Tag: maldives

Leaked diplomatic cables will include 3325 from US Embassy in Colombo

The US diplomatic cables leaked by whistle-blowing website Wikileaks includes 3325 as-yet unreleased missives from the US Embassy in Colombo, making the Embassy in Sri Lanka among those hardest-hit by the scandal.

Wikileaks, in conjunction with several newspapers in the UK and Europe such as the Guardian, will stagger the release of 250,000 cables over the next few days. Today’s leak has already sparked diplomatic crisises all over the globe.

Correspondence already released includes urging by Saudi Arabian leaders for the US to attack Iran to disrupt its nuclear programme, while leaders in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates described the country as “evil”, an “existential threat” and a power that “is going to take us to war”.

The Guardian’s newspaper’s report on the leaks noted that former president of the Jordianian senate, Zeid Rifai, had told “a senior US official” to “bomb Iran, or live with an Iranian bomb. Sanctions, carrots, incentives won’t matter.”

The leaked cables included allegations that Russian intelligence agencies were using mafia bosses to conduct criminal operations, with one cable claiming that the country was “virtually a mafia state.”

According to the Guardian’s report, the cables also identified “intense US suspicion” around the “extraordinarily close relationship” between Russia Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in relation to “lavish gifts”, “lucrative energy contracts” and “shadowy” contacts.

The cables identify Saudi Arabian donors as allegedly “the biggest financiers of terror groups”, and disclose an “extraordinarily detailed account” of plans to disguise the bombing of al-Quaeda targets with the assistance of countries such as Yemen.

Hacking attacks directed at Google, which prompted the search giant to leave China, were reportedly ordered by a senior member of the Chinese politburo after he typed his name into the popular search engine and found disparaging articles written about him.

One of the most controversial leaks concerns a directive requesting the specification of communications equipment and IT systems used by top UN officials and details “of private VIP networks used for official communication, to include upgrades, security measures, passwords, personal encryption keys.”

Maldives Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed noted that former US President Richard Nixon had tapes of his conversations leaked in the early ’70s.

“Nixon used a few choice phrases to describe some close allies. It didn’t damage [international] relationships, but he may have upset some of the people he referred to,” Dr Shaheed said.

The correspondence includes 3325 as-yet unreleased cables from the US Embassy in Colombo, some of which may concern the Maldives.

Dr Shaheed told Minivan News that while he doubted the dispatches would be as sensational “as some people think”, “it will make the US uncomfortable when some of its confidential reports go public.

“However I don’t think it will damage US ties in this region because, by and large, this not central region for US diplomacy and they US has not been brokering difficult negotiations – what the US has been saying here it has been saying very publicly,” he added.

Dr Shaheed confirmed that the US Embassy in Colombo had notified the Maldivian government that the release of the cables was likely, “however they don’t know what the contents are or the areas they will [concern].”

Cultural Affairs Officer and Spokesperson for the US Embassy in Colombo, Glen Davis, told Minivan News that the US would not be commenting specifically on the contents of the leaked cables.

“Cable traffic is very preliminary; pieces are incomplete and read out of context, they are easy to misconstrue,” he said.

“A disclosure like this is bad for contacts, harmful to global engagement and makes it difficult to tackle problems such as organised crime and nuclear proliferation. Washington has taken very aggressive action to ensure the privacy of future communication is secure.”

Davis added that the US Embassy was “determined to keep doing what we’re doing, and reassure the people we work with. It’s hard to see [how the leak] will lead to constructive results.”

The UK High Commission in Colombo said it was official policy “not to comment on the substance of leaked documents.”

However, it condemned the “unauthorised release of this classified information, just as we condemn leaks of classified material in the UK. They can damage national security, are not in the national interest and, as the US have said, may put lives at risk. We have a very strong relationship with the US Government. That will continue.”

The diplomatic cables were drawn from the US government’s Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPDIS), a separate US military-run internet that is accessible to approximately three million Americans. The US reportedly suspects that the leak originated from the same source as the Iraq and Afghan war logs, 22 year-old US soldier Private Bradley Manning, who was posted as a junior intelligence officer in Baghdad.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldivian and US servicewomen talk defense challenges

Servicewomen from the US Navy and the Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) last week got together to discuss their respective roles, Miadhu has reported.

Female sailors serving on the Naval vessel, the USS Momson, met with counterparts from across the Maldives’ police, border security and defense forces to share experiences on the individual challenges they have faced in their careers, the paper said.

According to the report, the US representatives also discussed their feelings on serving away from home all over the globe.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court to hold first hearing on cabinet controversy

The first hearing of the case filed in the Supreme Court against the government regarding the cabinet endorsement controversy is scheduled to be held tomorrow at 10:30 pm.

The case was filed in the court by Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ali Waheed and by Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), according to the Supreme Court.

The parties filed a case seeking a court order to declare that ministers who did not receive parliamentary consent should be removed from  their posts.

Former Attorney General and DRP Council Member Azima Shukoor will argue the opposition’s case in court. The present Attorney General’s office will act as the defendant in the case.

Following weeks of political stalemate, parliament voted last week to approve five out of 12 cabinet ministers reappointed by President Mohamed Nasheed in July.

After MPs of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) boycotted the sitting before voting began, the remaining MPs voted against the nominees Finance Minister Ali Hashim, Education Minister Dr Musthafa Luthfy, Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed, Fisheries Minister Dr Ibrahim Didi, Home Minister Mohamed Shihab, Defence Minister Ameen Faisal and Attorney General Dr Ahmed Ali Sawad.

The government however insists that as none of the ministerial appointees received 39 votes against – the majority required to pass a no-confidence motion – all cabinet members shall remain in their posts.

Recently MDP Parliamentary Group leader and MP Moosa Manik has said that the Supreme Court have no authority to remove ministers from their position and said ”I can assure that the court will not even issue such an order.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Clearly rejected

Among the wheeling and dealings we’ve seen in the Majlis, the issue of Cabinet Ministers has been one of the most convoluted and silly arguments we’ve seen.

Can the Cabinet Ministers be questioned? Can’t they be accepted or rejected together? Are they just nominated or actually appointed? And therefore once chosen by the President, are they Ministers or Ministers-in-waiting? And in what capacity are they beholden to the Majlis?

Within two days the Supreme Court will decide on these questions. In two days, hopefully the drama will end, rather than begin anew.

Why are they going to court?

The Majlis has rejected seven Cabinet Ministers. MDP does not like this and would like all of their Ministers to keep their portfolios. Was approval necessary? Yes. Can the Majlis reject a Cabinet member without a vote of no confidence? Yes, but only when the President asks for their approval and acceptance of that appointment.

Nowhere is it written in the constitution that there is only one way to remove a Cabinet Minister, as Reeko Moosa suggests.

Article 101 of the Constitution states that a vote of no confidence is possible, but it does not say that a vote of no confidence is the only way to remove a Minister. There are in fact two ways: 1) A vote of no confidence; or 2) A rejection when appointed.

Once appointed, s/he is a Minister

The opposition claims that individuals were nominated rather than appointed. They claim that the President can choose people, and that those people would only become Ministers once they have approval. This is false.

The President does not nominate, he appoints. The moment those individuals take their oath by either the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, or his representative, those individuals become Ministers of the Cabinet of the Republic of the Maldives as per Article 131 of the Constitution.

Article 131 states: ‘A member of the cabinet shall assume office upon taking and subscribing, before the Chief Justice or his Designate, the oath of office.’

The only thing that might be left up to debate is whether the Chief Justice could choose to simply not provide himself or his representative to swear the appointees in, and refuse to do so until each individual had parliamentary approval.

But in this case, Abdullah Saeed (Chief Justice at the time) did not do so. If you think back, though, you will remember that the cabinet was re-sworn at the same time that the MNDF had locked up the Supreme/High Courts and taken away the key. Not surprisingly, after Abdullah Saeed had sent his representative to swear in the cabinet he was given back the key to his office.

Nonetheless, once these individuals were sworn in, they were fully fledged Ministers, with every power, right, authority, and responsibility afforded them. All talk claiming they were just acting as ministers is just silliness. But if these people are already Ministers, do they still need approval? Isn’t it just a formality?

Approval or rejection necessary

Article 129C and D of the Constitution state:

C. Except for the Vice President, the President must receive the approval of the People’s Majlis for all appointments to the cabinet.

D. The President shall submit to the People’s Majlis, within seven days of making appointments to the Cabinet, the names of the appointees to the Cabinet for approval to the People’s Majlis.

Article 129C clearly states that the President “must receive approval” of the Majlis. Therefore, if any Cabinet Minister is rejected, then they are no longer Ministers of the cabinet. The only way they can continue is if the President swears them in again, where they will then have seven days before the President is required to send their names to the Majlis for a second time.

I do not believe there is any impediment to repeating this as many times as the President wants. Though I’m sure rejection after rejection by the Majlis would appear a complete farce in the eyes of the public.

Together or one by one

As to the issue of whether the cabinet should be approved together or individually, that is completely up to the preference of the Majlis Members. It is a tiny insignificant point that the constitution makes no reference to.

MDP thought there would be a bigger chance to get everyone approved if they are lumped together, because then DRP could be made to look stubborn and completely against all betterment of the nation if all of the cabinet members were wholly rejected.

One usually expects the entire cabinet to come to approval only once in a presidential term. It was assumed that after the approval of the entire cabinet, if a minister was dismissed, it would be done on a case by case basis.

But alas, that was not how things went down in this scenario. In this case, there is another instance which was particularly odd as well in the issue around whether Minister’s couldn’t be questioned.

Questioning Ministers

So, can a Minister be questioned? Of course, but only about the job at hand.

The opposition wanted to evaluate and judge each Minister before giving their approval. They claimed that a summons for this purpose required Ministers to come.

This is false. Ministers are only required to attend the Majlis for questions regarding their duties and responsibilities – not their qualification. In fact, under Article 98 of the Constitution, they can question any head of any government office if they so chose to. To answer falsely, or withhold information would directly violate the constitution.

The Supreme Court agreed with this evaluation in stating at the article in the Majlis rules of procedure that required their presence to judge their qualifications was outside of the constitution.

The bottom line and 2011 budget

The seven Ministers who were rejected by parliament remain rejected. However, until that rejection was decided by a vote of parliament, they were proper Ministers.

They were therefore required to answer summons that related to their job, but not to summons to simply scrutinize them on their qualifications.

The only way for the President to have Ali Hashim, former Finance Minister, present the budget is to reappoint him and swear him in. I believe Ali Hashim is one of our most capable Ministers, and if not for being caught in the crosshairs of political maneuvering, his position would not be in question.

It is a shame and a travesty that this issue is dominating so much of the public’s time and that these Ministers are losing their livelihoods over it. It is a shame that so many other bills that need passing, like those on drugs, evidence, and the penal code are left on the sidelines while we quibble about Ministerial portfolios.

While I have my own claim and object to GIP (Gaumee Itthihaad Party) not receiving its three cabinet portfolios in Economic Development, Education, and Fisheries as was understood in the MDP Itthihaad Coalition agreement, I still do not condone spending time on this issue when so many more desperate issues are waiting to be addressed.

There are procedures for cabinet appointments that should have been followed. There once was a clear understanding of how to go about all of this. But instead of it being a simple and day long matter, it has led our nation to constitutional crisis. Instead of following procedure we all now look at the constitution from a thousand different angles and wrest every type of meaning we can from every line before proceeding in the way most beneficial to us.

I am not a government apologist trying to hide constitutional violations, nor an opposition sympathizer trying to topple the government. I’m just trying to make sense of a now convoluted issue.

I pray that the Supreme Court protects the constitution and laws it was created to uphold and that their life time tenures ensures justice free of political sway and maneuvering.

I pray that we can move forward from this upcoming Supreme Court decision and find a way to create a whole government dedicated to the MDP Itthihaad manifesto confirmed two years ago.

I pray our conscience prevails and sanity finally reigns.

Note: Article 87 states:

A. Unless otherwise provided in this Constitution; all decisions made by the People’s Majlis shall be decided by a majority of the votes of members present and voting (Approval or rejection of Cabinet Ministers is done this way as it is not mentioned anywhere else.

http://jswaheed.com

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)

Government set to limit coolant gas emissions: report

Limitations on imports of hydro-chlorofluorcarbons (HCFC), gases used in certain manufacturing and refrigeration processes, have been set at 67 metric tonnes for 2011 by the Ministry of Housing and Environment as part of the country’s environmental commitments, according to press reports.

Miadhu reported that the Environment Ministry has publically announced the annual restrictions as part of a new permit system designed to be awarded exclusively to a selected number of parties due to be decided during an upcoming bidding process.

As part of the government’s commitment to trying to become carbon neutral by 2020 and wider global eco-policies such as part of the so-called Montreal Protocol, which targets a reduction in substances linked to reducing the Ozone Layer, use of HCFCs in the Maldives is set to be phased out.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Website leaks ticket reservation for Speaker and DRP Leader’s alleged trip to Delhi

The Dhivehi Post website has leaked a document it claims is the ticket reservation for leader of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, and Speaker of the Parliament Abdulla Shahid, to fly to India for “secret talks” with GMR.

The website last week alleged that Thasmeen and Shahid had received US$1 million from Indian infrastructure giant GMR to cease opposition to the firm’s take over of  Male’ International Airport.

The booking, apparently made in the name of the two DRP MPs, appears to have been reserved by ‘FCM Travel Solutions India Ltd GMR’ and was issued on October 26 for travel on October 30 to Delhi, via Colombo on Sri Lankan Airlines. The cost of each ticket was 42,749 Indian rupees (US$934).

Minivan News can confirm that air travel arranged by GMR for Maldivian journalists visiting the opening of Delhi Terminal 5 in July was booked by the Indian corporate travel firm ‘FCM Travel Solutions(India)Ltd’, and is seeking to clarify the legitimacy of the tickets.

Last week Managing Director of GMR Male International Airport Limited, P Sripathy, told Minivan News the allegations were “totally false and baseless, and very disappointing and damaging to our reputation. We have never met any members of the opposition to date.”

Thasmeen and Shahid likewise dismissed the allegations as ”baseless and false”.

”Out of all the articles published by the Dhivehi Post so far, most of them are untrue,” Thasmeen told Minivan News. ”Like I said before, I did not go to India and I have never met anyone from GMR.”

Thasmeen said that the website was operated by “political figures” and their intentions was to split the DRP leadership and “smear its respect.”

”They are doing this for political gain. If you look at the articles very carefully and try to understand who runs it, it becomes very clear,” he said. ”I do not want to tell the media yet.”

Shahid n”I have not even been to India lately, they are all lies and false accusations,” Shahid said. ”It is a website that publishes false allegations very often, it is operated by some persons who stay hidden.”

Shahid said the aim of the website was to split the DRP and ferment aggression inside parliament.

The Dhivehi Post claimed that it was possible Shahid and Thasmeen would not have an Indian immigration stamp in their passports if they waited at the airport as a transit passenger, “and therefore could be considered as they did not go to India”.

Showing a rather detailed understanding of protocols attached to diplomatic passports, the website speculated that “as all the MPs have the red diplomatic passport, and any diplomat waiting as a transit passenger will be provided services from the VIP lounge, it would be very easy for anyone waiting in the lounge airport to meet senior officials of the company [without passing through immigration].”

The website threatened that “more proof awaits”, should Thasmeen and Shahid continue to deny the allegations.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court has “no authority to dismiss ministers”, claims Reeko Moosa

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) parliamentary group leader and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik has claimed that the Supreme Court has no authority to dismiss ministers from their positions.

“MPs have the power to dismiss Supreme Court judges, and the Supreme Court will understand that the panel consists of judges we appointed,” Moosa said. ”Parliament does not know how to remove ministers from their position,” he claimed.

The matter saw parliament proceedings derailed for three weeks on points of order. Eventually the MDP boycotted the endorsement process during the vote last Monday, and seven ministers were ‘disapproved’.

The government meanwhile contends that the only way to remove a minister from their position is through a no-confidence motion.

However, the opposition believes that the procedure of cabinet appointments remains incomplete without the consent of parliament, and that ministers should not remain in office after the parliament disapproves them.

After disputes last week, the opposition filed the case in the Supreme Court.

Referring to the opposition’s refusal on Finance minister presenting the budget, Moosa said that if the opposition MPs obstructed Finance Minister Ali Hashim from entering the parliament ”he will enter the parliament with the citizens of the nation.”

Moosa also alleged that DRP MPs planned “to attack” Hashim if he entered the parliament to present the budget.

”If DRP committed any such actions, no ministers will remain silent. I – Moosa Manik – and MDP activists will go to their houses.”

However, DRP MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom said that Hashim was a ‘former’ minister and former ministers cannot present the state’s budget in parliament.

”A person becomes a minister only after the person successfully passes the three procedures: presidential appointment, parliamentary consent and taking the oath,” Mausoom said. ”[Moosa] Hecannot say that the courts have no authority – courts have full authority to make the best decision to resolve every issue.”

Mausoom said Moosa’s remarks reveals how much the government disregards the constitution and laws.

”This issue should have long been resolved if some people did not have these issues of stubbornness,” he said.

He also said that parliament speaks the citizen’s words and ”participation of citizens is required in sincere good governance.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police search Hulhumale hospital during investigation of abandoned baby

The police yesterday searched Hulhumale’ hospital to investigate the circumstances around the discovery of an abandoned infant found last week.

An abandoned newborn female baby was discovered in some bushes near the Wataniya telecommunications tower in Hulhumale’ last week. The baby was first taken to Hulhumale’ hospital for treatment and now has been transferred to Indira Gandi Memorial Hospital (IGMH).

Initial reports in the media said the baby appeared to have been born prematurely and discarded by the mother. The umbilical cord was still attached to the infant.

Police Sub Inspector Ahmed Shiyam said police had collected “necessary information” for the investigation from Hulhumale’ hospital.

”The baby is now in a good condition at IGMH,” Shiyam said, adding that ”no further information can be disclosed yet.”

Head of Hulhumale’ hospital Dr Ahmed Ashraf told Minivan News that the infant’s condition was “very weak” when she was first brought to the hospital.

“Her condition was very weak when she was brought here that day in the afternoon,” Dr Ashraf said. “We treated the infant and her condition was stable when she was referred to IGMH that evening.”

He said police officers searched the hospital after obtaining a warrant from the Criminal Court, and “collected information they needed for the investigation.”

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Nasheed listed in magazine’s annual top 100 “thinkers”

President Mohamed Nasheed has come in 39th place in Foreign Policy magazine’s list of its Top 100 Global Thinkers on the back of a number of high-profile environmentally-themed speeches and commitments such as a national pledge to be carbon neutral by 2020.

The magazine, which chronicles international political development, chose the president in a list of figures it believes have had great significance on global affairs over the last eleven months, which has been topped this year jointly by business giants Bill Gates and Warren Buffet.

Pointing to a much publicised underwater conference held by the president in the Maldives last year – a promotional event designed to raise attention to cutting global output of greenhouse gas emissions amidst fears the country may be sunk by changing climate conditions – the magazine believed Nasheed has continued to be an important pioneer for greener political talk.

“Since taking office two years ago, Nasheed, a 43-year-old former human rights activist, has become the world’s most environmentally outspoken president,” the magazine claimed. “He has made his tiny country — a string of atolls in the Indian Ocean that sits an average of just 7 feet above sea level — a poster child for the need to stop global warming.”

Other names included in the list include US president Barrack Obama in third place, Oxford University economist Paul Collier at 29th place and Salam Fayyad, the Palestine prime minister, at 23.

As reported by Minivan News last week, Nasheed has continued to talk strongly about sustainability commitments. He claimed last week that failure to meet his government’s plan of becoming a carbon neutral country by 2020 would be a “disaster” for the nation and the wider development and promotion of alternative energy-driven economies as a whole.

The article praised the president particularly for comments made this year in the media calling for dynamic street action by citisens of the US to change political attitudes in the country that he has accused of being a significant “obstacle” to trying to battle climate change.

As a destination for green developments, environmental organisations such as Greenpeace have said they view the Maldives more as a symbol than a practical demonstration of how national development and fighting climate change can be mutually exclusive.

Wendel Trio, Climate Policy and Global Deal Coordinator for Greenpeace International, believed that the Maldives can nonetheless play an iconic role in promoting the potential benefits of adopting alternate energy programmes.

“By coupling both strong words and the need for the big emitting countries in the developed and the developing world to reduce their emissions sharply, with a strong commitment at home, the Maldives has gained respect,” Trio explained.

“However, obviously none of the big emitting countries are looking at the Maldives as an example, as they all claim that their social and economic development cannot be compared to that of a small island state.”

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)