Tag: maldives news

Comment: SAARC promises regional economic integration

With the ‘Addu Declaration’ issued at the conclusion of the 17th SAARC Summit in Maldives, resolving to take the maritime and rail linkages among member-nations forward and with tangible goals set for the present, there is promise of SAARC moving forward to integrate South Asian economies.

The decision for India, Maldives and Sri Lanka to cooperate in building maritime connectivity and for India, Bangladesh and Nepal to develop railway links will go a long way in bringing SAARC goals nearer to achievement full 25 years after the concept of South Asian cooperation was given some practical shape. Each of these components need to be expanded to cover other nations in the region. Bringing Afghanistan and Pakistan, into this process of building maritime and rail-road linkages in South Asia acquires importance, if the current initiative were not to be lost.

The success of SAARC depends on a variety of factors, both internal and external. First, there is the question of political resolve in member-nations to implement all the various declarations and decisions of SAARC summits. Differences between India and Pakistan have hampered the speedy completion of the SAARC agenda from the beginning. The inclusion of Afghanistan as a full-fledged SAARC member has brought in both opportunities as well as challenges.

Earlier the focus was on India-Pakistan differences as obstacles to progress. Now it is for Pakistan to address issues pertaining to fundamentalism and terrorism which affect the region and sort out the problems in its relations with Afghanistan. Pakistan will also have to shed its perceived security concerns related to Afghanistan and also facilitate over-land connectivity and two-way movement of goods between India and Afghanistan.

The India-Pakistan differences are really not as insurmountable as they might appear. Mutual trust will help to resolve them in course of time. Unfortunately, terrorism sponsored from Pakistan territory has continued to make neighbouring India look at Islamabad with suspicion.

There seems to be some realisation in Pakistan’s political circles about the need for working closely with Afghanistan and India even to eradicate terrorism from its soil. Pakistan-based terror groups, often assisted by the ISI, have also been using the territory of other SAARC nations, particularly Nepal and Bangladesh, to target India, which has give cause for concern to these countries also. Apprehensions now exist even in Maldives and Sri Lanka.

India’s role and responsibility

SAARC has taken 25 long years to reach where it is today. The growth of Indian economy during this period, and the opportunities that it offers to India’s South Asian neighbours, jointly and severally, were not there when SAARC was founded. India’s place in the global economy has given New Delhi a certain leverage and confidence to look at SAARC, and indeed at the world beyond, in full awareness of its responsibilities and role in contributing to their economic advancement.

South Asia’s economic integration will help India’s growth as much as the economic growth in its SAARC neighbours. Given the fact that the global economic turmoil has left very few nations, regions and groupings unaffected, for India to sustain its own economic growth it should help to develop the markets in South Asian countries and, at the same time, open up its own vast market to them. India’s economic success has contributed to a new awareness in these countries of their larger neighbour being more of a source of support and cooperation than of irritation. There are indications of fairly common desire to sort out the differences and irritants that their countries may have with India.

In the new environment of a fast globalising world, cooperation for a better future takes precedence over political confrontation and contention left over by history. In an environment of cooperation, willing neighbours will find India open-mined and generous in dealing with them. Even as efforts must continue to peacefully resolve lingering bilateral problems, SAARC countries must work together for the larger goal of peace, progress and prosperity of their people.

Common currency for SAARC?

Though SAARC’s founders had contemplated the EU model for it, the Association has been reluctant even to consider measures such as a SAARC passport for greater freedom of movement and unhindered trade, not to speak of open borders and single currency for the region’s integration. The Addu Summit was characterised by the usual timidity in this regard. The Summit Declaration chose not even to mention a forward-looking suggestion by the Sri Lankan President, Mahinda Rajapaksa, for a ‘South Asian currency’.

However, Maldives has taken the initiative to begin discussions with India and Sri Lanka about direct exchange of its rufiya against the currencies of the other two nations. For Maldives, in particular, the measure would yield immediate benefit. India and Sri Lanka are its major trading partners and earning US dollars to pay for imports has been a major problem for the country. The solution should lie in balancing the books between SAARC members in terms of dollars and expanding the experiment to cover bilateral arrangements among all SAARC members. Common SAARC currency is an idea the adoption of which may become unavoidable, after a time, when there is greater integration of SAARC economies, including on the labour front.

Migrations in search of employment in the region are a problem and varying restrictive visa regimes are a part of it. India’s neighbours are complaining about the non-availability of the facility of visa-on-arrival regime in India. Maldives offers this facility to all nations owing to its needs as a global tourist destination. Sri Lanka, which used to be open, has begun to review the position: it has decided that the facility has to be bilateral. India has genuine concerns in regard to security and unauthorised movement of individuals.

Experience, however, has shown that ban on travel movement has not made the security situation any less worrisome. For Sri Lanka, the source of apprehension is different: Colombo is reluctant to enter into a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) because of its fears about Indian professionals and skilled labour flooding its market. India could have similar apprehensions, and a via media needs to be found at the SAARC-level. Issues remain between India and Bangladesh, on the labour front.

SAARC needs to evolve a common economic and fiscal policy for an effective free trade area. The Indian decision announced at Addu, to prune the ‘Sensitive List’ from 425 tariff-lines to 25, is a big positive step in the direction of economic integration of the SAARC countries. Moving in slow and halting steps, SAARC has, nevertheless, gathered some strength. The setting up of the SAARC University in New Delhi will create greater awareness among the young of the region of their common heritage, shared interests and help promote common standards in higher education.

The harmony and the spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation witnessed at the Addu Summit should, one hopes, lead to SAARC countries speaking with one voice on important issues in international arenas regardless of bilateral difference such as those between India and Pakistan. Complex bilateral problems are best left to be resolved through bilateral negotiations. The SAARC mandate rightly prohibits raising of such issues in the group’s meetings at different levels.

Perhaps, the most important feature of the 17th SAARC Summit was the one pertaining to the promotion of maritime and rail connectivity among three of the region’s eight countries. Much improved connectivity – maritime and on-land, duly extended to cover all member countries, will lead to reintegration of the region, which was, not-so long also, one single whole.

<strong>The writer is a Senior Fellow at the <a href=”http://www.orfonline.org/” target=”_blank”>Observer Research Foundation</a></strong>
<em>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]</em>
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

HRCM marks human rights day with reception

A society with no respect to human rights will inevitably plunge into social chaos and economic decline, said the head of the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM), Mariyam Azra, speaking at a reception held on Saturday night to mark International Human Rights Day.

In the ceremony attended by President Mohamed Nasheed and senior officials, Azra noted that much has to been done in guaranteeing the rights given to all individuals, groups and societies.

Highlighting the increased physical, sexual and emotional abuse of children in Maldives, Azra said that the regulations have to be formulated to identify and protect them.

She also encouraged people to end domestic violence and the stigmatising of women, providing them equal opportunities in social, economic and political fields.

“The state also needs to provide better protection to people with special needs, ” added Azra.

She noted the importance of implementing a monitoring mechanism to oversee the rights of the expatriate workers, which currently accounts for one third of the total populace.

“The authorities need to monitor their living conditions before giving the work permit, as well during their stay here,” Azra said.

Minivan News recently reported a steep rise in human trafficking, which was calculated to be the second largest contributor of foreign currency to the Maldives at US$123 million.

In 2010, the United States’ State Department listed the Maldives second on its Tier 2 Watchlist for Human Trafficking, following a report that Bangladeshi workers were being exploited in high numbers by fake companies promising work permits.

Azra highlighted the need for the formulating the laws and regulations, to establish legal framework to follow the international declarations the government has signed, and urged parliament and other institutions to support the process. A report on the practice of human trafficking in the Maldives is pending.

Azra also noted that the commission had faced several complaints concerning the decentralised healthcare system, urging the government to ensure better health services in islands.

Speaking at the ceremony, President Mohamed Nasheed accepted that a lot of work had to be done by the state to ensure human rights, and reiterated the importance of investigating the torture of inmates during the former government.

He had earlier criticised HRCM for failing to conduct a full investigation of torture faced by inmates at prisons in the country.

Speaking at the ceremony, Nasheed also restated his position that human rights is not a strange concept in Islamic Sharia. Safeguarding the dignity of the human being was a fundamental obligation of Islamic Sharia as well, the President added. The punishments and rulings of Islamic Sharia were not inhumane, Nasheed said, claiming that confusion arose in interpreting those rulings.

He also said the Maldives had missed an opportunity to demonstrate “the nobility of Islamic Sharia” to the world, after it reacted “in a Jihadi spirit” to controversial statements made by visiting UN human rights chief Navi Pillay last month.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Sun, sand and intolerance

Saturday’s attack on a group of people silently protesting against religious intolerance is just the latest in a series of orchestrated, well-choreographed acts of violence, hatred and intolerance sweeping across the nation in recent months.

Independent journalist and blogger, Ismail ‘Hilath’ Rasheed, whose personal blog was censored by the Maldivian government last month, was among those attacked, sustaining serious injuries to the head. Others who attempted to intervene also suffered minor injuries.

Ahmed Hassan, one of the protesters, said, “We planned a silent sit down protest in order to make a statement over the lack of religious freedom for minorities, especially those who aren’t Sunni Muslims.”

“We are entering the fourth year of democracy but unfortunately, many basic freedoms and rights have yet to be achieved for all Maldivians. It is unacceptable in this day and age that non-Muslim Maldivians are discriminated against in their own country,” he said. “This is their country as much as ours.”

He further added “I would like to say to those that attacked us today that violence is not a part of Islam. Islam is a religion of love, peace and shura (consultation). The unprovoked attack is clearly an act of intimidation. We realize that as our movement grows, we could face many more such attacks, but we will not be backing out. We will not be intimidated into silence.”

Local writer and blogger, Aminath Sulthona, who was also among the protesters said, “These are not people worthy of being termed ‘religious’, but they are misguided thugs spreading terror and violence in the name of religion.”

Sulthona complained that the police at the scene failed to carry out their duties. “I was being openly threatened and verbally abused in the presence of a police officer who paid no heed to the man… I managed to take pictures of the attackers, but as soon as I got home I started receiving calls saying I would be attacked on the streets if the pictures were leaked.”

The injured protester, Hilath, has also previously faced death-threats over his vocal criticism of Islamic radicalism on his personal blog.

Million-Man March of bigotry

As the rest of the world celebrates the International Human Rights day to commemorate the adoption of the UDHR, a network of NGOs in the Maldives and seven political parties are preparing to conduct a large protest on December 23 – with organisers vowing to assemble a rather ambitious 100,000 protesters, including mothers and their newborns, in order to ‘protect Islam’.

The protests were announced in the aftermath of a speech delivered in parliament by Navi Pillay, the visiting UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, after she sought the removal of discriminatory clauses in the Constitution towards non-Muslims, as well as an open debate on the subject of degrading punishments like public flogging that are still practised in the Maldives.

Pillay argued that flogging as a form of punishment was “cruel and demeaning to women”, while pointing out that apart from just one other Islamic country, the practise wasn’t condoned even among Muslim nations.

Available statistics appear to support the claim that women are disproportionately affected by punishments such as flogging. Mariyam Omidi, then Editor of Minivan News, reported in a 2009 article that according to government statistics, out of 184 people sentenced to flogging for ‘fornication’, 146 were women.

However, the report was met with outrage from conservative sections of the public who gathered with placards at the same venue where the protesters were attacked yesterday, and demanded that the journalist be deported.

There was simply no room for intelligent discussion on the subject and the offending statistic mysteriously disappeared from government websites not long afterwards.

Similarly, the response to the UN Human Rights Commissioner’s recommendations has been a brutish all-out war on the very idea of having a debate on the subject.

One gimmick to rule them all

One might wonder how in a country where Islam is safeguarded by the Constitution, and where there is overwhelming support among both leaders and the general public for mandating Islam’s role in state affairs, and where educating the public on other religions is not only taboo, but also illegal by law – could there still exist such insecurity among citizens that they need to rally in order to ‘protect Islam’.

The explanation is simple.

For 30 years, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom carefully consolidated the state’s authority over personal beliefs by successfully selling the idea of a ‘100 percent Sunni Muslim’ nation, and making the Dhivehi Identity virtually synonymous with Sunni Islam, which needed to be fiercely protected at all times from ever-present, invisible threats.

One of Gayoom’s most damaging legacies is that a paranoid Maldives found itself among the top ten countries in the world noted for religious intolerance, according to a study by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life published in 2009.

Employing religion to keep his citizens in check was a master stroke that ensured him a long reign, but Gayoom’s chickens came home to roost in the dying days of his regime when the democratic uprising threw up a medley of ultra-conservative mullahs who would take over the religious mantle from Gayoom.

Following the first democratic Presidential elections, the ultra-conservative Adhaalath Party assumed control of the newly created Ministry of Islamic Affairs, and took upon themselves the onerous responsibility of deciding who were the ‘true Muslims’ and what constituted ‘true Islam’.

It didn’t help matters that despite the freedom of speech granted by the constitution, the mainstream Maldivian media continues to exercise strict self-censorship when it comes to issues of religion and human rights.

The subject remains taboo among other public institutions and agencies as well, as evidenced by the statement released by the Maldivian Human Rights Commission yesterday on the occasion of Human Rights day, which glaringly omits any mention of minority rights or non-Muslim Dhivehin.

Speaking at a National Awards ceremony last month, President Nasheed gently rebuked his citizens for reacting ‘in a jihadi manner’ over the Navi Pillay controversy.

Instead, he exhorted the citizens to “have the courage to be able to listen to and digest what people tell us, what we hear and what we see”

President Nasheed would have done well to foster this spirit in his own government which, in the first few months after coming to power, shut down several websites that were allegedly critical of his then coalition partner, the Adhaalath Party.

Less than two weeks before he implored his citizens to have the courage to digest others’ opinions, President Nasheed’s government banned the blog of independent journalist Hilath who had been critical of Islamists in the government.

Even more startling was the reaction of his foreign Minister, Ahmed Naseem, to the controversy over Navi Pillay’s recommendations for doing away with degrading punishments.

“You cannot argue with God”, he said, in what was a clear surrender to the politics of bigotry.

The President would also do well to convey his ideas to his erudite Islamic Minister, Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Baree whose response to the call for open discussion on the subject was merely, “No Muslim has the right to advocate against flogging for fornication.”

The Islamic Minister had also previously condemned the presence of commemorative monuments presented by participating nations in the recently concluded 17th SAARC summit in Addu.

Burning Bridges

The destructive outcome of emotive politics of hatred, strife and fear was clearly demonstrated by the hyper-paranoid religious vandals who burnt, damaged and stole multiple SAARC monuments because they allegedly depicted ‘idols of worship’.

One police officer on duty guarding the monument recollected being approached by hostile members of the general public asking why they were guarding “temples”.

The opposition parties, seeing political expediency even in the most unfortunate acts of xenophobic vandalism, quickly hailed the vandals as “national heroes”.

In a related incident, some MPs of the Progressive Party, including MP Ahmed Mahloof apparently hijacked a ferry in a valiant effort to save Islam from a banner hung at the International Airport, before they were intercepted by the Police and diverted to another island.

The offending banner at the airport depicted an image of Jesus Christ, a Buddhist chakra, and other religious motifs symbolising the religious diversity of South Asia, which the design consultants who came up with the concept said was in keeping with this year’s SAARC summit’s theme of ‘Building bridges’.

Notably, none of these MPs had anything to say on the young non-Muslim Maldivian man who hung himself from a tower at that very airport in July 2010, following immense pressure from family and state religious authorities after he, in his own words, “foolishly admitted (his) non-religious stance” to friends and colleagues.

If the 17th SAARC Summit proved anything, it is that building bridges is impossible when there are greedy political trolls ready to pounce on anyone willing to cross it.

Uphill struggle

It also appears that the Mullah and the MPs seem to be firm in their understanding that Islam has no room for thinking, no room for debate, no room for tolerance and no room for intelligence.

The seemingly endless series of ugly incidents and violence carried out in the Maldives in the name of Islam only reinforces the reputation of Islam as an intolerant, backward religion fit for narrow minded thugs who are incapable of dealing with 21st century realities or co-existing peacefully with the international community.

According to a March 2011 Universal Periodic Review Report for the Maldives, the Maldivian government had pledged to raise awareness and public debate around the issue of freedom of religion and religious tolerance.

The report states that “The Maldives commits to begin domestic awareness-raising and an open public debate on religious issues. Moreover… the Maldives requests international support to host, in 2012, a major international conference on modern Sharia jurisprudence and human rights.”

However, this may be a difficult task given the sense of over-entitlement prevalent among sections of the Maldivian public that, though it demands – nay depends – on foreign aid, income and expertise to keep their families clothed and fed, nevertheless scoffs at the very thought of having to fulfil any obligations to the international community at large.

When confronted by the UN Committee on the the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in August 2011 on the constitutional clause depriving non-Muslims of citizenship, the Maldivian delegation reportedly had this to say:

“It was not true that under the new Constitution existing citizens could be arbitrarily deprived of their nationality if they were to stop practicing Islam… The Muslim-only clause under the citizenship article of the Constitution only applied to non-Maldivians wishing to become naturalised.”

However, just one month later, the government published new Regulations under the Religious Unity Act of 1994, making it illegal to propagate any other religion than Islam, or to be in possession of any material or literature that contradicts Islam. Any violations of the regulations would carry a 2 to 5 year prison sentence.

In other words, as the silent protesters attacked in broad daylight yesterday learned, the struggle to achieve universal human rights in the Maldives is a seemingly impossible and uphill task that only keeps getting harder, thanks to the cesspool of paranoia, hatred and violence generated by a band of short-sighted politicians who are happy to abuse religion and opportunistic religious clerics who dabble in politics.

As with last year, where a motorcade of fundamentalists rode around the capital yelling loud anti-Semitic slogans about visiting Israelis, this year too the Human Rights Day has been marred by gloomy incidents of intolerance that only remind us of how the idea of mutual respect and civility still eludes us as a nation.

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(2)Dislikes(0)

Sri Lankan men sentenced for illegally importing alcohol in Reeko Moosa’s car

Three Sri Lankan nationals involved in the case concerning the discovery of hundreds of bottles of cheap alcohol in a car belonging to Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Parliamentary Group leader ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik, have been sentenced to one year in jail.

The Criminal Court identified the three men as Isru Priyankara Disilva Nufehevage, Niroshan Don and Muhaidhee Mohamed.

The four  men were arrested in February last year, while loading 168 bottles of whiskey and menthol gin into a car registered to Moosa, on the same day controversial liquor licensing regulations were unveiled by the Ministry of Economic Development.

Moosa, who was in Singapore at the time of the incident, has maintained that his driver was bribed and the bottles were planted in his car to attack him politically.

Moosa observed at the time that television station DhiTV “has been showing the incident non-stop for 24 hours.”

“The last time I was in an advertisement for a liquid was with my brother in a television ad for Sun-Up,” he said, suggesting that he should now be paid royalties for every bottle sold.

According to the Sunday’s ruling, the expats – including Reeko Moosa’s driver – told the court that the alcohol bottles were “gifts” and that some other people were involved. However, the ruling stated that they were unable provide any evidence to back their story.

Deliberating on the evidence submitted to the court by Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO), the court charged the three men for illegally importing alcohol to Maldives and sentenced each if them to one year imprisonment.

According to the Criminal Court, importing alcohol without a license from the Ministry of Economic Development is prohibited under article 5(b) of Contraband Act of 1975.

Although three men were convicted, the main suspect identified as the leader of the group fled during the police investigation.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Protesters calling for religious tolerance attacked with stones, threatened with death

Police are investigating a violent attack on a ‘silent protest’ calling for religious tolerance, held at the Artificial Beach to mark Human Rights Day.

Witnesses said a group of men threw rocks at the 15-30 demonstrators, calling out threats and vowing to kill them.

One witness who took photos of the attacked said he was “threatened with death if these pictures were leaked. He said we should never been seen in the streets or we will be sorry.”

Among those injured in the attack was Ismail ‘Khilath’ Rasheed, a controverisal blogger whose website was recently blocked by the Communications Authority of the Maldives (CAM) on the order of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs.

Rasheed suffered a head injury and was rushed to Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH).

“They started hitting us with bricks. They were aiming at our heads – we could tell they were serious and wanted to kill us,” Rasheed told Minivan News from hospital. “I was taken on a motorcycle to IGMH, but I could see them behind me still hitting my friends.”

Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam said police attended the scene after the attackers had departed, and were currently investigating the cause of the violence. No arrests had yet been made, he added.

The protesters, calling themselves ‘Silent Solidarity’, had earlier issued a press release stating that their intention was to “make the Maldives and the international community aware of the rising religious intolerance in the Maldives, and to condemn the Constitutionally endorsed suppression of religious freedom. We also denounce the increasing use being made of Islam as a tool of political power.”

“Silent Solidarity will be protesting against discrimination of all races, gender, sexual preferences and religious beliefs and supporting freedom of thought and expression. In our silence, we speak volumes,” the group’s statement said.

The Maldives has come under increasing international scrutiny following an apparent rise in religious intolerance.

Several monuments gifted to the Maldives by other SAARC countries during the recent summit in Addu have been defaced or stolen on the grounds that they are idolatrous. Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari has condemned the monuments while the opposition has hailed the vandals as “national heroes”.

Protests also erupted last month after UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay spoke in parliament calling for the government and the judiciary to issue a moratorium and debate on flogging as a punishment for extra-marital sex.

“This practice constitutes one of the most inhumane and degrading forms of violence against women and should have no place in the legal framework of a democratic country,” Pillay said.

“The issue needs to be examined, and therefore I called for a countrywide discussion. It is much better if the issue is transparent and debated.”

Pillay also stated that requirement under the Maldivian constitution that all Maldivians be Muslim ”is discriminatory, and does not comply with international standards. I would urge a debate again on the issue to open up entrance of the constitution to all.”

Challenged by a local journalist that the Maldives was both obliged to protect the religion of Islam, she replied: “You have a constitution which conforms in many respects to universal human rights. Let me assure you that these human rights conform with Islam.”

She added that the Maldives had signed international treaties that are legally-binding obligations, “and such a practice conflicts with these obligations undertaken by the Maldives.”

The following day protesters gathered outside the UN building, carrying placards stating “Islam is not a toy”, “Ban UN” and “Flog Pillay”, and called on authorities to arrest the UN High Commissioner.

MPs roundly condemned Pillay’s statements.

‘”What we should be worried about holding discussions against the fundamentals of Islam in a 100 percent Muslim country such as the Maldives is that we may start questioning about worshipping God Almighty tomorrow,” said opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Afrashim Ali.

Ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed said the Maldives “will never ever open doors for religions other than Islam in the Maldives. We’ll not give the opportunity to speak against the fundamentals and principles of Islam in the parliament.”

MP Riyaz Rasheed, from the opposition-aligen Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) condemned the Speaker Abdulla Shahid from allowing Pillay to complete her address.

“There is a good chance for us to directly say that Abdulla Shahid has made a good deal with this government to wipe out the religion of Islam from this country,” MP Rasheed said.

President Mohamed Nasheed has meanwhile said that Maldivians “should have the self-belief and resolve not to have our faith shaken by listening to statements or opinions expressed by others.”

“That the punishments and rulings of Islamic Sharia are not inhumane is very clear to us,” Nasheed said. “We have the opportunity to show the whole world how noble and civilised Sharia is. That is because we are the only Islamic nation with a democratically-elected government.

“Wasting that opportunity in a Jihadi spirit” with the claim of “defending Islam” was unacceptable, Nasheed said. “Opposition parties will always attack us by using religion as a weapon. [But] I believe that this country is the only Islamic nation where Islamic Sharia has been practiced uninterrupted for 700 years.”

Religious sentiment in the Maldives can often be vocal and heated, but has rarely led to physical violence.

In late May 2010, well-known Islamic preacher Dr Zakir Naik visited the Maldives and delivered a sermon in the capital Male’. During a question-and-answer session 37 year-old Mohamed Nazim stood up and declared himself “Maldivian and not a Muslim”.

Nazim’s declaration angered the 11,000 strong crowd, and he was escorted from the venue by police and officials from the Ministry of Islamic Affairs amid calls for his execution.

After two days of religious counselling in police custody, Nazim appeared before television cameras at an Islamic Ministry press conference and gave Shahada – the Muslim testimony of belief – and apologised for causing “agony for the Maldivian people” and requested that the community accept him back into society.

In July 2010, 25 year-old air traffic controller Ismail Mohamed Didi was found hanged from the control tower of Male’ International Airport in an apparent suicide, after seeking asylum in the UK for fear of persecution over his stated lack of religious belief.

“Maldivians are proud of their religious homogeneity and I am learning the hard way that there is no place for non-Muslim Maldivians in this society,” Didi wrote in a letter to an international humanitarian organisation, prior to his death.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

India’s 3-1 win “bad luck for us”, says Maldives coach

India has defeated the Maldives 3-1 in the semifinals of the South Asian Football Federation (SAFF) championship, securing its place at the finals of the ongoing Championship Tournament.

The Maldives equalised an early goal from the India side, with Shamweel Qasim scoring in the 60th minute.

However India regained the lead after the Maldives brought down India’s Sunil Chhetri in the penalty area, losing the penalty and allowing India to pull ahead in the 70th minute.

Chhetri scored India’s third goal during injury time, cementing a victory for India that will see it playing Afghanistan in the final, following the latter’s 1-0 victory over Nepal.

Maldives’ coach Istvan Urbanyi said India was “lucky to have won the match.”

“The Indian coach said that the team which made less mistakes will win the tournament. But I said luck is very important. It was 1-1 deadlock and then India got the penalty and we had enough chances to restore parity again but we could not. So it was bad luck for us,” Urbanyi said, following India’s win.

“I had said the team which has extra quality players will win the tournament and my side has more quality players. But bad luck for us.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

GMR shares dip on back of Civil Court ruling against airport development charge

GMR shares on the Mumbai stock exchange fell 7.57 percent on Thursday on the back of a Civil Court ruling in the Maldives against its proposed US$25 Airport Development Charge (ADC), India’s Economic Times reported.

The paper earlier reported that the share slip had taken the company to a 52-week low, and that that the decision could leave the airport development project facing an annual funding shortage of US$25 million.

GMR said yesterday that it had yet to receive a copy of the Civil Court’s judgement and was only aware of the ruling through media reports.

“We are yet to receive the copy of the judgment and as such we are not in a position to evaluate the implications of the ruling,” the company said in a statement.

“GMR has been permitted to collect ADC and Insurance charge under the Concession Agreement signed between GMR-MAHB, Maldives Airport Company Limited (MACL) and The Republic of Maldives (acting by and through its Ministry of Finance and Treasury), and as such has set up processes for ADC collection from 1st January 2012 supported by an information campaign to ensure adequate awareness,” the company said.

“The bid for the Concession to manage, develop and operate Ibrahim Nasir International Airport for 25 years was conducted by the [World Bank’s] International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the component of ADC was part of the bid. GMR is confident that Government of Maldives will take such measures as would be necessary to honour its contractual obligation in this regard, given that the success of the development of the airport project is of national economic importance.”

The company noted that the payment of a development fee was “a common concept in many airports globally”, particularly as a part of concession agreements where airports are privatised.

“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 Civil Court ruled that the clause in the concession agreement with GMR violated the Airport Service Charges Act of 1978, which was amended in 2009 to raise the charge to US$18 for foreign passengers and US$12 for Maldivians above two years of age.

Judge Ali Rasheed Hussein ruled that the Airport Development Charge and insurance charge were service charges “under other names.”

He noted that the Airport Service Charges Act had been amended seven times to raise the charges since 1978 by the legislature, “based on the economic circumstances of the Maldives and the means of the public,” which showed that the purpose of the law was to ensure that enforcement agencies did not have the authority to raise the charges.

The suit was filed by the opposition-aligned Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP), led by former Attorney General, Dr Hassan Saeed.

President Mohamed Nasheed’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said he believed the government was obliged to appeal the lower court ruling to in order to comply with the terms of the concession agreement.

GMR’s 25 year concession agreement to construct and manage a new US$400 million terminal (to be competed in 2014) is the single largest foreign investment in the history of the Maldives.

The strength of the IFC-monitored bid by the GMR-Malaysian Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB), split 77:23 percent respectively, came from its US$78 million upfront payment (compared with US$27 million from the second-highest bidder) and in particular, its 27 percent sharing of fuel revenue (from 2014).

At the time, the government anticipated that 60 percent of government revenue from the airport deal would derive from fuel – US$74.25 million annually between 2015-2020, increasing to US$128.7 a year from 2025-2035. This in turn was the most significant element of the final ‘net-present-value’ calculations to determine the winning bid.

A briefing document obtained by Minivan News following GMR’s successful bid in June 2010 contained forecasts of the government’s expected earnings from the airport over the lifespan of the contract. It revealed that a majority of the predicted revenue, a major factor in calculating the NPV (net present value) used to determine the successful bid, derived from the 27 percent fuel revenue share once the airport is completed in 2014:

  • 2015-2020: 12.8m gross + 74.25m fuel = US$87.05m per year
  • 2020-2025- 17.02m gross + 90.99m fuel = US$108.01m per year
  • 2025-2035 – 20.43 gross + 108.27m fuel = US$128.7 m per year

The document contrasted this with the dividends paid to the government by MACL over the last three years, noting that the majority of the dividends paid in 2008-2009 were achieved “by taking a loan.” Dividends in 2007 were 2.3 million, 13.3 million in 2008, and 5.05 million in 2009.

On the suggestion that MACL should be allowed to raise finance and invest in the upgrade itself, a predicted US$300-400 million, the document noted that MACL “already has debts of Rf 600 million (US$46.69 million)” and would be unable to obtain further leverage “without a sovereign guarantee – simply not allowed due to the IMF measures.”

At the same time, GMR’s bid offered a significantly lower 10 percent share of gross airport revenue, as compared to the other two bids.

The only historic figures available to the government in estimating this revenue (a staid US$20.43 million by 2025-2035) were derived from the existing commercial revenue from the airport – usage fees, ground handling charges, duty free shop rents, and so forth.

Compared to the glittering Gucci-lined corridors of airports in tourist hubs such as Dubai, the airport’s 4-5 departure lounge shops and dilapidated eateries – some serving pot noodle – were a missed opportunity, given the bulging wallet of the average visitor to the Maldives.

Speaking at the opening of GMR’s cavernous Delhi Terminal 3, GMR Manager P Sripathi told Minivan News that the consortium was very interested in the well-heeled concourse traffic in the Maldives – sufficiently interested to invest a sum equal to almost half the country’s stated GDP at the time.

“It’s a lovely project. The type of tourists coming are from the very high-end tourism market, therefore the business opportunities are plenty,” Sripathi said at the time.

Minivan News reported in June 2010 that some of the investment was to be recovered through a US$25 airport development charge, set by the government for all bidders to be levied only on international travellers at time of departure and added to ticket prices.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

ACC fowards Nexbis case to Prosecutor General

The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has forwarded corruption cases against Former Controller Ilyas Hussain Ibrahim and Director General of Finance Ministry, Saamee Ageel to the Prosecutor General’s Office (PG) .

The ACC alleged the pair had abused their authority for undue financial gain in giving the US$39 million Border Control System project to Malaysia’s Nexbis Limited.

The border control agreement was signed on November 17, 2010. However the upgrade stalled earlier this year when the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) expressed concerns about the deal, claiming that there were “opportunities for corruption” during the bidding process.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Lawyers question reappointment of judges convicted of sexual misconduct

A group of lawyers have questioned the Judicial Service Commission (JSC)’s decision to reappoint two judges, previously removed from the bench for sexual misconduct, as magistrate court judges.

The lawyers, including Former Attorney General Husnu Suood, said on Thursday that  Gaafu Dhaalu Thinadhoo, Meeraaz Ahmed Shareef and Dhaalu Meedhoo Biloori Villa, Ali Shafeeg who were appointed as magistrate court judges had previously been convicted for sexual misconduct.

Speaking to Minivan News, Suood said the two judges were removed from bench in 2010 because they did not possess the “high moral character” required to be a judge according to the article 149 (a) of the amended constitution.

According to the records, Shareef – appointed to Gaafu Alifu Dhevadhoo Court – was sentenced to two months under house arrest on July 30 2001, for having an affair. He was former Chief Magistrate of Thinadhoo in Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll.

Ali Shafeeg, appointed to Kaafu Gaafaru Magistrate Court, was sentenced to four months banishment and subjected to seven lashes in 1989, for having an affair with a married woman.

Suood noted that, article 149 (a) of the amended constitution states “a person appointed as a Judge in accordance with law, must possess the educational qualifications, experience and recognized competence necessary to discharge the duties and responsibilities of a  Judge, and must be of high moral character”.

Referring to the previous convictions of the Judges, Suood said that the “two judges were not up to the moral standards required and that’s why they were disqualified in 2010”.

“We are preparing the documents to submit to JSC requesting them to investigate the case. It’s up to the JSC to hold the integrity of the judiciary,” he said.

JSC spokesperson Hassan Zaheen noted that Shareef and Shafeeg were also removed in 2010, under the article 285, which allowed  JSC to dismiss judge failing to meet the requirements in article 149.

However, he added, that Shareef and Shafeeg were reappointed “because the Judges Act now allows it.”

According to the article 15 of the Judges Act – which came into effect five days after the reappointment of judges with life time tenure – a judge will be considered as failing to meet the required ethical and moral standards if they had served a sentence for a criminal offence in the seven years prior to the appointment.

“Shareef and Shafeeg were sentenced before the seven year period,” Zaheen added.

In 2010 when Shareef was dismissed from the bench, he also protested against the JSC in court, claiming his conviction was 11 years old when he was removed from the bench on August 5, 2010, and his sentence had been suspended. The Judges Act was being debated in the parliament at the time of Shareef’s removal.

Therefore, JSC pointed out at the time, the Judges Act post-dated its decision to remove Shareef from the bench, and argued that it could not be expected to rely on legislation that did not exist.

The JSC reiterated that he was removed from bench under the article 285, that allowed JSC to dismiss the judges failing to meet the moral and ethical requirements of article 149.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)