Tag: Maldives politics

PPM strikes back against DRP’s criticism of government

Vice President of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Umar Naseer has alleged to local media that Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP)’s recent criticism of the government was due to their intention to leave the ruling coalition.

Speaking to newspaper Haveeru, Naseer accused DRP leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali of trying to “get things done in his favor” through the present government.

“The DRP is seeking to get a sovereign guarantee to pay off Thasmeen’s debts. As soon as they know it can’t happen, they will break away from the coalition”, Naseer claimed.

DRP Deputy Leader Ibrahim ‘Mavota’ Shareef denied Naseer’s allegations and said Thasmeen had no debts under his name.

He further accused Naseer of continuously attempting to defame Thasmeen.

“Umar accused Thasmeen and Abdulla Shahid of being involved in the [awarding of the airport] to GMR . If that is so, why aren’t they investigating the matter now that they are in the government? There is never any truth to what [Umar Naseer] says,” Shareef said.

Naseer claimed that PPM deserved more positions in the current government than the DRP, as PPM had played the “most important role” in the transfer of power in February.

“Ninety-nine percent of the anti-government protesters were from PPM. 99 percent of the injured were from PPM. Our members sacrificed the most to change the government. And DRP does not deserve to get an equal number of government positions as PPM,” Naseer said.

Naseer’s comments follow Monday’s press conference by the DRP criticising certain government officials and describing them as incompetent.

During the press conference, Shareef claimed the Foreign Ministry had inaccurately portrayed the real situation in the Maldives, and had falsely claimed that the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) had sided with the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

Misconceptions in the international community surrounding the transfer of power represented a failure on behalf of the Ministry, Haveeru reported Shareef as saying.

In response, Naseer accused the DRP of trying to win a parliamentary majority by forming a coalition with the MDP.

However, speaking to Minivan News, DRP MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom said that despite some concerns the party had regarding the current government’s policies, it had no intention of leaving the coalition until the next presidential elections.

Asked about any possible consequences clashes between the DRP and PPM – the two largest parties in the ruling coalition – would have on the functioning of the unity government and political stability in the country, Dr Mausoom said the cross-party strife had “nothing to do with the functioning of the government”.

Furthermore, “imagining” that the DRP would leave the coalition and join the MDP was “irresponsible journalism”, he said, adding that the DRP would continue to support President Waheed’s administration until the next election.

The PPM was formed last year following an acrimonious split with the DRP, after the party’s disciplinary committee evicted Naseer from the party. Naseer claimed he had been thrown out of the party for protesting against the MDP, while the DRP leadership contended that he had been holding protests without the party’s consent.

In December 2010, following Naseer’s departure from the party, a DRP event ended in a factional brawl.

A meeting came to blows after Naseer, the party’s Deputy Leader prior to his dismissal by the party’s disciplinary committee, and his supporters gatecrashed the venue.

The meeting was held in celebration of a Supreme Court ruling, which saw seven cabinet ministers departing their posts after their reappointments were disapproved by the opposition-majority parliament.

In February 2011, police evacuated Shareef from DRP headquarters after the spokesperson was attacked by a crowd of Naseer’s supporters.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Yameen and Shiyam air grievances against Gayoom, DRP in leaked audio clip

MPs Abdulla Yameen and Ahmed (Sun Travel) Shiyam have aired grievances against former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom in a leaked audio conversation, giving a rare behind-the-scenes insight into the workings of Maldivian politics.

Gayoom’s half-brother Yameen and resort owner Shiyam spoke of their diminishing trust in and dwindling support among the elite support for Gayoom. Yameen believed Gayoom’s opponents “will hurt [Gayoom] a lot more” if he decides to stand for presidential elections again.

Yameen and Shiyam paint Gayoom as a leader who built his power on extensive patronage, including issuing diplomatic passports, granting land and islands for tourism, and providing loans to build homes.

Minivan News believes the conversation, now viral on social media, predates the September 2011 establishment of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM). According to the audio clip, Gayoom broke away from the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party, which he established in 2005, amid leadership disputes with current DRP leader and Gayoom’s 2008 running mate Ahmed Thasmeen Ali.

Yameen also narrates Gayoom’s attempts to sideline him during the period of political liberalisation between 2003-2008. Yameen said Gayoom attempted to send him out of the country as ambassador to the UK.

“Where are Maumoon’s ministers?”

Yameen compared Gayoom to then-president Mohamed Nasheed, stating that Gayoom was inaccessible and did not believe in the importance of his parliamentary group.

DRP’s four vice-presidents had to wait in queue to attend Gayoom’s functions or write letters to see Gayoom, “but look at how close Reeko Moosa and Mariya are to Anni [Nasheed],” Yamin said. Reeko Moosa Manik and Mariya Didi are senior opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) parliamentary group members.

Yameen said Gayoom’s close associates no longer attend to Gayoom, reflecting dwindling support for him. “Maumoon knows all the people he did favors for are not with him. Look at how many ministers he had. Who goes when he asks?” Yameen said.

Shiyam then replies, “[Even after he] built up their houses to 10- 12 stories. And even that was through president’s office loans.”

Yameen highlighted the absence of senior Gayoom-era officials in July 2009 when police summoned Gayoom from his residence, Alivaage, to question him over corruption allegations. Although Fathuhulla Jameel and Abdulla Jameel, both long time ministers under Gayoom, lived around the corner, they “did not dare to come,” Yameen said. Only a handful of people, former Speaker Ahmed Zahir (Seena), former minister of gender and family Aneesa Ahmed and former deputy minister of youth and sports Aishath Shiham, are now loyal to Gayoom.

“They will hurt him a lot more”

Shiyam and Yameen’s statements also imply they do not want Gayoom to stand for re-election.

Yameen said although Gayoom was not hurt during a 2008 stab attempt, if Gayoom were to stand for re-election “this time they will hurt him a lot more”. Yameen also said that if another murder attempt was carried out on Gayoom, he did not have the confidence that Nasheed would investigate or prosecute the case.

An unknown participant also criticises Gayoom on his old age, while Shiyam said he wanted a “stronger” and “more ruthless” man in the presidency.

“Only two favors I ever asked of Maumoon”

Shiyam expressed disappointment with Gayoom’s refusal to issue him a diplomatic passport and give him land for a boat yard in industrial Thilafushi Island. “These are the only two favors I ever asked of Maumoon,” Shiyam said.

“Once [Gayoom] took me to Singapore on some trip. All the vice presidents [of DRP] went. All of them had red passports [diplomatic passports]. We went and I was given a very average room. Even when I travel on my personal business, I don’t stay in anything but a suite. So I went and said it is a very small room, I cannot stay there. They told me that was how it had been booked. So I told them to give me the presidential suite. I stayed in a suite bigger than Maumoon’s. Dr Shaheed [foreign minister under both Gayoom and Nasheed] and others ridiculed me quite a bit,” Shiyam said.

After Shiyam returned, he met with Gayoom and told him, “I am this party’s vice-president. You have given red passports to many businessmen, and ordinary people as well. I would like one as well. And he told me he could not do so under the law. That is what he said. Then I told him I own a lot of boats. Therefore I would like a plot of land at Thilafushi [industrial island]. Gasim had received a plot of one million square feet. [not clear] according to the law, could you please arrange for a plot of 50,000 or 25,000 or even 10,000 square feet. He said he will work on it. I sent him 12 letters on the matter [hits table repeatedly]. Yameen, Maumoon never replied,” Shiyam continued.

Yameen then replied that arranging for a diplomatic passport was a small matter and that “it’s no issue at all.”

Shiyam also questioned Gayoom’s gratitude, saying that he said he had spent US$1.8 million on the DRP.

“DRP has to be buried”

Gayoom’s decision to break away from DRP came after DRP leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali refused to hold a primary within the party to choose a presidential candidate, according to the conversation.

The DRP constitution, written under Gayoom, institutes the party’s leader as the party’s presidential candidate. During the DRP 2010 congress, a constitutional amendment requiring primaries was voted out.

“Maumoon says go for a primary. But Thasmeen very stubbornly says there is only one way. Thasmeen says [Maumoon] should apologise on the media and endorse him as the presidential candidate. But that cannot be,” an unknown participant said.

The participants of the conversation discuss buying out members of the DRP council, specifically DRP spokesperson Ibrahim Shareef (Mavota). According to the participants, the DRP council at the time was aligned with Thasmeen.

Yameen then said there was no solution but to form a separate party, a cult of personality based on Gayoom.

“To tell you the truth, I don’t want to have anything to do with DRP. We made DRP what it is today with our hard work, but DRP gave us pain and hardship. DRP has to be buried. DRP has to be buried,” Yameen said.

“He treated all who were loyal to him very badly”

Yameen believed a faction led by former attorney general Dr Hassan Saeed, former planning minister and Gayoom’s nephew Hamdhoon Hameed and former tourism minister Dr Mahmood Shaugee suggested Gayoom sideline Yameen from politics by offering him an ambassadorship in the UK.

Yameen was appointed as the minister of trade in 1997. Following the political crisis of 2003, which saw mass demonstrations for democracy and against police brutality, Gayoom sacked older members of his cabinet and brought in a group of reformist ministers including Hassan Saeed, Shaugee and Hamdhoon.

“Every time, Maumoon thinks all the problems are because of his ministers,” Yameen said.

Yameen refused the ambassadorship because as Gayoom’s half-brother no one in the UK “will believe a thing I say.” Further, he said he had not wanted to give up his Majlis seat and wanted to look after his source of income.

“I just built my house, I took out loans to build it. I have to stay in Male’ to find tenants, that is my source of income,” he said.

After Gayoom’s repeated attempts to remove him from the trade portfolio, Yameen consented to take up the higher education portfolio. Yameen attempted to regain an economic portfolio later, but was told there was no space in any of the economic portfolios.

“He’d given tourism to Dr Shaugee, fisheries to Abdulla Kamaldeen, other economic posts, such as agriculture, some other person, he [Gayoom] had space for all of these people, Gasim [prominent businessman] was given finance, when Maumoon said there was no space for me in the economic field then you should believe that he did not want me in the government,” Yameen said.

Download the full transcript (English & Dhivehi)

Listen to the full audio (Dhivehi)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Some dis-satisfactions” expressed over India’s participation in All Party talks: Mujuthaba

Indian Foreign Secretary Shri Ranjan Mathai has visited the Maldives for the second time in just a few weeks since ousting of former President Mohamed Nasheed, to observe the progress of the cross-party peace talks.

Mathai was a key proponent of  a ‘roadmap’ document proposing early presidential elections, with necessary amendments to the constitution and  laws to be completed within a month’s time. Minivan News understands that Mathai participated in last night’s round of talks.

The Indian High Commission has released a press statement stating that Mathai had “extensive consultations” with all parties individually.

“The objective of [Mathai’s] visit was to take forward the political process and continue India’s engagement with all parties concerned,” the statement read.

“In this connection, the foreign secretary had extensive consultations with all parties individually and collectively. All parties expressed the view that India had played a very useful role in taking the process forward as a facilitator and friend of the Maldivian people,” it said.

The statement also stated that there had been a “broad measure of agreement” during the talks between the parties, which had “identified key important principles”.

Those principles included continuing dialogue to find a possible agreement on the amendment of the constitution and enactment of legislation for institutional reform.

All the parties had recognised the need to undertake the necessary amendments and legislation within a short time period in parliament, and highlighted the importance of parties continuing consultations for a possible agreement for early elections within and out of the All Party Consultative Committee (APCC)

Local media had reported that the meeting was “heated” due to the participation of Mathai, with representatives of some parties expressing their “dismay” at the Indian government “interfering in the domestic affairs of the country and trying to rush towards an early election.”

Facilitator of the talks, Ahmed Mujuthaba, told Minivan News that he was too busy to speak about how the meetings went last night.

However, local newspaper Haveeru reported that Mujuthaba had admitted that there were some “dis-satisfactions” during the talks regarding Mathai’s intervention, but said the talks had gone well.

The roadmap document promoted by India was “not something proposed formally”, he told Haveeru, and that “the agenda of the talks has been decided by the participants of the talks.”

Former President Nasheed said this morning, amid ongoing protests calling for  early elections, that the parties in support of the current government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan had now showed hesitation towards early elections “despite agreeing on it earlier.”

MDP Parliamentary group leader and the party’s representative at the talks, MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, had not responded at time of press.

However Haveeru reported that the MDP was waiting for the outcome of the roadmap talks before deciding what stand the party would take on protests tomorrow.

President Waheed, who assumed power after the events unfolded on February 7, has called all political parties to join his ‘National Unity’ government and come to the negotiation table to discuss a peaceful political solution to the current political turbulence. MDP has refused to recognise the Waheed government’s legitimacy, and has been calling for early presidential elections.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police officer burned by flaming ball as protests persist

A police officer was hospitalised last night after being struck by a ball set on fire and hurled during night’s protest outside Male’s fish market, where opposition party members have been rallying crowds since January 16 calling for the release of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed from military detention.

According to police parts of the officer’s uniform were burnt along with some of the weapons he was carrying at the time. The officer also sustained injuries to his neck, chin and ears.

The officer was immediately taken to ADK hospital, police said. Two other police officers injured during the confrontation have been admitted to hospital as well.

Police said they are currently investigating the attack. No other arrests or injuries were reported.

During the opposition-led protest, which began at approximately 9:00pm last evening, a group of 200 active participants charged police blockades in an effort to enter the off-limits Republic Square. Between 10:30pm and 11:30pm protesters and police advanced and retreated along the jetty near the fish market several times. Various glass objects as well as empty bottles, stones, eggs, young coconuts and flares were thrown by protesters into the police zone, occasionally falling short of their marks and landing among the protesting crowd.

Police retaliated by pushing back the crowd, eventually deploying tear gas and pepper spray.

A woman who was sprayed following a near-hysterical confrontation with police was treated and calmed by a group of protesters on the side lines before rejoining the crowd.

Meanwhile, approximately 200 bystanders observed the commotion from the upper levels of nearby boats and the fish market opposite, some laughing, some shouting, and some simply watching.

Yesterday afternoon, activists and Parliament members from the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) marched up the island’s central road of  Majeedhee Magu, past the tsunami memorial and down Ameenee Magu to the party camp, calling for all judges to be arrested and for Male’ city “to be calm.” At the party camp activists announced their intention to advance on the protesters that evening at 8:30pm, before dispersing for prayer and dinner.

The previous evening, protest leaders went to the house of Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan to request an immediate meeting. The Vice President reportedly welcomed them inside, and at 1:00am opposition leaders emerged pledging allegiance to the Vice President and urging him to assume control of the executive.

The government maintained that it had not lost confidence in the Vice President, discounting his decision to meet with the protesters as a diplomatic courtesy and reaffirmed its faith in his allegiance. During the protest the following evening, however, protesters maintained that the Vice President was on their side.

“He wants the judge free, he has said he shares our interests,” an opposition protester told Minivan News.

Party members from both sides of the political aisle gathered at their respective locales last night. MDP activists reportedly urged an advance on the fish market, however MDP Chairman and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik instructed those assembled to wait for official party orders, according to sources.

Although the crowd vocally supported an advance, no official decision was made and members of the crowd did not initiate a mass movement.

A protest coordinator and opposition party member meanwhile told Minivan News that a number of protesters were harmed during last night’s protest at the fish market in a clash with the MDP.

“It is the [MDP] activists who are doing and throwing these things,” he claimed. “They are the ones causing all the damage.”

Other protesters acknowledged that gang members are known to be participating in the demonstrations, sometimes after taking drugs or alcohol, however they would not provide further details.

Protests are expected to continue through February 24, the opposition protest coordinator said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Umar Naseer issues wooden weapons to supporters

The 23 December coalition’s steering committee armed supporters outside the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) office last night with wooden clubs and sticks, stacked outside, reports Haveeru.

Opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Vice President Umar Naseer told local media the group was “armed and ready with wooden clubs to defend themselves” against activists from the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), who allegedly confronted them with knives.

Emphasising that the wooden weapons were only meant for defense, Naseer allegedly urged opposition members standing guard outside the building not to initiate a confrontation. He added, however, that the weapons were mean to show protesters that the coalition was willing to stand alongside their supporters on the front lines, local media reports.

Naseer alleged that the MDP activists had evidently consumed alcohol, and that police had not responded to the coalition’s phone calls.

Meanwhile, MDP labelled Naseer and the coalition’s committee as “ready for a rebellion”, local media reports.

Approximately 20 MDP protesters proceeded to shout vulgar commentary outside the DRP office before dispersing.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC President deserts emergency meeting, refuses to adopt House Rules

The Chair of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) deserted an emergency meeting of the JSC Thursday night, refusing to meet members’ demands for adoption of the Commission’s House Rules as a matter of high priority.

The JSC’s deadline for adopting House Rules, as stipulated in Article 40 of the Judicial Service Commission Act, expired ten months ago on 26 January of this year.

Without House Rules, the Commission’s work has no set standards of procedure according to which to carry out its responsibilities, allowing for Commission business to be conducted on an ad hoc basis, and according to the discretion of the Chair himself.

JSC is the independent body Constitutionally mandated with oversight of the country’s judiciary. It is responsible for maintaining the standards, principles, ethics and discipline of members of the judiciary.

Chair of the JSC Supreme Court Justice Adam Abdulla convened Thursday’s emergency meeting, which he later deserted, to discuss the impending departure of three Chief Judges who are travelling abroad to finesse their English Language skills.

The JSC is required to appoint substitute Chief Judges to replace any that leave their post on a temporary or permanent basis.

Four members of the JSC, however, refused to discuss the substitutes’ appointments unless Justice Abdulla acceded to their requests to put House Rules adoption at the top of the Commission’s agenda when it meets later today.

Justice Abdulla refused the demand of the dissenting members who included the Attorney General Ali Sawad, JSC Lawyer Ahmed Rasheed, Member of the General Public, and President’s Member Aishath Velezinee. He chose to abandon the meeting instead.

Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdullah Didi, one of the three judges scheduled to travel to India yesterday to brush up their English Language skills, joined Justice Abdulla in the walkout.

In a leaked audio recording of Thursday’s meeting listened to by Minivan, Chief Judge Didi is heard urging Justice Abdulla to leave saying, “Let’s go. Nothing can be done in this place. Let’s leave, Adam”.

The two men then walked out of the meeting. Both the matter of the House Rules and the matter of appointing substitute judges to stand in for those taking English lessons remain yet to be addressed.

Minivan has learned this morning that Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed remained in Male’, foregoing the English language training after the JSC’s failure to appoint his substitute.

The two jurisdictions without a magistrate, however, could remain a legal limbo until the JSC appoints substitutes.

Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed is one of the six judges under official investigation by the JSC for alleged misconduct

So far the Investigating Committee of the JSC appointed to look into allegations against Judge Didi has spent over a Rf100,000 solely on reimbursing its members for their attendance. The Investigating Committee, too, is yet to adopt any House Rules.

Before deserting the meeting Justice Abdulla told the dissenting members of the Commission that nobody had the authority to impose conditions on him, as stated in a press release issued by the JSC on Thursday night.

JSC regulations state that any matter which the Commission, or any member of the Commission, wishes to include in the agenda of its meeting should be duly included in the agenda.

When contacted by the media subsequent to the JSC press release, Justice Abdulla said he walked out because he could not tolerate what he described as “the vulgar behaviour of Velezinee”.

Justice Abdullah did not mention that three members of the JSC other than Velezinee, including the Attorney General, had joined together in demanding the adoption of House Rules as a matter of urgency.

Placing the blame squarely on Velezinee’s behaviour, he told the media she had “belittled the importance of the meeting” and accused her of being a disruptive force in the Commission’s work.

“Yes, I do try and disrupt the ‘work’ that they do”, Velezinee said. “They are not carrying out the responsibilities as required by the Constitution. It is my duty, and the obligation of every member of the JSC, to ensure that the JSC performs its proper functions.”

Velezinee said certain members of the JSC appear to have a false perception of the Commission as “a welfare organisation for members of the judiciary with the oversight to ensure their individual and collective well being”.

Justice Abdulla’s claims that Velezinee’s behaviour forced him to leave the proceedings contradict the press release by JSC, and also the proceedings as heard in the leaked audiotape.

When referred to the the JSC press release, which had been issued after his desertion and of which he was not aware until contacted by the media, Justice Abdulla told Haveeru that it was not a valid document as it had been issued without a required approval of the majority.

After the recent controversy over Article 285 of the Constitution and the re-assembling of JSC at the end of August, however, JSC had approved three senior Secretariat staff as media spokespersons with the authority to brief the media.

Dismissing Justice Abdulla’s claims as a frequently used strategy of “character assassination to deflect attention from the JSC’s sustained negligence of its Constitutional responsibilities”, Velezinee listed a variety of issues deliberately left out of the JSC agenda.

“Adopting the House Rules and other regulations required of the Commission under the JSC Act, appointing Justices to the High Court, and appointing a Secretary General to JSC”, she said, are vitally important issues that are yet to receive any attention.

Velezinee said that without House Rules the JSC has not been able to perform some of its chief responsibilities such as preventing impunity among judges and building public confidence in the judiciary.

The Complaints Commission of the JSC, mandated to examine complaints against members of the Judiciary, for instance, has met only once in the last five months despite having over a hundred complaints awaiting its examination.

To date JSC has not settled a single complaint it has received regarding the conduct of a judge.

Minivan has also learnt that Judge Abdulla ignored requests by the US Embassy and Commonwealth delegations to meet with the Commission, and failed to inform Commission members of such requests.

The 10-member JSC voted Justice Abdulla as Chair with five votes, while waiting to decide whether or not to investigate his involvement in the High Court Declaration of 21 January 2010.

The Declaration removed High Court Chief Justice Abdul Ghani from JSC accusing him of misconduct and installed Justice Abdulla as head of JSC.

Meanwhile, Justice Abdulla moved up to the Supreme Court, vacating the High Court seat in the JSC. To the seat was returned Chief Justice Abdul Ghani, who had been removed from the JSC by the High Court Declaration only months previously.

The allegations of misconduct against Chief Justice Abdul Ghani have not come to the fore since his re-instalment at the JSC.

A report of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is due out soon, revealing the findings of its visit to the Maldives last month. The ICJ delegation was lead by former UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Dr Leandor Despuoy.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)