to outgoing passengers from January this year, as stipulated in the contract signed with GMR in 2010. The Civil Court blocked the fee on the grounds that it was essentially the same as a pre-existing Airport Services Charge (ASC), and that any new fees would constitute a new tax and was subsequently required to go through the People’s Majlis.
The case was filed by then-opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) – which had opposed the handing of the airport to GMR.
“I do not believe [the ADC] can be charged in the current situation because of the court’s decision,” Dr Waheed stated while speaking to the media at the inauguration of the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO) Asia-Pacific Conference held today in the Kurumba Maldives Resort.
According to the President, GMR can only take the Airport Development Charge following the “completion of all necessary legal procedures”.
“We are now having discussions with GMR. The government has now formed a team. As they are proceeding with the discussions, I believe a solution will be found without further delay,” President Waheed noted.
“Some of the things related to [the ADC] must be coordinated with the parliament. Therefore, when parliament convenes after the recess, we will submit the matter. So the work will proceed with parliament’s decision,” he said.
Parliament is now in recess until early June.
Managing Director of the Airports Company Mohamed Ibrahim was recently quoted in the local media as saying that the current administration does not support the decision of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s government to allow GMR to deduct the ADC from the concession fees.
GMR has been asked to reimburse the deducted amount, Ibrahim said.
GMR has not commented recently on the subject, however it noted following the civil court ruling that the payment of a development fee was “a common concept in many airports globally”.
“The reason for the inclusion of ADC in many global concession agreements is to address the funding needs to meet the investment model required to upgrade and develop new airport facilities at significant costs,” GMR stated.
The company further stated that the charge was included in the concession fee proposed between GMR and the government in 2010.
Speaking at the groundbreaking ceremony for INIA’s new terminal on December 19, then-President Nasheed said he wished to assure GMR that the government was “200 percent behind your contract, and every single other contract the government has signed with any other foreign party in this country. Not just contracts signed by our government, but also contracts that any ruler of the Maldives has signed with any party. We will honour it.”
(0)Dislikes(0)Porters working in Maldives Ports Limited (MPL) held a strike this morning in protest against MPL management for “confiscating” their television set that was kept in the area.
The protesting porters have claimed that their television set was taken around midnight and have alleged MPL had done so because the porters had been watching Raajje TV there.
Raajje TV is a station the political parties affiliated with government have alleged is heavily biased and in favor of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).
They have also alleged that the electricity had been cut from the premises while the porters had been viewing a live broadcast of protests held by the MDP on the occasion of International Workers day, or ‘May Day’.
Minivan News understands that many employees in the state-owned ports company are supporters of the MDP.
“When we came in this morning, we came to know that the TV had been taken by MPL. MPL had been furious because we always watch Raajje TV here,” a protester told local media.
An MPL official speaking to local media denied the claims made by the porters, claiming that the TV was taken in order to replace it with a new TV.
“Given the current political situation these days, everything becomes entangled with politics. We only took that TV to replace it with another one,” an MPL official told the local media.
Container clearance work was reportedly halted because of the protest, after protesters barricaded the main gates of MPL. Lorries were parked near the premises and the drivers stopped work to join the protests.
“We won’t open the gates unless the TV is placed back where it was,” a protester told the local media. “No pickup truck will enter the harbour to transport cargo.”
The protester said the TV was given to the port workers by the President’s Office during former President Nasheed’s administration.
“MPL has no authority over it. We even pay the electricity and cable bills as well,” added the protester.
However, MPL denied the claims and said that the TV was installed there by the company. Management said they had asked the protesters to come and discuss the issue with them, but the protesters had declined to do so.
Ibrahim Khaleel, the president of Ports Workers Union (PWU), told Minivan News that the porters had a temporary hut in front of the Maldives Customs Building and had a TV installed there.
“Last night, on the occasion of International Workers Day, MPL had a dinner for the staff. After the dinner, I went near the hut, and some of the porters told me there was no electricity there. I called the staff at the electricity department and they said that the electricity had just gone off. But later I learned that it was done deliberately,” Khaleel said.
“This morning when I went there the TV was gone missing. A porter told me it was taken by MPL because the porters were watching Raajje TV,” Khaleel added.
Khaleel said that was why the porters went on strike, and that he and President of the Labor Union Ahmed Jaleel had discussed the matter MPL management who had agreed to return the TV temporarily until they came to a decision on its fate.
Khaleel said that the protest has now been concluded and the porters have returned to work following the return of the TV.
MPL’s media coordinator was not responding at time of press.
Maldives Ports Limited recently suspended seven of its staff from their jobs at the state company for their participation in protests held by ousted Maldivian Democratic Party’s (MDP), a source in the company has confirmed.
MPL staff stage strike over “confiscated” television:
(0)Dislikes(0)