Tag: Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)

JSC “fully controlled by political figures”: lawyer for Chief High Court judge

Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is set to face another court battle after attorneys representing Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef announced on Thursday that they would challenge the commission’s decision to suspend the judge.

Chair of JSC, Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed, had earlier held a press conference declaring the commission had decided to “indefinitely suspended” Chief Judge Shareef, over a complaint filed against the judge last year.

That decision came hours after the High Court temporarily halting the hearings of a case against the JSC lodged by former President Nasheed – who has accused the judicial watch-dog of exceeding its mandate in appointing the three-member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court currently hearing a criminal case against him.

According to the JSC Chair, the suspension of Chief Judge Shareef – who is among the three judges presiding over the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed’s case – was a “precautionary” measure while investigation of the complaint was proceeding.

Judge Shareef in the new Civil Court lawsuit against the JSC will be represented by former Attorney General and veteran lawyer Husnu Al Suood and his law firm, Suood, Anwar and Co.

Briefing the media about the court case which is set to be filed on Sunday, Suood said that Chief Judge Shareef was suspended in contrast with the existing laws and the decision undermines the independence a Judge requires in executing his legal duties.

He said the Chief Judge’s team of counsels will plead in court that the decision by the JSC was an attempt to unduly exercise influence over judges.

He also added that once the case is registered at the Civil Court, a request will be made at the Supreme Court to take over the case, as has been the previous practice.

The Supreme Court previously took over the case filed at Civil Court by prominent lawyer Ismail Wisham against the JSC, challenging the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Magistrate Court it created.

The case was also represented by Suood, which eventually led to the Supreme Court endorsing the legitimacy of the controversial court in a 4 to 3 majority decision in which Chair of JSC and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed cast the controversial deciding vote, despite initial pleas against the judge sitting on the bench by Suood on the ground of ‘presumption of bias’.

“Not a small thing”

Speaking of the JSC’s decision, Suood – who is also the President of Maldives Bar Association – said the suspension coming after the JSC sitting’s on the case for a year was “not a small thing”.

“That is not a small thing when you get a suspension after one year. Suspending a country’s Chief Judge of High Court is not a small thing,” he said.

JSC Chair Adam Mohamed has meanwhile said “there are no legal grounds to stop looking into a complaint submitted [to the commission] or halt proceedings”.

According to local media reports, the call for an indefinite suspension of the Chief Judge was proposed to the JSC by the incumbent Attorney General Aishath Bisham – who is yet to receive parliament’s consent following her appointment – and was passed by the vote of three members out of the 10-member commission.

Those who voted in favour included two representatives of the executive branch, the attorney general herself, the President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s representive Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem, and a third vote by Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi.

The public’s member to the JSC Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman opposed the motion while lawyers’ eepresentative Ahmed Rasheed and Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan abstained. High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed did not participate in the vote.

Both the Speaker of parliament Abdulla Shahid and Parliament’s representee to the commission MP Gasim Ibrahim did not attend the meeting.

Politically motivated and influenced

Suood said the JSC’s passing of a motion to suspend the judge with a vote of just three members – two of whom represented the executive – lead to presumption that the vote had been influenced.

He said that such a grave motion being passed by the support of just three members also led to the belief that the JSC was seeking to undermine the independence of the judges.

“There is reason to believe this decision had political motives behind it,” said the veteran lawyer.

Suood further said the decision could also be perceived as a way to prevent a further delay of the case filed by Nasheed, who is contesting the legality of the three-member judges panel appointed to Hulhumale Magistrate Court by the JSC.

“The JSC is one party to the ongoing High Court case of which Chief Judge Shareef is among the judges who presiding over the case. It is wrong in every aspect for JSC to take action against the judge,” he said. “Due to such actions, public confidence in state institutions is being lowered day by day.”

“Entire judiciary under the influence of retired Supreme Court Judge Mujthaaz Fahmy” – Suood

Suood also alleged that two parliament members and a retired Supreme Court judge have long been influencing the work of judges and their verdicts on several cases.

Suood claimed that the presidential candidate for the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, the Deputy Speaker of Parliament and PPM MP Ahmed Nazim, and retired Supreme Court Judge Mujthaz Fahmy have long been in the business of influencing the judges and the verdicts they had been issuing.

He further contested that his allegations were based on evidence, and said he would do everything possible to make the judiciary free from such undue influences.

“The entire judiciary is under the influence of [retired Supreme Court Judge] Mujthaaz Fahmy ,” he alleged.

Suood further alleged that Deputy Speaker Nazim had close ties with members of the JSC, and said several judges had told him that Yameen Abdul Gayoom – half brother of  former President of 30 years, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – had on several occasions given instructions to the judges over the phone as to how their sentences should be phrased.

Despite claiming to have strong evidence to support his allegations, Suood admitted that it would be extremely difficult for the authorities to take action against the three individuals.

JSC juggling judges to appease politicians

Suood further contended that the JSC had been taken over “dark powers”, and that it was fully under the control of certain political figures.

He alleged that in a bid to serve the interests of a few politicians, the JSC was planning to juggle judges from court to court and even had planned to give salary increments to certain judges.

Among the planned switches, Suood claimed that Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed – who was taken into military detention during former President Nasheed’s administration over allegations of gross judicial misconduct – is set to be transferred to Civil Court, while JSC member and Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi will become the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court.

Among other changes, Suood claimed that JSC had been working to transfer the two “best serving” Civil Court Judges – Judge Aisha Sujoon and Judge Mariyam Nihayath to the Drug Court.

“These things are carried out under a great plan. They are installing judges to courts as they please,” Suood said.

Denial

All the three individuals accused by Suood have dismissed the allegations in responses given to local media.

Speaking at a membership event held in PPM’s headquarters on Friday night, PPM’s presidential hopeful Yameen Abdul Gayoom denied the allegations, describing them as an “outright lie”.

“The JSC is taking action against a judge. They don’t have judges sitting on the JSC. Therefore I do not believe anyone can influence the JSC,” Yameen said.

He further expressed his frustration over the allegations claiming that it had become common for people to make erroneous and slanderous remarks against political figures.

“This would not have happened if defamation had been kept as a criminal offence. All this is happening because defamation has now been changed to a civil wrong,” he said.

He further said that even though he did not influence judges and their work, he admitted to speaking about lapses within the judiciary and the delaying of cases on public forums.

“It would be better for Suood to stop making such irresponsible comments and focus on working for his clients,” Yameen responded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC suspends Chief Judge hours after High Court postpones case against JSC

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has announced that the High Court has temporarily suspended the hearings of the case against Judicial Service Commission (JSC) filed by the party’s presidential candidate, former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Nasheed is challenging the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of the three-member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court to hear Nasheed’s criminal trial.

The party’s remarks come just a day after High Court cancelled a hearing of the case in which local media reported that the court was to decide on counter-procedural issues taken by JSC. The JSC has contended that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to look into a matter.

Member of Nasheed’s legal team, Hassan Latheef, told Minivan News on Wednesday that the hearing was cancelled after the judge who was presiding over the case opted to “take leave” for the day.

However, shortly after the cancellation, the JSC declared that the commission had indefinitely suspended the Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef – who also happened to be among the judges presiding over Nasheed’s case against the JSC.

JSC Chair and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla insisted at a press conference yesterday that the disciplinary action had no relation to the former president’s case.

In a press conference held today at the party headquarters, Vice Chairperson of MDP Ali Shiyam said the party saw the High Court’s decision to withhold the hearings until next July as an encouragement for Nasheed and the party to continue its nation-wide presidential campaigning.

Shiyam added that if no further disruptions came from the courts, it would mean an additional strength to the party in their bid to secure the presidential elections in the first round. Shiyam also described the move as an end to the obstructions leveled against Nasheed by the courts and the judiciary.

“President [Nasheed] will not have to halt the campaign and come to Male to appear before the court. That is a new strength, a new encouragement to our campaign,” Shiyam said.

Meanwhile, another member of Nasheed’s legal team, Hisaan Hussain, tweeted that despite the indefinite suspension of Judge Shareef, neither the JSC nor the acting chief judge appointed to fill the vacancy of Judge Shareef would be allowed to reshuffle the judges presiding over the case.

Speaking to Minivan News, MDP Spokesperson MP Imthiyaz Fahmy said the move to hold the hearings was also an assurance to the public and the international community that former President Nasheed would be able to take part in the elections, as was unlikely that Nasheed would be given a criminal sentence.

He added that the party were facing a lot of challenges compared to other political parties who are also campaigning for the election.

“Because of the ongoing case concerning President Nasheed, the party has had to spend equal time and resources on its legal battles while running a nation wide presidential campaign. The MDP is battling with everything including the judiciary, the Prosecutor General and all the injustices faced by ordinary people,” he said.

Fahmy further added that the previous scheduling of Nasheed’s cases and sudden cancellations resulted in severe financial losses to the party, as each campaign event is organised by the hard work of party members across the country.

However, Fahmy also echoed Shiyam’s statement that the suspension of the case marked the end of Nasheed’s legal battle, stating that the High Court’s decision would allow the party to focus its energy on campaigning rather than winning court battles.

The Hulhumle-based magistrate court is currently hearing the case against the former President over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed by the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) during the last days of his presidency.

During the first trials of the hearing, Nasheed’s legal team contested the legitimacy of the magistrate court.

However, in a Civil Court case filed by lawyer Ismail Wisham, which was subsequently taken over by Supreme Court – and to which Nasheed’s legal team also intervened – endorsed the legitimacy of the much-debated Hulhumale Magistrate court.

As soon as the trials resumed, Nasheed’s legal team challenged the legitimacy of the appointment of the three-member judges panel to the magistrate court. The former president’s counsel is arguing that appointing judges to specific cases was not the JSC’s responsibility, but that of the chief judges of respective courts.

Minivan News contacted a High Court media official but was told the court had no comment on the case.

JSC suspends High Court Judge, appoints acting replacement

The JSC has meanwhile appointed Judge Abdul Rauoof Ibrahim as acting Chief Judge of High Court until the JSC concludes its inquiry into complaints filed against the suspended Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef.

Speaking to Minivan News, JSC Media Official Hassan Zaheen confirmed the appointment and said that Judge Abdul Rauoof would be in charge of running the High Court until the JSC concludes its inquiry.

The JSC on Wednesday issued Judge Shareef an ‘indefinite suspension’ following a complaint filed by the remaining judges of the court against him during last year.

The ruling came hours after the High Court suspended hearings against the former President.

A similar case was lodged last April in which eight judges of the High Court’s nine-member bench lodged a case with the JSC against Chief Judge Shareef, for suspending the Hulhumale Magistrate Court’s trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed without registering the case in court.

The suspension coincided with the cancellation of a hearing of a High Court’s case in which Nasheed challenged the legitimacy of the JSC’s appointment of the three member panel of judges to Hulhumale Magistrate Court.

High Court Chief Judge Shareef was summoned to the JSC earlier this month, almost a year after the complaint was lodged.

According to local media reports, the decision was approved at a JSC meeting today with three votes in favour and one against. Attorney General Aishath Bisham, President’s Member Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem and Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi voted in favour while Public Member Shuaib Abdul Rahman voted against the motion.

Lawyers’ representative Ahmed Rasheed and Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan reportedly abstained while High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed did not participate in the vote.

Speaker Abdulla Shahid and Majlis Member MP Gasim Ibrahim did not attend the meeting.

Shuaib told private broadcaster Raajje TV following the meeting that the decision was made in violation of due process and JSC procedures as a report regarding the allegations against the chief judge was not presented to the commission members.

The motion or petition to suspend Shareef was proposed by Attorney General Bisham, who is yet to receive parliamentary consent for her appointment.

Meanwhile, at the press conference this evening, Justice Adam Mohamed refused to reveal either the details of the vote or the members in attendance despite repeated queries from reporters.

He also refused to state which High Court judge would take over the chief judge’s administrative functions.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) – of which Nasheed is the presidential candidate – described the actions by the JSC as attempts to influence the case filed by Nasheed against the JSC.

“We condemn the actions of the Maldivian courts, which violate the electoral rights of nearly 50,000 Maldivian Democratic Party members. The disruption to President Nasheed’s campaign trip to Raa atoll is an unnecessary, politically motivated challenge,” the party contended yesterday.

“The JSC continues to try and cover up the unconstitutional manner in which they appointed the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court bench through attempts at influencing the judiciary, while the Courts create logistical challenges such as today’s.  However, it does not stop affect the spirit of President Nasheed’s campaign,” said MP Mariya Ahmed Didi.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

O’Level pass rate improves 10 percent on 2011

The Education Ministry has announced a 10 percent improvement in Cambridge O’Level examination pass rates for 2012.

President Mohamed Waheed claimed the results were due to education sector improvements, while former Education Minister Musthafa Luthfy claimed that these policies were enacted under the previous government.

The Education Ministry announced 2012’s Cambridge O’Level (grade 10) examination results on Saturday (May 25), noting that 31 students achieved global top 10 rankings, with five of these students having the “highest results worldwide” in various subject areas, according to local media.

The five students who achieved O’Level scores categorised as some of the “highest in the world” were presented with a prize and newly created presidential medal by President Waheed.

Additionally, 426 students achieved local top 10 rankings, meaning they achieved high scores in various subjects compared to other test takers in the Maldives.

“The number of students who passed five subjects was at 46 percent last year, whilst in 2011 it was at 37 percent,” said Education Minister Dr Asim Ahmed.

Receiving a ‘C’ or above in five subjects is considered a pass.

The the number of students who passed eight subjects increased two percent, from 17 in 2011 to 19 percent in 2012.

Overall 8,456 students in the Maldives participated in the 2012 exams, an increase from 6,100 in 2011.

Announcement of marks delayed

Preliminary results for the 2012’s Cambridge O’Level examination were not released sooner due to “difficulties” in analysis, the Ministry of Education said earlier this year, despite claiming “one of the highest pass rates to date”.

O’Level exams began in early October and concluded in late November 2012, the Education Ministry’s Department of Examinations (DPE) Director General Ibrahim Shakeeb told Minvian News.

“This is just how the process is; 90 days after the final exam session the preliminary results are available. Candidates can then ask to have their marks rechecked, which takes about a month,” Shakeeb explained.

“Students have a week or two to apply for rechecking, once the [preliminary] results are issued,” he continued. “Then the exams are sent to Cambridge.”

Preliminary O’Level exam results were issued to students at the end of January 2013.

“There were quite a large number of requests for rechecking, so it took Cambridge over a month to respond,” said Shakeeb.

“Final results are only issued after the recheck is complete. Cambridge does not release results country by country, rather [marks] are released online, globally,” he noted.

“Three to four months for the process to be completed is the norm,” he added.

Shakeeb told Minivan News earlier this year that the recheck process was ongoing and estimated it would be completed around late March.

Students are currently “in the middle” of the A’Level exam period, which began May 7 and will conclude June 24, according to Shakeeb.

Former Education Minister Shifa Mohamed previously claimed it was a change in Ministry of Education practice for preliminary O’Level results not to be publicly disclosed prior to the final results.

Preliminary Cambridge exam results arrive in January or February, with little difference between these and the final results, she explained.

“Analysis of these findings should only require three days,” Shifa said at the time.

Previous education policies

“The current government would not have been able to do anything in the period of time between coming to power [Febuary 2012] and when students sat for the exams [October 2012],” former Education Minister Dr Musthafa Luthfy told Minivan News today.

“The high exam pass percentage rate is due to what we did when we were in government,” he claimed. “Before us, there was no target set.”

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) had aimed to raise O’Level pass rates from 27 to 60 percent in five years by implementing a holisitc educational policy involving multiple strategies, Luthfee explained.

The quality of Maldives school education and exam pass rates will continue to improve if the current administration abides by the policy guidelines put in place by the MDP government, he emphasised.

“There are several strategies which should be included in all aspects of education. Working on one aspect will not improve exam scores or educational quality,” said Luthfee.

“We rapidly established single session schooling for 55 percent of institutions to provide children the opportunity to engage in opportunities outside of the classroom and develop their character through extracurricular activities,” he explained. “This enabled improved student discipline and motivation.”

“Educational standards were also improved, by developing ‘smart school’ indicators to assess teachers, school authorities, and the Education Ministry,” he continued. “Previously there were no assessment standards.”

“Educational management – classroom and school – was enhanced, which included institutionalising mandatory inservice teacher training each term,” he added. “The education system was also decentralised, and school boards were developed to bring parents into the decision making process, which improved teacher and parent motivation.”

“We also supported private higher education and established the Maldives National University (MNU),” said Luthfy.

He claimed these policies have not been maintained under Waheed’s administration.

“This year there was no money to continue the single session schooling,” Luthfy said.

“If they continue to dismantle the strategies we’ve set, exam results will not continue to improve,” he noted. “However, if they abide by these strategies then quality of education and motivation will continue to increase.”

“The vigour of the policy program made the public aware of the importance of education and the importance of exam pass rates, as well as other educational aspects,” he declared.

The Education Ministry was not responding to enquiries at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP alleges 117 cases filed against February 8 2012 protesters “politically motivated”

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has called for “politically motivated” court cases against 117 protesters charged with terrorism and obstructing police duty on February 8 2012 be immediately discontinued.

Nine MDP members from Milandhoo Island in Shaviyani Atoll, 28 members from Kulhudhuffushi Island in Haa Dhaal Atoll and 80 members from Addu City are currently facing prosecution. The accused include mid-Hithadhoo Constituency MP Mohamed ‘Matrix Mode’ Rasheed as well as a number of councilors and branch heads from these islands.

“A lot of the accused [currently standing trial] were charged with terrorism offences and obstructing police duty,” said MDP Spokesperson and MP Imthiyaz ‘Inthi’ Fahmy.

The MDP “condemned, in strong terms, these cases of unlawful and blatant granting of selective impunity from justice and calls on all concerned authorities to immediately cease this selective litigation,” during a press conference held May 20, led by Imthiyaz and MDP pro-bono lawyers Abdullah Haseen and Mohamed Fareed.

The party said it regarded the “discriminatory” prosecutions as being politically motivated, biased judicial actions against hundreds of MDP members, and “outside the requisite edicts of the Constitution for judicial fairness and equability.”

The political party also voiced their “great concern” that despite the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) findings that “unlawful brutal acts” were committed by security services in February 2012, the report’s recommendations that actions be taken against the offenders have been “disregarded with impunity”.

“Why doesn’t the government take action against those police officers when there is clear evidence of police brutality? None of the police officers have been investigated or prosecuted in line with the CoNI,” said Imthiyaz.

The MDP alleged that “despite public irrefutable and credibly substantiated video and audio evidence showing security services personnel committing brutal assaults and inflicting inhuman bashings”, no credible investigations or judicial actions have been taken.

Current court cases against MDP members had meanwhile been “unduly hastened”.

“The police were seen to participate in a mutiny and they have openly and publicly viewed their opposition and hatred towards the MDP,” MDP Spokesperson Mohamed Zuhair told Minivan News at the press conference.

“As police investigation reports make up a substantive part of the legal cases being brought against MDP activists, how can these investigations be fair when police have been publicly on the record as biased and downright malicious [toward MDP supporters],” he continued.

“The MDP came out in a peaceful protest on the 8th, on the roads of Male’, and they were bashed up,” Zuhair said. “Our activists on the islands heard this and that escalated tensions on many islands where there are police stations. And then it became a kind of public uprising.”

“Within that public uprising, our activists’ primary objective was to rally and to somehow show strength, but among those came in other elements, [who] set fire to places, and then escalated the whole thing,” he added.

Zuhair said given the state of the judiciary justice for the accused was not possible, “but we’ll have better recourse to due process through the high court and supreme court and through international redress.”

No grounds to prosecute

The trials were being conducted to “intimidate the people” because elections are “very near” and the entire process was politicised, MDP lawyer Haseen told Minivan News.

“They demanded the suspects be kept in remand claiming they had forensic evidence. And then when they’re produced in court, there is no forensic evidence or video footage submitted, only witness statements,” Haseen explained.

“They are telling the press they have the evidence and highlighting a lot of photographs with fire, but they are not submitting these – just witness statements given by rival political parties,” he said.

Haseen claimed senior Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) officials pointed out to the police who to arrest and were now providing the witness statements against the MDP protesters in court.

“The problem is that even the island judges are not competent judges. They don’t even know criminal procedure. That’s a larger fight that we are building our campaign with that on top – journey for justice,” Haseen added.

MDP lawyer Fareed concurred with Haseen that it is a “politically motivated conflict of interest” to have police and former-opposition political parties provide the only evidence – witness statements – against the MDP members on trial.

“There are not any grounds for prosecution,” Fareed told Minivan News.

He attended three hearings in Kulhudhuffushi, which took place May 19, against 11 MDP members, including two island councilors, and was also dismayed by how witness statements were taken.

“The court they did not have a recording system, so the judge he himself was writing the witness statements in favor of the state. It was very terrible,” Fareed recounted.

“When the first witness was presented, I asked him directly ‘were you there when these  things happened?’ and he replied ‘this is after one year so I don’t remember these things’.”

“That’s all that’s enough – whatever the witness says after that is not applicable, not acceptable,” he declared.

“When the prosecutor asked him [the same question], the witness said ‘That man may be there but I don’t know,’ however the judge himself had already written the witness statement in favor of the prosecution,” he added.

“If they continue this hearing, they should have a recording system otherwise we’ll have to stop it,” Fareed concluded.

“All courts have recorders”

Kulhudhuffushi Court Magistrate Ali Adam explained to Minivan News today (May 23) that “all courts have recorders”.

“When dealing with criminal cases we try to write witness statements, it is the best way,” said Adam. “Recordings can be changed or edited. There might be court staff who hold certain political ideologies who might tamper with the statements.”

“When listening to a witness statement a judge will only write relevant remarks and things related to the accused’s rights. The witness then signs the hand-written statement,” explained Adam.

“We do not consider anyone standing trial as a criminal. How can we face a person thinking he’s an enemy? We do not consider the individual’s personality or which political party he is in,” he added.

The Prosecutor General, PG spokesperson, and PPM MPs Ahmed Nihan and Ahmed Mahlouf were not responding at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police deny arresting 50 Addu City residents prior to president’s visit

The Maldives’ Police Service has denied arresting approximately 50 people – primarily Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters – the night prior to President Mohamed Waheed’s arrival in Addu City yesterday (May 8).

President Waheed visited Addu to inaugurated the Hulhumeedhoo road development project,  open the Hulhudhoo pharmacy and inaugurate higher secondary education at Seenu Atoll School, according to the President’s Office.

During the ceremony for the former Dr Waheed “highlighted the importance of developing roads on the bigger islands for the development of the atoll. In this regard, the President said the government’s aim was to complete such developmental endeavors without any interruptions.”

Addu City Mayor Abdulla Sodig told Minivan News the night before Waheed’s arrival close to 50 people were arrested, “and about 90 percent of those taken in were MDP supporters”.

“The police knew who had been actively engaged in [MDP] demonstrations and targeted those individuals. Those who were arrested were having coffee in restaurants, standing having a chat outside, others were stopped at vehicle checkpoints. They were arrested for allegedly being ‘a member of a gang’,” he added.

A few of the individuals arrested were released after one or two hours, according to Sodig.

“People know this game because it was the game [former President Maumoon] Gayoom played. They know they were arrested because of Waheed’s visit,” Sodig said.

“Police probably purposefully did this negative campaign. But Waheed’s game has backfired. Families of the arrested individuals are really angry and frustrated,” he added.

As part of an ongoing police operation in Addu to “keep the peace”, “lots of people were taken into custody and were released after their information was collected”, the Police Media Official who spoke with Minivan News today (May 9) initially stated.

The official then refuted the statement, claiming that only one person was arrested in Addu City on May 7.

The official confirmed that being “arrested” and “taken into custody” have the “same meaning”.

However, a police media official told local media outlet CNM that “people assembled in groups and other suspects were taken in for questioning last night. He said that they were all released except for one who is being held for issuing a death threat to a policeman.”

Mayor Sodig explained that the Addu City Council was not notified about this ‘special operation’.

“Normally the commander(s) visit and explain the details when a special operation is going to take place,” Sodig said. “During last week’s fortnightly meeting [with the council] the police did not mention such an operation was planned.”

“The [city] council is gravely concerned by these developments,” Sodig told local media.

Approximately 30 were arrested from Hithadhoo Island, more than 10 from Feydhoo Island and around 10 from Maradhoo Island, all part of Addu City’s administrative district, according to local media.

These arrests were made under the “’Our Peaceful Addu City” operation, which has been continued by the police services to make the atoll “crime free”.

Police ‘star force’ out of control

“Addu City has the largest population outside of Male’ [approximately 35,000 people], as well as a very large land area, and so much is happening now,” Sodig explained. “We have to have a police presence not only in namesake or to run the desks, but enough to oversee the whole area.”

“Usually there are 15 to 20 police officers in each of the three stations in the area, however this is not enough, so we requested the police provide extra strength to increase numbers to about 30 per station,” he continued.

“The special operations team [responded by] sending their ‘star force’, but they don’t have their commander here. He’s not in control of this group or operations. Instead they are directly overseen by Male’ command,” said Sodig.

“That’s the reason why we don’t want them to continue,” he declared.

The task force consisting of 50 special operations police was started in January 17, 2013 and was supposed to end April 17, according to Sodig. However, the entire special operations force has remained in Addu City, targeting those allegedly involved in drug and gang issues.

“Dream on Waheed”: Sodig

During Waheed’s visit to Addu City, he stated that the Maldives not only has two ideologies – Islamic and anti-Islamic – but a third “ideology of unity” which was evident in Addu City.

He made the remarks after seeing a “Unity Jagaha” (campaign office) on Hulhumeedhoo Island in Addu, according to local media.

Last month President of the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and former president, Maumoon Gayoom, claimed the Maldives was now dominated by people belonging to the “Islamic” ideology and those belonging to the “anti-Islamic” ideology.

Waheed also said that prior to his visit to Addu, “he had received information that a certain group was ‘very strong’ in Addu City, however, his team received greater support than he had expected.”

Waheed was informed that MDP support in Addu was very strong, but that’s not what he has seen, according to Mayor Sodig.

“Dream on Waheed,” Sodig declared. “He doesn’t have much support here, it is not close to [former President Mohamed] Nasheed, Maumoon, or [Abdulla] Yameen supporters.”

Sodig explained that paid government employees were ordered to receive Waheed at the airport, which is abnormal.

“This is the game Mamoon played during his [30 year] term,” said Sodig. “During Nasheed’s government this kind of thing never happened.”

“There were only 100 or 200 people to receive Waheed. There were some supporters from his united coalition with Adhaalath Party (AP) and Yameen supporters. However, people from all government agencies in the area, all paid staff, were told to receive him,” Sodig said.

“This includes senior government officials, senior civil servants – informed by the Civil Service Commission, all the schools’ senior management and non-teaching staff – issued a letter from the Education Ministry, southern utilities company staff, as well as airport and customs staff,” he claimed.

According to Sodig, currently 70 percent of Addu City’s electoral ‘dhaaira’ (constituency) are MDP supporters, and the party is close to reaching their goal of signing 80 percent of the population.

“At the moment, [we know] from door to door campaigning, MDP has more than a 60 to 70 percent support base, while 20 to 30 percent of the population is undecided,” said Sodig.

“In my area we only need 200 or 300 extra votes to reach that target [of 80 percent]. It’s achievable for sure,” he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Presidential candidates’ policy pledges threaten the environment: Environment Ministry

The Environment Ministry has ‘called out’ presidential candidates for making election pledges that threaten the environment, amidst civil society calls for government authorities to support NGOs’ sustainable development initiatives.

Environment Minister Dr Mariyam Shakeela noted that no policy on environmental protection has been articulated by candidates despite their numerous election pledges during her speech at the “NGO Forum on Environment and Sustainable Development 2013” held by the Environment Ministry and NGO Federation yesterday (May 5).

“Although all political parties are currently talking about their plans to govern the country for the next five years, none of their manifestos include policies on protecting the environment,” local media reported Shakeela saying.

“When you deeply consider these policies, I certainly haven’t heard of any plans to protect the environment. But on the other hand, we keep hearing of plans that can seriously threaten the environment of the Maldives,” she added.

Shakeela stated that despite the economic benefits which could be gained from finding oil or establishing a mariculture industry, these policies could pose grave threats to the environment, according to local media.

“Sometimes, although these plans gain a short-term gain, or some amount of money, they may cause great damages in the long run. It is very important that we give this due consideration,” said Shakeela.

Shakeela emphasised that civil society must hold the Maldivian government and policy-makers accountable when they “veer off course” and endanger the environment.

“Regardless of who prepares it, if the plans are such that they may harm the environment, it is the role of the civil society organizations to be vigilant over such matters and try to stop them,” declared Shakeela.

She also stressed that civil society organisations must identify the environmental threats posed by such policies on the behalf of Maldivian people.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has pledged to develop a mariculture industry in the country should former President Mohamed Nasheed be reelected in September 2013.

The potential for developing a domestic oil industry was launched as a campaign issue during a January 14 speech by Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) presidential prospect, MP Abdulla Yameen.

Leader of the government-aligned Jumhoree Party (JP), business tycoon MP Gasim Ibrahim, has also vowed to find oil in the Maldives should he be elected president.

NGOs issue government recommendations

The NGO forum was held to facilitate environmental protection discussions between civil society organisations, as well as implementation of sustainable development methodologies and policies.

“This is the only forum of this kind. Civil society did not previously get the opportunity to come together and discuss these issues,” NGO Federation President Ahmed Nizam told Minivan News yesterday (May 6).

Many NGOs work on environmental issues at the island and national level – particularly conducting advocacy and awareness programs – however they do not conduct adequate work on environment and sustainable development, according to forum participants.

Participants highlighted ongoing issues that narrow the opportunities available for Maldivian NGOs, which include legal challenges as well as government administrative procedures. NGOs also lack access to resources, such as well educated people and finance.

Given these limitations, the 15 participating civil society organisations presented a list of recommendations to the government, in line with the forum’s theme of enhancing NGO engagement in environmental governance and management.

The forum recommended the government provide NGOs with equal opportunities and “reveal their stand” to the organisations.

Participants also recommended the Environment Ministry establish a separate focal point to engage with NGOs and provide a common room for civil society organisations within the “green building” currently under construction for the ministry. Research grants for NGOs and environmental studies students should also be provided.

Organisations further recommended the government include NGO representatives in all delegations from the Maldives attending environmental and sustainable development meetings. These organisations also requested the government provide Maldivian NGOs opportunities to participate in environmental and sustainable development projects.

“Minister Shakeela’s response to the recommendations was very positive. She pledged to do everything possible to implement the recommendations,” said Nizam.

“However, she also said certain things might not be possible to implement immediately due to budget and planning constraints,” he added.

Nizam explained that the NGO Federation plans to take the discussion forum to a “different level” by ensuring dialogue and collaboration on environmental protection and sustainable protection continues.

He emphasised that the NGO Federation aims to hold conferences annually or biannually and will continuously seek improvement and additional NGO participation.

The Maldivian NGO Federation held a follow-up workshop today on NGO capacity building for advocating environmentally sustainable development, a project funded by UNDP’s Global Environment Facility, Small Grants Programme.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Sacked Human Rights Minister sues Speaker Shahid for role in alleged “coup d’état”

Former SAARC Secretary General and dismissed Human Rights Minister Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed has filed a lawsuit against the Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid over his decision in February 2012 to declare the presidency vacant.

The suit also asks the court to declare illegitimate the transfer of power following former President Mohamed Nasheed’s controversial resignation.

Saeed, along with her associates, previously attempted to file a similar case at the High Court requesting it rule that former President Mohamed Nasheed’s resignation was obtained under duress.

The group of attorneys claimed that following their assessment of the events that led to the former president’s controversial resignation, several legal inconsistencies and lapses that suggested the transfer of power took place illegally.

However the High Court refused to accept the case claiming that it did not have jurisdiction to look into the matter. However, Dhiyana had at the time contended that she was of the view that High Court did have the jurisdiction.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed resigned following a 22-day continuous anti-government protest led by religious scholars and opposition leaders with the backing of mutinying police and military officers, that began in mid-January 2012. The protest flared after Nasheed’s controversial detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed.

Following his resignation, Nasheed claimed to have been forced to resign under duress, and declared that his government had been toppled in a bloodless coup d’etat.

According to Saeed, the new Civil Court case was a modified version of the case first rejected by the High Court. She also announced the case had been accepted by the Civil Court.

Saeed told Haveeru that it was fundamental in a democratic society for people to have the right to cast their vote. She claimed that people had elected Nasheed for a term of five years, and forcing him to prematurely submit his resignation in a coercive environment was disregarding the right for people to vote and elect their ruler.

Prior to declaring that this right had been grossly disregarded, she argued that it was important for the court declare that President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s ascension to presidency was illegal and that his government therefore was illegitimate.

Speaker’s role

Speaker Shahid recently defected from the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) to Nasheed’s MDP and is currently actively campaigning for Nasheed’s bid for the presidency in 2013.

However Dhiyana Saeed stated that Shahid was the person under the Article 121 of the constitution who was to declare vacant of the office of president, should an incumbent president resign or vacate the office.

“It was the Speaker of Parliament who declared the office of president vacant, be it had he done it knowingly, mistakenly or unknowingly,” Saeed told Haveeru. “This doesn’t mean Shahid committed a criminal offense. It also does not mean that he partook in the events or that he made the decision [maliciously].”

She further contended that Speaker Shahid had failed to look into the circumstances surrounding Nasheed’s resignation before making the declaration.

Saeed told Minivan News on Sunday that she and the counsel have “stopped short of asking for Nasheed’s reinstatement”, claiming that she did not have “the locus standi to ask for a particular relief”.

“If the ruling comes in our favour, it might be possible for Nasheed to institute a second proceeding for reinstatement. As far as this case is concerned, our interest is in the rule of law and invoking constitutional process to uphold the legal order as stipulated by the constitution,” Saeed told Minivan News.

Dhiyana Saeed, formerly a member of current President Mohamed Waheed’s cabinet and one of the earliest critics of Nasheed’s decision to detain Judge Abdulla, has also released a personal memoir explaining her interpretation of Waheed’s ascension to power. In the memoir, Saeed alleged that Nasheed’s political rivals had conspired to assassinate him.

Saeed alleged that the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7 was the result of a premeditated and well-orchestrated plan, and questioned the findings of the Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), which had declared that there was no coup and Nasheed had resigned voluntarily.

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee’s review of the report revealed several concerns including omission of key evidence and witness statements.

Chair of Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee, MP Ali Waheed, claimed the August 2012 report produced by the CNI was “flawed” based on the findings of the committee.

He added that many interviewed by the committee claimed the CNI report lacked “key information they had given [the CNI panel]” while “others claimed their information was wrongly presented”.

Parliamentary review

To support its claims, the parliamentary select committee released audio recordings of all the statements given by the witnesses. These included former police and military chiefs and officers, who claimed that Nasheed had no option but to resign.

Leaked statements to the CNI given by key witnesses of the events, including senior police and military officials, also suggested that the transfer of power took place illegitimately.

In the transcript of the statement given to CNI by MNDF Staff Sergeant Shafraz Naeem – the commander of the riot squad of the Bandara Koshi (BK) Battalion on the day – said that he also believed that Nasheed was ousted in a coup.

“In my view this was a coup. Why? I could see it from the way they handled everything, their attitude, how cool and calm all the officers were. I could tell from how cool General Shiyam was inside the MNDF. They did nothing. This is not how a uniformed officer should behave,” he told the CNI.

Meanwhile former President Nasheed told the CNI that he was forced to resign, as he believed his life was at stake on February 7 if he did not.

“In essence, my statement is very small. I was forced to resign. I resigned under duress. I was threatened. If I did not resign within a stipulated period it would endanger mine and my family’s life. I understood they were going to harm a number of other citizens, party members. They were going to literally sack the town. I felt that I had no other option, other than to resign,” he said.

On September 2012, following the release of the report, a legal analysis of the CNI’s report by a team of high-profile Sri Lankan legal professionals – including the country’s former Attorney General concluded that the report was “selective”, “flawed”, and “exceeded its mandate”.

“The report offends the fundamental tenets of natural justice, transparency and good governance, including the right to see adverse material, which undermines the salutary tenets of the Rule of Law,” observed the report.

The Sri Lankan legal team also contended that “there is evidence to demonstrate that there was in fact adequate evidence to suggest that duress (or even ‘coercion’ and/ or illegal coercion as used by CNI) is attributable to the resignation of President Nasheed.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives divided by “Islamic” and “anti-Islamic”: former President Gayoom

President of the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and former president, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, has claimed the Maldives now dominated by people belonging to the “Islamic” ideology and those belonging to the “anti-Islamic” ideology.

Gayoom’s remarks come shortly after public outrage over former President Mohamed Nasheed’s allegedly “laadheenee”(secular) remarks made during the speech he gave at the University of Copenhagen on the subject of the economics of climate change.

During his address, Nasheed stated the Maldivian population had largely rejected Islamic extremism, and, in a veiled reference to the Adhaalath Party, noted that “the Islamists were never a credible electoral threat.”

Following the speech, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP) and Gayoom’s own party PPM issued statements condemning the remarks Nasheed had made.

Subsequently, a protest was launched by a group of hundreds – thought largely to represent supporters of the government-aligned AP – who in certain cases called to “hang Nasheed to death”.

AP last month publicly pledged its support to President Waheed by announcing plans to form a coalition with his Gaumee Iththihaadh Party (GIP) ahead of elections scheduled for September this year.

Anti-Islamic, anti-national

During a dinner held at Nasandhura Palace Hotel on Monday (April 29) night, Gayoom claimed that those belonging to the laadheenee ideology operated as a foreign organisation to change the country, and that Maldivians needed to decide on where they stood.  The comments were made at a dinner to honour the services of his Gayoom’s daughter Yumna Maumoon, who had resigned from the secretary general position of the PPM.

The former President, who ruled the Maldives unopposed for six consecutive five-year presidential terms, claimed many people believed the country had two political ideologies.

Gayoom added that in his view, these two ideologies were that of those who stood up for Islam and the nation and those who did not.

“These are the two options left on our table. We need to choose from one of these ideologies. We are, by the will of Allah, those who uphold the nation and Islam. PPM represents the aspirations of a nationalistic Islamic state. It is also the same aspirations represented by those who support PPM,” Gayoom said. “Those who are at the other end are anti-national and anti-Islamic people. They are attempting to install their own views among us, trying to transform us into the West.”

Gayoom further alleged that those standing by the anti-Islamic ideology wanted to destroy the independence and sovereignty of the Maldivian people, and “put the country in control of an anti-Islamic organisation”.

“We really need to understand and comprehend this fact. We have to carry out a lot of hard work to prove that our nation comes first, for the sake of this country, for the sake of our beloved people,” he stressed.

Gayoom contended that should the people of the Maldives fail to defend the country from anti-Islamic forces, it would mean the slowly beginning of “imported cultures” that the country was unfamiliar with.

“They will try to bring in another culture. A culture that we are not familiar with, a culture that represents anti-national, anti-religious beliefs and ideologies,” he added.

During his speech, Gayoom also emphasised the importance of ensuring that his half brother Yameen Abdul Gayoom was elected president in September.

Criticism

Both Gayoom’s PPM and the religious conservative Adhaalath Party have attacked Nasheed for his remarks in Denmark.

The Adhaalath Party claimed that Nasheed had misled the Danish audience on extremism in the Maldives.

“Nasheed misled them about the party he fears and envies most, the Adhaalath Party. Nasheed knows very well that the Adhaalath Party is not a party that has no power and influence, unlike what he said in Denmark,” read the party’s statement.

The party accused Nasheed of “placing idols” in Maldivian lands – a reference to the SAARC monuments gifted to the country by other South Asian nations during the 2011 SAARC Summit hosted in Addu Atoll – and of “giving our assets to foreigners” – a reference to the concession agreement to manage and upgrade the international airport granted to Indian firm GMR.

In his address, the former President acknowledged that there was “a lot of xenophobia, Islamic rhetoric and intolerance going on in the Maldives”, and noted the destruction of 12-century Buddhist statues, manuscripts, and other evidence of the Maldives’ pre-Islamic history.

“The vast majority of our society very tolerant people. If all this Islamist rhetoric is removed from official discourse, there will be a much more liberal society. I assure you the rhetoric will be removed from official discourse,” he said.

The Adhaalath Party meanwhile expressed astonishment “that there are a few Maldivians joining [Nasheed] in his work to get another chance to brainwash the Maldivian people. God willing Mohamed Nasheed will not be able to come to power ever again,” the party said.

“Nasheed shamed the nation”: PPM

The PPM similarly condemned Nasheed, claiming his remarks about Islam would disgrace the Maldives in front of other Islamic states.

The party further claimed that it was totally unacceptable for a Muslim to claim that there lay a need for an alternative Quran and the Hadith.

“A former president of a 100 percent Islamic nation speaking in such a fashion, abusing the religion of Islam and mocking Prophet Muhammed is a derogatory act that brings disgrace to the country in front of other Islamic nations,” read the statement.

The PPM alleged that Nasheed during his time as the president had spoken against certain principles of Islam in the bid to appease non-Muslims, such as allowing SAARC nations to gift monuments to the Maldives.

“Bringing a person like Nasheed back to power will be the worst decision people of this country will make, as it will be a huge blow struck against the nation and Islam,” the PPM contended.

Sold out Islam to bring about a coup, says Nasheed

In response to the remarks made by his political rivals, Nasheed addressing a rally held in the island of Bilehdhoo in Faafu Atoll on Sunday night,  claimed that politicians who disguised themselves as religious scholars had “sold out Islam” to topple his democratic government on February 2012.

“There is no greater sin in Islam than to orchestrate a coup,” Nasheed claimed.

“Wearing hats of sheikhs and religious scholars, they have committed a huge sin, an act which is absolutely haram. Today, this country has a haram government. Being a 100 percent Muslim country, we must not let them continue carrying out this haram act in front of our eyes. God willing, we will win this presidential election in one round,” he added.

During his speech, Nasheed spoke of the rhetoric used by political parties had against his administration prior to the contentious transfer of power in February 2012.

“In their ploy to topple our government, they spoke of two things. One is that it was for the sake of religion. In this context, one issue they raised was that the management of Ghiyasudheen School [in Male’] included foreigners. Meanwhile, we can clearly see that even here the principal is a foreigner, the teachers are foreigners.”

“After having preached this against Ghiyasudheen School, today it is the children of these religious scholars who are enrolled to study in that school. [Adhaalath Party MP] Muhthalib’s child goes to that school. The Supreme Court Judges’ children also go to that school. All the religious scholars have their children enrolled in this school, and this is because it is a school where the educational standards are very high,” Nasheed said.

“They toppled our government because we were establishing that school, and yet today their children are enrolled there,” he claimed.

“Maldivians have never accepted that religious scholars should get entangled in worldly political matters. They are pious, righteous people who should be advising people like us on religious matters. It will not do when today they themselves are coming out and drafting laws to govern massage parlours,” Nasheed said.

“All of this is clear to us Maldivians now: a coup d’etat was brought about in the Maldives, and this coup was orchestrated by selling out the religion of Islam.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Candidates to file for presidential election on July 15: Elections Commission

Candidates for the upcoming presidential elections scheduled for September 7 will be invited to file their candidacy with the Elections Commission (EC) from July 15, the commission has stated.

Along with opposition leader former President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), leaders of several political parties currently aligned with the current government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan – including the incumbent – have publicly announced they will be competing for the office.

Leader of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, Leader of the Jumhoree Party (JP) and business tycoon MP Gasim Ibrahim and Parliamentary Group Leader of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), MP Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom – who won the party’s controversial presidential primary beating rival Umar Naseer – have publicly announced their bids for the presidency.

Speaking Minivan News on Sunday, President of the EC Fuad Thaufeeq said that the opening of the candidacies was not a “new announcement” as the constitution required the commission to announce the presidential election 120 days prior to the end of the current presidential term, which expires in November 2013. Therefore, he said the opportunity to file for formal candidacy needed to be opened on July 15.

“From July 15, all prospective candidates will get a 10-day period to file their candidacy with us. This period will include public holidays as well. So the due date to file candidacy will be July 24,” he said.

According to Thaufeeq, the commission has begun preparations for the presidential poll and is currently working on finalising “regulations” concerning the election which he claimed would be completed within a week’s time.

During the period in which the commission opened the regulation for public commenting, the EC president said it had received significant support from major political parties including the MDP, PPM and DRP.

Apart from the political parties, Thaufeeq also said that local NGO Transparency Maldives had also given very “constructive comments” on the draft regulation.

Transparency recently published a comprehensive pre-election assessment, highlighting vote-buying, political polarisation, and credibility as critical challenges for the 2013 elections.

The election was set to take place “against a context of uncertainty, crises of political legitimacy and unprecedented levels of political polarisation,” the NGO noted.

The Elections Commission has meanwhile revealed that this year’s presidential elections – which will be the country’s second multiparty presidential poll since the formation of political parties in 2005 – will see 31,000 new voters casting their vote.

According to the statistics from the commission, the total number of eligible voters for the election stands at 240,302 – 31,008 more than the number of eligible voters in the 2008 presidential elections (209,294).

The commission in March also opened registration for voters who are currently not residing on the island where they are initially registered to vote, in a bid to increase voter turnout for the 2013 election.

According to the statistics published at the commission’s website, voter turnout for the first round of the 2008 Presidential Elections stood at 85.38 percent with a slight rise in the second round of polling, at 85.58 percent.

The President is elected through a universal suffrage ballot where a candidate must obtain a minimum margin of 50 percent plus 1 vote to secure an election victory. Should any of the candidate contesting in the election failed to get the required number of votes, a run-off election is held after a 20-day period contested by the two candidates with the largest share of votes, to decide the winner.

Former President and the opposition MDP’s presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed predicted that he would win the election in the first round while the remaining government-aligned candidates have maintained the winner of the elections will be decided in a run-off election, where losing parties form coalitions with either of the two remaining candidates.

Despite the claim, the opposition MDP have claimed that they do not plan to go into a power-sharing coalition with parties, elaborating that coalition governments were incompatible with the country’s presidential system of governance.

Nasheed – who was elected as the President in 2008 with the backing of then-coalition of parties “Wathan Edhey Gothah Iththihaadh” which fell apart within the first year of his presidency – previously claimed that he along with all political leaders of the country had tasted the “bitter lesson” of incompatibility of coalition governments and described that the idea of coalition governments contrasted with the spirit of the constitution.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)