maldives – Page 488 – Minivan News

Comment: India’s inconsistent commitment to Maldivian democracy cost the GMR deal

The Maldives and India have always shared strong bilateral relations in terms of strategic, economical and military cooperation. The diplomatic bond has remained firm despite the vast difference between the two states in size, population and economy. India remains a major destination for many Maldivians who travel abroad for education, medical and business purposes.

A significant number of Maldivians reside in Indian cities such as Bangalore, Thiruvananthapuram, Mysore and several others. Similarly, a large portion of the Maldives’ expatriate workforce including teachers, doctors, engineers and other technical expertise are Indians, who have contributed to the country’s economy.

If not for the timely decision by the Indian government to intervene, the 1988 terrorist attack on the Maldives’ national defense force base by the mercenaries of the Sri Lanka-based terrorist organisation People’s Liberation of Tamil Elam (PLOTE), would have cost the Maldivian people their civilian government.

19 Maldivians lost their lives, but if not for the successful ‘Operation Cactus’ led by the Indian armed forces, the death toll could have been more, and a possible military junta could have taken control over the affairs of the state. Neither the Maldives nor its history will forget this brotherly act by India that symbolised the strong bilateral bond between the two states.

However, India’s decision to recognise the regime that took charge of the country after it toppled the Maldives’ first democratically elected government on February 7 shocked many. Of course, it would have been completely irrational to expect another ‘Operation Cactus’, but on diplomatic grounds India could have done better.

Having had a diplomatic office established in the Maldives and the rebellion broadcast live on television, the decision showed India’s failure in grasping the local political environment of the country, despite it being a base to large Indian investments worth millions. This failure did not only bring dismay to the local populace, but to international spectators as well.

For instance, Indian journalist Sumon K Chakrabarti in his article in the South Asia Monitor described the misstep as India losing “the mango as well as the sack”.

“With lost credibility and a history of dumping friends – from Burma to Bangladesh and now Maldives, the reality is stark – India has, as the saying goes, lost the mango as well as the sack in the Maldives,” he wrote.

Another journalist, B Raman for the Eurasia Review, put it as “badly damaging” to India’s “traditional position as the sole arbiter of political fortunes”.

He writes – “the government of India’s traditional position as the sole arbiter of political fortunes in the Maldives has been badly damaged and a number of international actors from the UK, the US, the European Union and the United Nations have rushed to the Maldives to try their hand in internal peace-making, thereby marginalising the traditional role of India. Only China and Pakistan have not yet entered the political fray in the Maldives. If they do, that will be ultimate humiliation for Indian diplomacy at its southern door-step.”

For a regime installed through illegitimate means, an assent from the region’s major player would obviously be the perfect gift. A gift that took the country back three years in terms democratic progress it achieved following the transition from a remorseless dictatorship. A gift that brought back the culture of state-sponsored torture, intimidation and harassment.

The accession of Vice-president Waheed Hassan resulted in a rudderless, clueless and mandate-less regime which neither entertained the popular support of the people nor had a contemplated plan to run the affairs of the state.

The unprecedented alteration to the dynamics of local politics saw the return of elements of past dictatorship back to power, which had previously been voted out in the country’s first free and fair presidential election in 2008.

Cabinet portfolios were divided among political parties with diverse political thinking, each of which had its own ambitions to come to power. Most of them do not carry any political weight or have any representation in parliament, including those with an religious element such as the Adhaalath Party.

Similarly ex-president Gayoom had his daughter and son appointed as state-minister level positions in the regime, much to the disappointment of those who had voted him out in 2008. But in Waheed’s words this was a “national unity government”.

A national unity government, whose elements while in opposition had made their antagonism towards Indian investments public, especially against infrastructure giant GMR, which was awarded a concession agreement to manage and develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) but was declared an economic enslaver.

India should have foreseen the consequences its investments would later face in endorsing a regime consisting of elements that had previously shown its disapproval towards major Indian investments. India should have taken its time to assess the political situation of the country and should have confirmed the legitimacy of the controversial regime before accepting it.

However, failure to do so resulted in the scrapping of its single largest investment by the very government it had recognised.

India’s concerns over the Maldives should have come earlier. Not when senior officials of the regime it give assent to nine months previously mocked, insulted and even accused its High Commissioner of indulging in bribery. Not when its largest investment in the country was evicted. None of which would have taken place had India taken a ‘prevention than cure’ approach towards the Maldives.

One must hesitantly agree to the point raised by the very ambitious Special Advisor to Waheed, Dr Hassan Saeed in his ‘candid’ letter to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

He observes: “The Indian Foreign Secretary’s visit to our country in February [2012] failed to resolve the political crisis largely because India is no longer seen as a friendly and fair neighbour who could broker an honest and fair deal.”

Hailed as the world’s largest democracy, India’s inconsistency in its commitment towards democracy in the Maldives not only cost the eviction of its single largest investment in the country, but also gave rise to noisy anti-India rhetoric led by religious fundamentalists and politicians sided with the current regime.

In nine months time, the Maldives will hold its second multi-party presidential elections. Perhaps it these will be the country’s last chance in the near future to overcome what it lost in terms of democracy. It might also be a golden opportunity for India to reassure its commitment towards the democratic process of the country, by pressuring Waheed’s regime towards a free and fair ballot.

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)

Indian hackers take down MACL website as lenders, Malaysian government seek to resolve GMR crisis

Indian hackers have taken over the website of the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL), the government company that has ordered the GMR-Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB) consortium to hand over the airport by the end of next week.

The hackers, calling themselves the “Indishell Defacers Team”, replaced the MACL homepage with a black background and a pair of eyes Thursday (November 29) evening, demanding that the Maldives “stop defaming Indian Reputed Companies & learn how to run a website and secure it first.”

“If you don’t know how to secure a website, can you run an Airport securely, MACL?” the hackers added, along with a promise to “do anything for India”.

As of Saturday afternoon, the MACL website remained suspended. MACL CEO Mohamed Ibrahim declined to comment, stating only that he was in a meeting and that the company would “issue media statements from time to time”.

Following the government’s announcement last week that its contract with GMR was void and it would therefore be issuing a seven day ultimatum for the investor to leave the country, MACL claimed that local employees who applied for jobs with the state operator would “have their present basic salary, allowances and other benefits, and training and development opportunities maintained under MACL management.”

The same day, the Immigration Department announced that it would cease renewing the work permits of GMR’s 140 foreign employees, while the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) sent GMR a letter stating that the operator’s aerodrome certificate – the regulatory authority to operate an airport – would be withdrawn at 11:59pm on December 7.

MACL has also filed a complaint with the Maldives Police Service, alleging that the contract was given to GMR in 2010 “unlawfully”.

GMR has meanwhile stated that it has no intention of leaving without exhausting the legal process and seeking due compensation – the company has stated that it has already invested between US$220-240 million of funds set out for the US$511 million airport development project.

Arbitration proceedings over the contentious airport development charge were already ongoing in Singaporean courts prior to the government’s declaration that the contract was void.

GMR is currently seeking an injunction against its eviction in the Singapore courts, with the next hearing reportedly set for Monday.

Malaysian visit

Meanwhile, Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman and MAHB Managing Director Basir Ahmed visited the Maldives on Friday to try and resolve the situation.

Aman told local media at the airport that his discussion with Maldivian Foreign Minister Dr Abdul Samad Abdulla was “fruitful”.

“As we are two friendly nations, there is no reason why this matter cannot be resolved,” Aman was reported as stating by Haveeru.

The reaction from the Indian government and industry groups has been substantially less prosaic.

The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), expressed “serious concern over the unilateral decision of the Maldives government” and the “violation” of the country’s concession agreement with GMR.

The chamber of commerce group urged the Indian government “to take immediate steps as may be necessary to protect the interests of GMR, its people working in Male’ as well as the Indian banks against such irrational moves.”

Lenders to GMR, including the lead underwriter Axis Bank, Indian Overseas Bank and the Indian Bank have meanwhile written to the Maldives government demanding that their interests be protected. US$368 of the US$511 million project is a loan component, most of it financed by Indian companies.

The Indian government is meanwhile reported to be reconsidering its bilateral aid assistance to the Maldives.

A succession of Indian loans have been crucial to the Maldives’ ability to pay its operating costs, including civil servant salaries.

Days prior to the government’s decision to void the GMR agreement, India had requested repayment of US$100 million in treasury bonds by February 2013.

A further US$25 million state loan from India was found to have been delayed after the Maldivian government failed to submit the requested paperwork, according to an Indian diplomatic source.

Overall Indian aid to the Maldives has totalled MVR 5 billion (US$324 million) over the last three years, according to official statistics from the Indian High Commission released in May.

In additional to credit facilities, purchase of bonds and provision of equipment and financial assistance, India provided the government substantial aid to hold the SAARC Summit in Addu Atoll last year.

In the last three years, India funded the construction of the Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality, provided US$4.5 million for the development of Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH), US$25 million for a police academy, US$9 million for police vehicles, US$1.5 million for a coastal management centre, US$1 million for the purchase of pharmaceuticals and sports equipment, US$5.3 million for the Institute of Information Technology, and most recently, the construction of a military hospital for the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF).

Credit facilities of US$40 million were provided for the construction of 500 housing units, while the State Bank of India (SBI) had spent US$100 million of treasury bonds (with a further US$100 as standby credit). India also provided US$28 million for the development of human resources in the Maldives.

Moreover, a substantial amount of private lending to the resort industry development takes place through Indian banking institutions active in the country, most notably SBI, and a significant quantity of food to the import-dependent Maldives (including basics provisions such as eggs) is supplied through trade concessions with India.

India has also provided extensive military support to the Maldives, including supplying vehicles and a helicopter.

“An impact on ties is inevitable,” Indian newspaper The Hindu reported a senior Indian government source as stating, after last week’s decision by the Maldivian cabinet to evict GMR.

“For the time being, we have to consider how things stand and how to proceed,” an official source told the paper, “when asked whether India would continue assisting the Maldives in combating its financial difficulties, including paying salaries to civil servants and shoring up the surveillance and reconnaissance ability of its security forces.”

“Stability can come only after elections. All of them [political parties] are looking for some cause célèbre. GMR has unwittingly become a major political issue in the Maldives,” an official source told the paper.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

PPM candidate Ibrahim Ameen takes parliamentary seat in Ungoofaaru by-election

The Progressive Party of Madives (PPM) candidate Ibrahim Ameen has secured the parliamentary seat representing the Ungoofaaru constituency in Raa Atoll that was previously held by his brother, the murdered MP Dr Afrasheem Ali.

According to provisional results from the Elections Commission (EC), Ameen took the seat with 1159 votes in polling held on the islands of Ungoofaaru, Hulhuduffaaru, and Maakurathu, all in Raa Atoll, as well as a special polling station in Male’. He defeated Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate Dr Ahmed Ashraf who had 1078 votes.

There was some polling success however for the MDP during the day. The party’s candidate, Ashiya Hussain took the vacant island council seat for Keyodhoo in Vaavu Atoll with 221 votes, narrowly beating the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party’s (DRP’s) candidate Ahmed Fayaz, who had 219 votes.

With 15 minutes left before polling booths were closed around the country, EC President Fuad Thaufeeq said an estimated 83 percent of eligible voters had turned out to cast their ballots. Voters in the queue to vote before the polls closure at 4:00pm this afternoon were still allowed to vote, according to the EC.

Thaufeeq claimed that voting had gone “quite smoothly” at all the corresponding polling stations, with the majority of complaints it had received concerned with campaigning tactics being used the previous day.

“We had received some complaints that campaigning was continuing to take place past 6:00pm yesterday,” he said, referring to a practice outlawed under elections rules. “Other than that everything is going smoothly in the atoll.”

The Ungoofaaru by-election had been scheduled earlier this year following the murder of PPM MP Dr Afrasheem in Male’ in early October.

Earlier this week, Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz said the Maldives Police Service (MPS) believed it was “not the right time” to reveal the details behind the murder of Dr Afrasheem.

Speaking to Minivan News today, EC President Thaufeeq said that despite the circumstances behind the by-election for the Ungoofaaru constituency, the polls had been conducted in “more-or-less the same manner” as had been seen with two other parliamentary by-elections held since February’s controversial transfer of power.

“We have been getting the same types of complaints that we received with previous by-elections in Kaashidhoo and Thimarafushi. I would say it has gone a bit smoother than these,” he said. “There have been no major issues with the polls.”

The election itself was initially scheduled to be contested by three candidates after the PPM’s partners in the coalition government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, such as the DRP, opted against fielding candidates.

However, an independent candidate, Najih Jinah, registered to stand against the PPM and MDP made a late withdrawal from the contest to lend support to Ameen’s campaign, according to local media.

Previous contests

In the local council elections of February 2011 for two atoll council seats in the Ungoofaru constituency, the MDP candidate Ibrahim Zayan received 1,024 votes while then-opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) candidate received 1,790 votes.

Meanwhile, in the May 2009 parliamentary election, then DRP candidate Dr Afrasheem Ali received 573 votes while MDP candidate Dr Ahmed Ashraf came second with 533 votes.

In Vaavu Keyodhoo, all five island council seats were won by DRP candidates in February 2011 with the first placed candidate garnering 267 votes.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Kudafari provides free bicycles in ‘green transport’ initiative

A new environmental NGO based on Kudafari in Noonu Atoll was officially inaugurated on Thursday the former Youth Minister Hassan Latheef.

The organisation, Kaanu Green Peace, was created by a team of young volunteers in June this year, out of a desire to do something to help their local environment.

A number of environmental initiatives were launched as part of the event, the culmination of weeks of work by the committee and volunteers. Dozens of banners around the island displayed environmental and civic slogans in both English and Dhivehi, from “Be proud of my island” to “Freshwater aquifer depletion threatens water supplies”.

The island’s street lamps were switched off for the evening and all roads lined with coconut-shell lamps. A procession with bodu-beru drumming conducted the guest of honour to a new public square opened earlier in the day, in remembrance of the late mother of Ali Mauroof, one of Kaanu Green Peace’s founding patrons.

Green transport

The most eye-catching scheme launched at the event was the island’s new ‘Green Transport’ initiative. Bamboo cycle racks have been erected at 8 points around the island (more are planned), and 30 cycles donated by sponsors. Anyone can use a cycle freely at any time, taking it from one of the special racks and leaving it at another. In return, explains Sehenaz Moosa of the organising committee, it is hoped residents won’t feel a need to introduce polluting vehicles such as motorcycles to the small island of 740 people.

Another initiative launched was a grass-covered ‘green avenue’, an experimental alternative to the sand roads elsewhere, of which construction is under way. The avenue will lead to two new island resorts, among the first resorts on local islands in Maldives, including Green Village, owned by Mauroof, which aims to use eco-friendly construction techniques. Hassan Latheef ceremonially planted a tree in the avenue before inaugurating the cycle scheme by riding the first bicycle between two of the pick-up points.

Environmental award

In another initiative, a local community award was inaugurated in memory of Yusuf Kaleyfaanu (Kudafari Kaleyfaanu), Mauroof’s late father, commemorating his service to the environment and to the development of Kudafari during his 60-year rule as Katheeb or Island Chief. The first Kaleyfaanu Award was given to Mariyam Ibrahim, a founder of the Kudafari women’s committee and long-time active community volunteer.

A temporary jetty with a stage had been built, from which Latheef addressed the crowded beach. He said that environmental challenges do not exist in isolation from other policy areas such as economic, social, and educational questions. He cited recent findings of the ILO that a ‘green economy’ can out-compete a traditional economy, and said the MDP manifesto will include measures to subsidise green initiatives and create ‘green jobs’, tackling unemployment as well as environmental problems.

Local action

“Not all problems can be solved by government,” explained Sehenaz. “We believe environmental problems also call for local action.”

She expressed a hope that Kaanu Green Peace’s brand of localism would take root and that the organisation will spread and help train volunteers on other islands.

Though officially launched yesterday, Kaanu Green Peace already has some ongoing projects, notably the setting up of dustbins in the streets in an attempt to get a grip on the problem of waste management that plagues Kudafari as it does the rest of Maldives. They hope to get a crusher with which to compact metals for resale and plastics to send away for recycling or disposal.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Male’ City Council accuses government of sabotaging Tatva Global waste management project

The government has announced is it in the process of renegotiating a waste management contract for the Male’ area with India-based Tatva Global Renewable Energy – leading to criticism by the opposition-dominated Male’ City Council (MCC) that the state is trying to sabotage the agreement for political gain.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s administration signed the original waste management agreement with Tatva in May 2011 in a deal that was supposed to have generated power from recycling waste. The scheme was also said to be part of attempts to improve the overall standards of waste management in Male’ and the nearby “garbage island”, Thilafushi.

The deal, like the airport development agreement with India-based GMR declared void by the government this week, was been backed by International Finance Corporation (IFC), an affiliate organisation of the World Bank, according to the Inter Press Service news agency.

However parts of the agreement were ordered halted by the country’s Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) in August this year over alleged concerns about the contract, which was also signed under the former government.

The ACC received concerns that the project would lead to an anticipated loss of MVR 1 billion (US$64.8 million) in government finances over a 20 year operating period, according to local news service Haveeru.

ACC President Hassan Luthfee had phone switched off at the time of going to press.

In correspondence sent to Minivan News this week, Dr Mariyam Shakeela, who has served as Environment Minister for the last few months and was most recently appointed acting Human Rights Minister, announced that a previous contract agreed with Tatva was expected to be replaced with a “mutually beneficial” agreement.

“Provided they perform within the time frame given, the contract will remain with Tatva,” she said in response to whether the company would retain its role on the waste management project.

Dr Shakeela, who did not respond to a question on the nature of the government’s concerns with the previous contract, said the time frame for the deal was “under negotiation”.

“[The] whole agreement is being formulated,” she added.

A spokesperson for Tatva Global Renewable Energy was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

MCC criticism

However, the MCC has claimed that following a visit of senior officials from Tatva Global Renewable Energy between November 18 to November 20, a failure by the government to involve its councillors in the process and ongoing delays to commencing the project had let it to conclude that the deal would be eventually cancelled. The MCC said it expected the project to eventually be cancelled, despite increasing problems with waste management in the capital.

MCC councillor Mohamed Abdul Kareem told Minivan News that he had been informed senior Tatva executives had been invited to the Maldives for several days earlier this month to meet with ministers and stakeholders involved in the energy project.

“However, I don’t know what the discussions were focused on. Many groups were there; the Finance Ministry, other government departments, the Attorney General’s Office and the State Electricity Company (STELCO) were all there,” he said.

However, Kareem questioned why the MCC – as a major stakeholder in its own waste management project – had also not been invited to the discussions to express its concerns over the need for the waste management project.

“The issue has been continually delayed and the waste management problem is getting worse, while we don’t have the budget to meet our waste management needs,” he claimed.

Kareem alleged that while the government was providing small amounts of funding for waste management, he believed attempts were purposely being made to exacerbate the capital’s refuse problems in order to undermine the municipal council’s work. Kareem added that he was presently consulting lawyers over where the MCC stood on the waste management project.

“We don’t have enough budget to collect the waste, meanwhile the collection centres in Male’ are full and waste is openly being burnt on Thilafushi,” he claimed. “I think this is a game [for the government], I am certain they will cancel this contract.”

Kareem claimed that with an estimated 150,000 inhabitants in Male’ each generating a kilogram of waste per day on average, managing the capital’s waste management was the largest logistical operations in the entire country on a daily basis.

“We are dealing with 150,00 kg of waste everyday, we don’t have efficient enough operations for this. We don’t have enough boat fuel and the excavators we use are 20 to 30 years old. “[Wednesday] even, the starter motor failed on one of these,” he said.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Singapore’s Crescendas Group claim Maldives is still secure for foreign investment

Maldives is still a safe and secure environment for foreign investors, Singapore’s Crescendas Group has claimed today.

The comments were made in local media days after the Maldives government annulled a contract with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to redevelop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) near to Male’. GMR was just two years into a 25-year contract to develop and manage the country’s main airport.

Prior to the annulment, an anti-GMR campaign organised by coalition-aligned parties was formed to increase public support to “reclaim” the airport.

Despite this week’s developments, Crescendas Group Chief Executive Officer Lawrence Leo today claimed to have “strong confidence” in the Maldives, expressing the company’s interest in looking to invest in country for “the long term”.

“There is huge investment potential here. We have met many from both the private sector and government; we have received great support from everyone. Most important thing to be noted is everyone we met gave very positive responses. This shows that Maldives is one of the best places to invest,” he told Haveeru.

“We are also thinking to invest here for the long term because we have strong confidence, otherwise we wouldn’t have brought our funds to invest it here,” Leo added.

Crescendas group is currently developing a resort in Addu Atoll Hankede.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Immigration halts work permits to GMR, aviation authority to revoke aerodrome certificate

Additional reporting by Mariyath Mohamed.

The Department of Immigration has declared that it will cease renewing the visas of foreign employees working under GMR Male International Airport Limited (GMIAL), the Indian infrastructure giant’s side of the deal to manage and operate Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) signed with the former government.

“We have stopped issuing visas to GMR for the time being. This was decided since the cabinet has terminated the contract, and GMR has been given a seven day ultimatum to leave. If we went on processing visa requests, it would just be pointless work,” Deputy Chief Executive Officer of Immigration, Mohamed Khalid told Minivan News.

“We are just going along with the decisions made from the top, the President’s Office,” he said.

The Maldivian cabinet declared the agreement with GMR void on Tuesday evening, and gave the company a seven day ultimatum to leave the country.

“The government has given a seven day notice to GMR to leave the airport. The agreement states that GMR should be given a 30 day notice but the government believes that since the contract is void, it need not be followed,” said Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor at the time.

Deputy Controller of Immigration Hamid Fathuhullah told Minivan News that immigration had not yet made any decisions on how to proceed on dealing with the visas and permits obtained by GMR that were still active after the government’s seven day ultimatum.

However, Fathuhulla added that they would be making provisions in accordance with existing regulations to allow ample time for the employees to make arrangements to leave.

“Right now, we are not going to provide visas, quotas or work permits to any company associated with GMR. This is in line with the Immigration Act 1/2007 and International Law,” Fathuhulla stated.

President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad declined to comment on the matter.

“It is not part of our mandate to cancel visas, deport or arrest people. The President’s Office will do no such thing. The immigration department will decide this issue,” Imad said.

CEO of GMIAL, Andrew Harrison, said the company had received no communication or memo from the immigration department, as stated in several media reports, and had contacted the immigration to try and clarify the matter.

Of the company’s total 1760 staff, 140 are foreign employees on work permits, Harrison said. He stressed 17 of there work permits were due to be renewed before the end of December.

“Our people are committed. They will stay and work until otherwise notified,” Harrison said.

He said it would be “premature” to discuss the implications of the Immigration Department’s announcement, given that GMR disputes the legality of the government’s termination of its contract, and that there was “still work to be done before statements are made”.

However, he said it was surprising that the notice was issued to the media before any discussion with the company.

“I don’t know why they are doing it this way,” Harrison said. “People are asking us about this, but we have no information apart from the conflicting reports in the media.”

“One report says the visas are being cancelled, another says they have not been cancelled, just the renewals,” said Harrison.

Minister of State for Home Affairs Mohamed Fayaz stated Thursday that the foreign employees of GMR would be “given protection” until they could arrange to leave the country.

Fayaz said that the ministry had extended an invitation to the management of GMR for a meeting following the termination of the contract.

Accepting the invitation, Harrison and Managing Director P Sripathi had met with the ministry representatives, he said.

“At the meeting, we requested that in these seven days, they proceed in a manner which would not disrupt any of the services being provided at the airport. We also assured them that they would remain safe and secure during their time in the country,” Fayaz said.

“We also told them that should they require it, we can provide security services through the police force,” he added.

The government-owned Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) has meanwhile issued a circular “opening opportunities for GMIAL staff who are keen to join the MACL team.”

In a statement, the company said it provided “assurance to employees that their present basic salary, allowances and other benefits, and training and development opportunities will be maintained under MACL management. MACL also guarantees that the employees currently sponsored by GMIAL will have the same opportunity to continue and complete their courses.”

CAA withdrawing aerodrome certificate

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has meanwhile sent GMIAL a letter informing the company its aerodrome certificate will be withdrawn at 11:59 pm on December 7.

“That is the regulatory authority that permits us to operate an airport,” explained Harrison, “We cannot operate an airport without the certificate.”

Harrison emphasised that the withdrawal of the certificate did not mean the end of the company’s effort to seek legal redress.

“Reckless”

The government’s decision to declare GMR’s concession agreement void and evict the developer from the Maldives comes after a tough year for tourism, the sector indirectly responsible for up to 70 percent of the country’s economy. According to the 2013 budget presented to parliament on November 27 – the same day as cabinet announced GMR’s eviction – tourism growth in the Maldives has fallen from 15.8 percent in 2010 and 9.1 percent in 2011, to an expected 0.7 percent in 2012.

In a statement today, former President Mohamed Nasheed, under whose administration the GMR contract was signed, said the government’s “reckless decision to terminate GMR’s contract will scare off investors”, with “serious ramifications for the economy, at a time when we can ill-afford to see it falter.”

“Right across the board we are witnessing positive trends being dangerously reversed. Growth in tourism – the bedrock of our economy – has flat-lined; our GDP, which was 7 per cent last year, is projected to be just 3.4 per cent this year; and our deficit, which we had brought under control at the start of the year, is now ballooning at an alarming rate,” Nasheed said.

“If this continues, we risk setting back every aspect of our development. It is not those in government but the Maldivian people who stand to lose most from President Waheed’s economic mismanagement.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Supreme Court overrules Parliament’s decision to invalidate Hulhumale Magistrate Court

The Supreme Court has issued an order invalidating the decision of Parliament’s Independent Institutions Oversight Committee to not recognise the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed is currently facing charges in the Hulhumale Court for the detention of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed during the final days of his administration.

The oversight committee this week declared the court illegitimate, claiming it lacked “constitutional and legal grounds” to support its legitimacy.

In an order, (No. 2012/SC-SJ/05) issued on November 28, the Supreme Court declared that no institution should meddle with the business of the courts, claiming that it held parental authority over “constitutional and legal affairs” and would not allow such “interference” to take place.

“Any action or a decision taken by an institution of the state that may impact the outcome of a matter that is being heard in a court of law, and prior to a decision by the courts on that matter, shall be deemed invalid, and [the Supreme Court] hereby orders that these acts must not be carried out,” the order read.

Though the order did not specifically mention the decision by the parliamentary oversight committee, it was issued shortly after the committee’s decision regarding the Hulhumale’ court.

Last Tuesday, the Independent Institutions Oversight Committee,following an issue presented by three sitting MPs, declared there were no “legal grounds” to accept the setting up and functioning of Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court based on the powers vested to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) under article 159 of the constitution and article 21 of the Judicial Service Commission Act, and based on the articles 53 and 63 of Judicature Act.

The members of the committee claimed there was a lack of any legal reasoning to recommence the works of the concerned court after its work had been suspended for five months after the Judicature Act came to force.

Article 63 of the Judicature Act states: “A Magistrate Court shall be established in all inhabited islands with the exception of Male’ where there are the four superior courts created in accordance with Article 53(b) of this Act and in an island where 4 divisions of these four superior courts are established in accordance with Article 53 (c) of this Act.”

However, the Independent Institutions Oversight Committee in its explanation of the decision stated that the exception of Male’ in the stated article included Hulhumale’, which for administrative purposes is considered a ward of the capital. The committee argued Hulhumale’ could not be deemed as a separate island to establish a magistrate court.

No one should meddle with the courts: Supreme Court

In quashing the parliamentary committee’s decision, the Supreme Court stated that while the Maldivian constitutional system broadly entertained the principle of separation of powers, no one power of the state can go beyond the limits set out in the constitution.

“According to articles 5, 6 and 7 of the constitution that came to force on 7 August 2008, the Maldivian constitutional system has explicitly set out that the executive power, legislative power and the judicial power is independent from one another and the boundaries of each power being clearly set out, it is unconstitutional for one power of the state to go beyond its constitutional boundaries as stated in article 8 of the constitution,” read the order.

The Supreme Court also in its order maintained that as per the constitution, the judicial power of the state was the sole constitutional authority in settling legal disputes between the institutions of the state or private parties.

“The judiciary established under the constitution is an independent and impartial institution and that all public institutions shall protect and uphold this independence and impartiality and therefore no institution shall interfere or influence the functioning of the courts,” it added.

Not meddling with business of courts – Deputy Chair of Independent Institutions Oversight Committee

Speaking to Minivan News, Deputy Chair of Independent Institutions Oversight Committee MP Ahmed Sameer said the committee was not meddling with the business of the courts, but addressing a constitutional violation carried out by the JSC in establishing an illegitimate court.

Sameer – who is also the deputy leader of Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) parliamentary group – stated that it was a responsibility of the parliament to hold independent institutions and other bodies of the state accountable, and that his committee was mandated with the scrutiny of actions of independent institutions.

“Initially, when we summoned the JSC to the committee, they refused to talk to us or provide any information to the committee. However, from the documents that the committee received later, we found out that the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was formed by the JSC which is a violation of the constitution and the laws,” he said.

Sameer argued that the constitution explicitly states that courts can only be formed by legislation and not “through a vote in the JSC”.

“The committee’s decision was made based on the findings of the inquiry. We have all the documents including the agendas of the meeting and the meeting minutes. It is clear that the JSC had formed and an act that is beyond the powers vested to the commission in the constitution and the JSC Act,” he added.

Sameer claimed that the decision by the committee was binding and no authority can overrule the decision.

“With the committee’s decision, we do not plan to give the budget to the court and works are underway to in drafting an amendment that would specifically state the courts that would be formed under the law,” he said.

Sameer added that the parliament will not tolerate any decision that undermines its constitutional powers and responsibilities.

Arrest of Judge Abdulla

The issue concerning Hulhumale Magistrate Court’s legitimacy came to limelight following the Prosecutor General (PG) filing criminal charges against former President Mohamed Nasheed for the detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested by the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) on the evening of Monday, January 16, in compliance with a police request.

The judge’s whereabouts were not revealed until January 18, and the MNDF acknowledged receipt but did not reply to Supreme Court orders to release the judge.

Then Home Minister Hassan Afeef subsequently accused the judge of “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist”, listing 14 cases of obstruction of police duty including withholding warrants for up to four days, ordering police to conduct unlawful investigations and disregarding decisions by higher courts.

Afeef accused the judge of “deliberately” holding up cases involving opposition figures, barring media from corruption trials, ordering the release of suspects detained for serious crimes “without a single hearing”, and maintaining “suspicious ties” with family members of convicts sentenced for dangerous crimes.

The judge also released a murder suspect “in the name of holding ministers accountable”, who went on to kill another victim.

Nasheed’s government subsequently requested assistance from the international community to reform the judiciary. Observing that judicial reform “really should come from the JSC”, Foreign Minister at the time, Ahmed Naseemm said that the JSC’s shortcomings “are now an issue of national security.”

The judicial crisis triggered 22 days of continuous protests led by senior opposition figures and those loyal to former President Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom, which eventually led to the controversial toppling of Nasheed’s administration on February 7.

The PG’s Office filed charges based on the investigations by Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) on the arrest, which concluded that Nasheed was the “highest authority liable” for the military-led detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Along with Nasheed, the report concluded that the former president’s Defence Minister, Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, was a second key figure responsible with others including Chief of Defence Force Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad.

Charges were also filed against all of those which the HRCM investigation report identified as responsible for the arrest in Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Hulhumale Magistrate Court and legitimacy

During the first hearing of the trial, ex-president Nasheed’s lawyers took procedural points challenging the legitimacy of the court, but were rejected without justification. Nasheed’s legal team’s appeal challenging the legitimacy was initially rejected by the High Court claiming that it cannot look into a matter that was already being heard in Supreme Court.

However, the High Court later granted Nasheed an injunction temporarily suspending the trial of the former president at the contested Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court. The injunction is pending a ruling on procedural points raised by the former President’s legal team.

Following the injunction, Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has announced that it had suspended all ongoing cases.

In its announcement, the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court said it has suspended proceedings on cases involving marriage, divorce, guardianship, family matters, property lawsuits, civil cases, criminal cases involving extension of detention periods as well as other matters that could be affected by the questions raised over its legal status.

Following the High Court’s injunction granted to Nasheed, the JSC filed a case in Supreme Court asking it to look into the legitimacy of the court. The Supreme Court then instructed the High Court to halt its hearings on the appeal.

Supreme Court had previously ordered the Civil Court to send over all files and documents on a case submitted by a lawyer, Ismail Visham, over a year ago challenging the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The Supreme Court on November 19, held the first hearing of the case concerning the legitimacy of Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and Ismail Visham was decided as the respondent of the case.

Nasheed’s legal team also intervened in the court case. Nasheed’s lawyers stated that the case involved the interests of the former president as his case regarding the detention of the Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed is heard by Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Meanwhile, several prominent figures have raised doubts over the legitimacy of Hulhumale Magistrate Court.

Former Chairman of the Constitutional Drafting Committee of the Special Majlis, Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail, in an article in his personal blog stated – “The [Hulhumale’ court] was created by the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) without authority derived from law. Therefore the validity of any order or judgement issued by this court is questionable, and the constitution says no one has to obey any unlawful orders, i.e, orders which are not derived from law. Therefore, President Nasheed’s decision to ignore the summons has more than reasonable legal grounds.”

Ismail further writes that no court has the power, under any law, to issue a travel ban on a person without ever summoning them to court.

He also stated that there was ample to room to believe that the courts were acting with a bias against Nasheed, owing to a number of other politicians and business tycoons who were repeatedly defying court orders and summons.

Prominent lawyer and Independent MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed – who is also the chair of Parliament’s Independent Oversight Committee – in his personal blog also echoed similar remarks explaining that a magistrate court could not legally be established at Hulhumale’.

However following the Supreme Court’s order, Nasheed told Minivan News said that he “wished to give a considered view soon” but refused to reveal a specific date by which he would respond.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)