Tag: maldives news

India’s response to coup “cold”, Ibra tells Times of India

India should come down hard on the present regime in the Maldives and ask President Mohammed Waheed Hassan to call for general election this year, senior Maldivian senior statesman Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail, has told the Times of India.

Ibra said India’s response to the coup in Maldives was cold and that the largest democracy in the world had shut its eyes on the human rights violations that were going on in his country.

“The protests against the military rule are on the rise. In the last 40 days, more than 650 people have been arrested compared to the 10-15 detained for hooliganism in the last three years of democratic rule,” he said.

Ibra, who led the first pro-democracy mass protest in 2004, which led to the formation of the first democratically-elected government in Maldives, admitted they didn’t see the coup coming until it was too late. “We should have been careful as the elements of dictatorship don’t go away too easily.”

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“I just couldn’t let [Abdulla Mohamed] sit on the bench”, Nasheed tells Guardian

This is definitely not how Mohamed Nasheed imagined he would be promoting a new film about his campaign against climate change, writes Decca Aitkenhead for the UK’s Guardian newspaper.

The documentary follows the charismatic young leader of the Maldives, an island nation slowly sinking into the ocean, as he lobbies world leaders, addresses the UN, and makes international headlines by conducting the world’s first underwater cabinet meeting. But now that The Island President beginning to appear in cinemas, Nasheed is no longer the island’s president. Ousted from power in February, and now a quasi-fugitive in his own country, he arrives for our interview via Skype dishevelled and breathless, following another dramatic day.

“Well it’s been fairly challenging today,” he admits, lighting a cigarette and composing himself with a rueful grin. “First there was this scuffle inside parliament, but mostly there were a number of people who were demonstrating outside. The military charged at the crowd and therefore there were disturbances throughout the day. And after sunset the police and the military moved down to where we have been having our rallies and gatherings, and they ransacked and dismantled that place, and cordoned off almost a good half of Malé town.”

But after 30 years in office, in 2008 Gayoom yielded to pressure and held the country’s first democratic elections, which swept “the Mandela of the Maldives” to power. Quickly claimed by David Cameron as “my new best friend”, the young president became an international folk hero, and the face of a nation that, as he warned the UN, will be underwater “before the end of this century” unless the world acts now on climate change.

The Maldives’ transition to democracy was, however, ominously incomplete. According to Nasheed, elements still loyal to Gayoom were undermining reforms, and in response to repeated constitutional crises many opposition MPs and officials were arrested and detained during Nasheed’s administration. In January, frustrated by the judiciary’s attempts to thwart his reforms, Nasheed ordered the arrest of chief justice Abdulla Mohamed. Protesters loyal to the old regime took to the streets, supported by factions within the police, and on 7 February, after weeks of unrest, Nasheed was confronted by armed military officers. “There were guns all around me and they told me they wouldn’t hesitate to use them if I didn’t resign,” he told reporters that evening. It wasn’t a resignation, he says simply, but a coup d’état.

The picture since then has been, to say the least, highly confused. A warrant was issued for Nasheed’s arrest, and he has been threatened with life imprisonment, but for now he remains at liberty – just about – in his family home in the capital, orchestrating protests and demanding fresh elections. “Well basically the arrest warrant is there,” he explains, “but they haven’t moved on with it simply because there’s always so many people around me, so I suppose they don’t want to risk it yet. But they tried to do it today, and they will continue to try, tonight and tomorrow as well. I wouldn’t put anything beyond them.”

How did he feel about Amnesty International calling for the release of the chief justice? “I didn’t like arresting a judge, and as a long and dedicated Amnesty member I must say yes, Amnesty’s point was that I must try and find a procedure within the system to deal with this another way. And I was asking everyone, can you spot that procedure? But I just couldn’t let him sit on the bench. There is a huge lack of confidence in the judiciary, and I had to do something and the constitution calls upon me to do that. It’s not a nice thing to do. And it’s not a thing that I would want to do. And it’s not a thing that I liked doing. But it had to be done.”

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Breaking the rules of democracy

Given the events of the past three years it is fair to say that we are still a democracy in principle rather than in practice. The existing authoritarian and undemocratic enclaves prevalent within our socio-political system support this argument. By authoritarian enclaves I refer to the prevalent corruption, the lack of respect for the constitution and the rule of law, and the continuous stifling of our civil and political rights by the so-called political fanatics, ‘vanguards’ of democracy and religious scholars in the Maldives.

It is true, old habits die hard. After 30 years of repression and authoritarian rule we still continue to focus on personalities; our institutions are not independent of specific personalities and as a society we continue to limit each other’s political freedoms. We need to liberate ourselves from our traditional, personalised patronage politics. We need to liberate ourselves from the old habits.

To be democratic we need to understand that the rule of law precedes everything; civil liberties such as freedom of expression should be exercised with responsibility and as a society we need to make informed and responsible decisions in selecting and electing those who represent our voice.

President Waheed was right when he said on Hardtalk that “we have come to this point because we have not respected our constitution. We have not respected the rule of law. The last thing I want to do is to circumvent our constitution”. So when and where have we circumvented our constitution? Without going into the details of Gayyoom’s 30 year authoritarian regime, if we begin with the dawn of our democracy following the election of Mohamed Nasheed, when and where have the laws of the land been flouted? Where have we failed at democracy?

The rule of law was flouted when the Supreme Court was locked down under the order of Nasheed. The rule of law was flouted when a senior judge was ‘judgenapped’ and arrested. We failed at democracy when projects or investment opportunities were given to political party aides and cronies without declaration of ‘conflict of interest’ or without a fair bidding process. We failed at democracy as the number of family ties increased within the top brass of the state institutions. We failed at democracy when we failed to listen to public protests for 22 consecutive days, regardless of whether they were 200 people, a minority, or 100,000 people.

During Nasheed’s regime, the opposition too failed at democracy because they refused to accept the rules of the game of democracy. Over the past couple of years the opposition have been hell bent on creating parliamentary deadlocks which delayed the enactment of key legislations; used religious fervor to rile up anti-MDP sentiments and backed questionable characters to achieve their political goals. Democracy is not the only game in town if the losers of an election do not accept their defeat. If we see democracy under the axiom of a game, it will only continue to work if the losers in the game want to play/try again within the same institutional framework under which they lost.

Our constitutional sins reached a new level on February 7, 2012. The constitution of our country was punched in the face when our democratically elected leader was ousted in a coup. If Nasheed was such a failure, his removal should have been by the rule of law, by the people and by the ballot. Whether by the fate of circumstances, by Nasheed’s own making or by advanced planning the removal of an elected President by force, has set a very dangerous precedent here and in my opinion this constitutional sin is worse than anything Nasheed ever did.

I am willing to accept that politicians from all sides have failed to uphold the rule of law in the past, move forward and draw lessons from it. So I ask President Waheed, since he holds the reigns now, what is his plan to uphold and maintain the rule of law? The current government’s commitment to democracy will continue to be tested and judged by the disgruntled opposition until the next election. Until then I hope our fragile democracy will continue to withstand the pressures and shocks without abandoning the electoral process ever again. The lesson for all of us is, never again should the constitution and rule of law be abandoned under the guise of upholding democracy.

I am not really concerned about ‘who’ is in power as long as the person in power is there through legitimate means and is concerned about implementing positive change. We have intellectuals on both sides of the political spectrum. Our infant democracy was born by the work of several people. For every protester there was an intelligent and energetic policymaker creating the rules of the game. For instance, Nasheed is a great orator and a true torch bearer for democracy. While Nasheed carried the torch, there were policy makers behind the table such as Dr Ahmed Shaheed, Dr Hassan Saeed, and Dr Waheed who rigorously used other channels to bring democracy to our country. All of them should be credited for their contributions regardless of which side of the table they are on.

Some of our MP’s display appalling behavior, ignorance and a lack of professionalism. Some are borderline criminals. When the next election confronts us, we as the electorate have a moral responsibility to select and elect leaders who are competent, crime-free and open-minded.

One of the fundamental components of democracy is freedom of expression, because without it, free elections mean nothing. We do enjoy ‘freedom of expression’ in the Maldives but without any responsibility. Freedom of expression is an abused freedom in the Maldives because religious extremists use it to spread their religious fatwa’s, war-mongerers use it to spread their hate, politicians use it to create division and the media uses it to spread half-truths. Where is our sense of social responsibility when we exercise freedom of expression?

We need to remember that before the 7th of February there were thousands of people who opposed MDP and exercised their fundamental right to criticise. The coup was not undertaken by the opposition supporters, therefore, why should they be labelled as ‘baghees’ (traitors)? The level of cyber bullying evident on social media towards anyone associated with the current government is one example where freedom of opinion is violated. The number of people that tell me that they are afraid to show their support to the parties they supported prior to 7th February due to fear of being labelled as ‘baghee’ is proof enough that freedom of opinion and expression is no longer a given. Without proper freedom of thought, opinion and association we will never be able to safeguard the integrity of our elections.

As a society that aspires to be democratic we all have a social responsibility to respect the rule of law, exercise our freedoms with responsibility and empower politicians for the right reasons. We are the drivers of change and politicians are only the mediators we select to implement the change we want.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Govt will pay “special attention” to small populations: Dr Waheed

President Mohamed Waheed said his administration will pay “special attention” to small populations when addressing the needs of the people, according to the President’s Office.

Dr Waheed made the remarks on Friday while speaking to the inhabitants of Gaadhoo island in Laamu atoll. He expressed regret that a senior government official had not visited Gaadhoo for years, and said even if it was not possible for him personally to visit all the islands, he would try to send at least one of his ministers to each of the islands during this year.

“We must visit the islands and see for ourselves the well-being of our people. It is our duty to fulfill the needs of the people as much as possible,” Dr. Waheed observed.

According to 2006 census Gaadhoo has only 231 inhabitants. The island has access to primary education, a healthcare post and ferry connections to other islands of Laamu atoll.

Dr. Waheed meanwhile added that regardless of the size of the population, basic services must be provided to all citizens equally – however, acknowledged that “providing those services and improving the quality of services remained a challenge”.

The complex population distribution in Maldives has been identified as a great concern for the future of Maldives as it poses major challenges to the economic development.

The total population of nearly 350,000 is dispersed over 196 inhabited islands spread over a distance of more than 600 miles – making this one of the world’s most dispersed countries.

Around 130 islands have populations less than a 1000, and others between 1000-6000 while Male’ accounts for one third of the total population.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MNCCI waits on Adeeb parliamentary backing before appointing new president

The Maldives National Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MNCCI) will wait for current president Ahmed Adeeb to receive parliamentary approval for his appointment as Minister of Tourism Arts and Culture before replacing him in the organisation.

Speaking to Haveeru, current MNCCI Vice President Ismail Asif said the organisation was in the process of setting out an election process to appoint a new president.

However, Asif stressed that no decision would be taken until Adheeb received parliamentary approval to become the country’s new tourism minister – a decision requiring him to step down from holding the chamber of commerce’s presidency.

Should parliamentary backing be obtained for Adheeb to succeed Dr Mariyam Zulfa as the nation’s tourism head, Asif was quoted as saying that a general meeting would then be held to find a new MNCCI head.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Minivan News team wins Earth Hour Quiz

Minivan News journalists won first place in the Earth Hour Quiz organised by the global logistics service provider Federal Express Corporation (FedEx), in collaboration with Maldives Youth Climate Action Network (MYCN).

“We were lucky enough to have a very diverse group of environmental enthusiasts from surfers to shippers, accountants, couriers, journalists, cameramen as participants,” said Grant Baxter, Sales and Marketing Manager of the Holidayland Maldives, the new FedEx Licensee in Maldives.

Nearly 30 participants were divided into groups of three, and asked questions relating to the local background, environment, history and entertainment.

Minivan News journalists Daniel Bosley, Zaheena Rasheed and Hawwa Lubna won the first round and achieved highest overall score, winning a surfing lesson and a sponsored fishing trip.

During the Earth Hour, 8:30pm and 9:30pm, the lights at FedEx office were switched off while inside the participants were briefed on the increasing menace of plastic waste in the country.

According to Baxter, the event marks the relaunch of FedEx services in the Maldives under the new local partner Holidayland, which replaced Universal Enterprises as the local FedEx agent on February 15.

Baxter observed that the company aims to be more localised and sensitive to the needs of the local market while it promotes the brand through events such as the Earth Hour quiz gathering, boat trips and community upliftment projects.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

High Court upholds Civil Court injunction against investigation of Judge Abdulla by judicial watchdog

The High Court today upheld a Civil Court injunction against the Judicial Services Commission (JSC)’s investigation of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed.

Abdulla Mohamed was a central figure in the downfall of former President Mohamed Nasheed, following the military’s detention of the judge after the government accused him of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, links with organised crime and “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist” to protect key figures of the former dictatorship from human rights and corruption cases.

Abdulla Mohamed obtained the Civil Court injunction against his investigation by the judicial watchdog in September 2011, after it produced a report stating that he had violated the Judge’s Code of Conduct by making a politically biased statement in an interview he gave to private broadcaster DhiTV.

The JSC appealed the injunction on January 24, claiming that the Civil Court had disregarded the commission’s constitutional mandate which allowed it to take action against judges, and argued that the court did not have the jurisdiction to overrule a decision of its own watchdog body.

The commission further argued the Judge Mohamed did not have the authority to seek the injunction preemptively as the commission had not yet taken action against him.

The JSC had therefore requested the High Court to terminate the injunction, citing contradictions to legal and court procedures.

However presiding High Court Judge Dr Azmiralda Zahir contended that the commission had not provided the court “any reason to terminate the injunction”.

Zahir further observed that the High Court would be violating the court procedures if it decided on the injunction before the Civil Court had reached its own verdict in the case.

She also added that that JSC could not establish a connection between the Civil Court’s injunction and jurisdiction of the court, and concluded it is not a reasonable argument to terminate the injunction.

Therefore, she ruled that the judges who evaluated the case had found no grounds to change the civil court’s injunction.

Former President’s member on the JSC and whistleblower Aishath Velezinee for several years contended that Abdulla Mohamed was a central, controlling “father figure” in the lower courts, answerable to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and a key figure responsible for scuttling the independence of the judiciary under the new constitution.

“When Abdulla Mohamed [was arrested by Nasheed’s government] I believe the opposition feared they were losing control over the judiciary, and that is why they came out on the streets. If you look at the so called public protests, it was opposition leaders and gang members. We did not see the so-called public joining them – they were a public nuisance really,” Velezinee observed, in a recent interview with Minivan News.

“For nearly three weeks they were going around destroying public property and creating disturbances. It wasn’t a people thing – we can say that. We locals – we know who was there on the streets. There is footage and evidence available of it. We’ve seen the destruction they were causing in Male’ every day.”

Following the arrest of the judge, Nasheed’s government appealed to the international community – in particular the Commonwealth, the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) and the UN – for assistance in resolving the spiralling judicial crisis. A Commonwealth team arrived in the Maldives the day before Nasheed’s government was overthrown after a group of police sided with opposition demonstrators, attacking the military headquarters and seizing control of the state broadcaster.

Velezinee bemoaned the local and international focus on the arrest of the judge rather than the decline of the institution that led Nasheed’s government to such desperate interference in the judiciary.

“To the international community [the protesters] were a crowd of people – and to them that’s the public. It’s a public protest to them. But it was not. We need to consider who was involved in the free Abdulla Mohamed campaign. These are the same people I have previously accused of covering up and being conspirators in the silent coup,” Velezinee told Minivan News in an interview in February.

The first complaints against Abdulla Mohamed were filed in July 2005 by then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed – now Dr Waheed’s political advisor – and included allegations of misogyny, sexual deviancy, and throwing out an assault case despite the confession of the accused.

Asked in February this year whether he was satisfied with the investigation into the judge’s conduct and the action taken since his complaints in 2005, Dr Saeed replied that “under that constitution [President Gayoom] was the head of the judiciary. So it was my legal and moral obligation to raised that issue with him, which I did.

“I did not know if it was followed up. Obviously if there are issues it has to be resolved in accordance with the established laws and institutions.”

During the same interview, President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan said it was “for the judiciary to decide what to do with him, not for me.”

“I don’t want to interfere in the judiciary. I want our constitution to be respected, and work with everybody to make our constitution work. This is a new constitution, and it is the first time we are trying it out. And so there are difficulties in it. We need to find ways of solving it. It is time for us to work together, and if there are problems with the judiciary we need to work together to solve them – they are intelligent good people in the judiciary and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC).”

The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) last week summoned former President Mohamed Nasheed, former Home Minister Hassan Afeef, and former Defence Minister Tholath Ibrahim for questioning over their detention of the judge. It had promised to conclude the investigation by April.

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

MDP refuses to cooperate with CNI citing concerns over impartiality

The ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has said it does not recognise the Committee of National Inquiry (CNI), in response to the committee’s call for cooperation on Thursday.

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan charged the CNI with looking into the legality and legitimacy of the transfer of presidential power on February 7. The MDP alleges former President Mohamed Nasheed was deposed in a coup d’état and have called for early elections.

The CNI told local media all political parties have complied with request for statements except for the MDP. But the committee said it believed MDP may cooperate if the CNI addressed the party’s concerns, local media reported.

The MDP has raised concerns over the committee’s composition. The CNI is chaired by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Defence Minister Ismail Shafeeu. The MDP has also called for strong international presence on the commission. The EU and the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) have supported the call.

The CNI did not appear to commit to addressing MDP concerns, but instead requested dialogue.

However, MDP spokesperson Hamid Abdul Gafoor said, “We do not recognise the CNI. How can the people who instigated a coup investigate the coup? There is no validity in the process. How can we give any weight to it?”

Gafoor also noted that the CNI had not requested for statements from officials of Nasheed’s administration.

Dialogue

According to local media Sun Online, committee head Ismail Shafeeu said, “[The MDP] have told media that they are dissatisfied with the commission. They have said the same to us.”

Further, CNI member Mohamed Fawaz Shareef had said he believed the MDP may cooperate if the CNI addressed the party’s complaints. The CNI have now requested for dialogue with the party, reports Sun Online.

According to Sun Online, the CNI also said although the UN had assured the committee of assistance, the committee had not heard back from the UN. The CMAG has offered assistance to the investigation, but the government said it favors UN assistance over that of the Commonwealth.

The CNI have requested for statements or videos to be uploaded to its website if witnesses are uncomfortable with submitting statements in person.

The CNI has said its inquiry is not a criminal investigation, but that the final report will consist of the three members’ opinions on the events of February 7.

Minivan News tried to contact the CNI for further comment, but the committee said it did not speak to the media except during its biweekly press briefings.

The committee is expected to complete its inquiry by May 31.

Dr Waheed Hassan told local television station Villa TV (VTV) he would resign and reinstate ousted President Nasheed if the CNI established the February 7 transfer of power to be illegitimate.

“Flawed”

The MDP has criticised the lack of cross-party consultation in compiling the committee and the lack of international experts on the committee.

“It has been conceived and imposed by those parties allied to Dr  Waheed without any consultation with MDP. It does not include any eminent international experts. And the inclusion of individuals who held Cabinet posts during the autocratic government of former President Gayoom, including the appointment of a Chair – Mr. Ismail Shafeeu – who had held various ministerial posts under former President Gayoom including the position of Defense Minister at a time of widespread human rights abuses in the country, suggests that no effort has been made to ensure independence and impartiality,” the MDP said in February.

The EU, Commonwealth, India, UK and the US have called for an impartial investigation.

Local NGOs Transparency Maldives, Maldivian Democracy Network, Maldives NGO Federation and Democracy House have called on the CNI to seek cross-party support, international assistance and have asked for observer status.

According to the CNI’s website, its members held meetings with the Adhaalath Party, the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and the Maldives Reform Movement (MRM). The CNI has also met Commonwealth Special Envoy Sir Donald McKinnon, the UN’s Mediation Expert, and three NGOs. These are the Maldives Democracy Network, Transparency Maldives, and Democracy House.

It has also met with media outlets, the Attorney General’s Office, the Foreign Ministry, Communication Authority of Maldives, Police Integrity Commission, Human Rights Commission of the Maldives, the Civil Service Commission and the Prosecutor General’s Office.

Likes(0)Dislikes(1)

“Democracy must be restored in the Maldives,” Nasheed tells US media

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s promotional tour of the US media for the Island President continued over the weekend, including interviews with the Washington Post, Salon, and the Huffington Post, among others.

The interviews follow Nasheed’s appearance last week on the Late Show with David Letterman, and address to Colombia University. The recent political instability in the Maldives has been as much a topic in many of the interviews as the wider environmental threat highlighted in the Island President, and the media has been quick to draw parallels.

The first half of the film gives a political backdrop to Nasheed’s own political rise – and imprisonment.

“It is very important that democracy be restored in the Maldives, and we hope that friendly governments understand the necessity and the need for it,” Nasheed said, in a Q&A with Salon. “As we see it now, I’m afraid the government there is going to all sorts of places. Certainly it’s not going democratically, and we need to bring it back.”

Asked by Salon if he believed Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s government would pursue tackling climate change to the same degree, Nasheed said “They can’t. You must have a high moral authority to address climate change. Every time you start speaking, you know, you can’t be answering back to the skeletons in your own closet. So it’s not going to be possible for them to articulate in the same manner as a democratic government. I don’t see it happening.”

There was, Nasheed told the magazine, no policies or political ideology behind Gayoom and the former opposition coalition.

“[The] ideology is xenophobia and racism. All the rhetoric against Israel and the West, calling everyone a heathen. It’s really narrow-minded and intolerant and nationalistic. This is an island mentality as well, but it’s possible to change that. It’s not the people who have that mentality but the ruling elite, who want to suppress the people through that narrative, that rhetoric,” Nasheed explained.

Nasheed also met with the US State Department. Recounting the meeting to the Washington Post, Nasheed said: “the whole issue centred around the restoration of democracy in the Maldives, and how it was very important to get the country back on track, and how the US government may assist in doing that.”

“We were encouraged that the US government willing to listen and see how they may be of assistance to democratic progress in the Maldives,” Nasheed said, adding that the State Department had shown a willingness to reassess the situation as new information emerged.

“The US government was of the view that elections were necessary – they had reservations in the past, but main focus of conversation was that whatever their viewpoint in the past, they were willing to assess situation on the ground as it is now.”

Gayoom denies allegations

Former president Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom has meanwhile brushed off the allegations made by his successor regarding his involvement in the coup.

Gayyoom in a press statement released yesterday after Nasheed had made remarks to the US media, stated that he had not attempted nor took part in any type of attempts to unlawfully topple the government of Nasheed.

However he acknowledged that his party, the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), had participated with thousands of people who raised concerns over Nasheed’s unlawful and unconstitutional actions and his efforts to distance the Maldivian people from their Islamic faith.

“For that purpose, PPM had participated in the protests that were organised by several political parties and NGOs. That [protesting] is a legal and a democratic right for the people to ensure accountability of the president and senior officials of his government. It is also an obligation on the citizens as well,” Gayoom claimed..

Gayoom also expressed his confidence that the events that unfolded on February 7 was not a coup d’état: “Therefore I can confidently say that the allegations that Nasheed is making, regarding the transfer of power that took place on February 7 was a coup d’état or a revolution, and that I was involved in it, are completely absurd.”

Gayoom issued the press statement in particular response to Nasheed’s appearance on Letterman.

During the show, Nasheed said Dr Waheed’s regime, is the “old dictatorship that we voted out of office”.

“Gayyoom is back in the country, his children are in cabinet, he is in power. Dr Waheed is just a facade.” Nasheed said.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)