Tag: MDP

MDP Parliamentary Group call for Gasim’s removal from JSC

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs have called for the removal of opposition Jumhoory Party (JP) leader and MP ‘Burma’ Gasim Ibrahim from the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) – the commission mandated to appoint and investigate complaints against judges.

Gasim is a well-known business tycoon, media owner and leader of the opposition-aligned Jumhoree Party (JP). He was in 2010 accused by the government of treason and bribery after phone calls of his conversations with People’s Alliance MP and the former President’s half-brother Abdulla Yameen were leaked to the media.

Gasim replaced opposition Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Afrashim Ali on the JSC, after Afrashim was dismissed by parliament 38-34 in favour amid claims of misconduct and corruption. Gasim was then narrowly appointed to the judicial watchdog after 38 members of of the 77 member parliament voted in his favour, to 36 against.

Former President’s Member on the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, observed at the time that Gasim “is a man of wealth, and every seat he has ever sat on has benefited him. We can expect the same from the JSC. I don’t think anyone is under any other impression. The people’s representatives have sold out to the devil, and this is a very sad day.”

DRP Deputy Leader Ibrahim Shareef also expressed reservations at the time, suggesting the Gasim’s extensive business interests could prove a potential conflict of interest when overseeing the Maldivian justice system: “That is a real possibility. I think the judiciary must be totally free from political influence. We have to see how this unfolds – this is a small country and it is hard to have complete impartiality.”

“What is required is sincerity. We need to build a judiciary that is competent, efficient and capable of delivering justice,” Shareef told Minivan News in June 2011.

Speaking at an MDP rally today, several MDP MPs and senior figures accused Gasim and Speaker of the Parliament Abdulla Shahid – both of whom are members of the JSC representing parliament – of not fulfilling their legal duties on the committee.

The MDP called on Gasim and Shahid to carry out the responsibilities at the JSC and conclude cases presented against Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, to end the current political tensions in Male’. The JSC’s investigation of the judge stalled after the Civil Court issued an injunction to its own watchdog body, which the JSC obeyed.

The MDP Parliamentary Group expressed concern that the judicial watchdog was defunct while the situation of the country was deteriorating, accusing the JSC of taking no action against the judge which had allowed him “to destroy the entire judiciary.”

Speaking to Minivan News, Spokesperson for MDP Parliamentary Group’s Mohamed Shifaz said that they had not officially decided to remove Gasim.

”What we want most is a professional JSC. If removing unprofessional persons to professionalise the JSC is the only way then we will do it,” Shifaz said. ”It is possible that the MDP Parliamentary Group will make such a decision.”

He said that JSC members attending protests and trying to defend a particular judge was not very professional.

”I believe that JSC members protesting is an ethical issue,” he said, in reference to Gasim who has been a key opposition figure throughout last week’s rallies in Male’.

Speaking at the MDP rally last night, MDP Chairperson and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik said that the citizens of the Maldives handed the administration to President Mohamed Nasheed to establish justice.

Gasim did not respond to calls and text messages at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MNDF dismiss High Court order to produce Judge Abdulla Mohamed

The High Court has ordered the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) to produce Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed for the hearing of the case appealed by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), following the Civil Court injunction preventing the JSC from taking action against Judge Abdulla over an ethical issue.

High Court Spokesperson Ameen Faisal told Minivan News that the High Court had ordered the MNDF to produce Judge Abdulla to the court at 4:15pm today, but said the MNDF had dismissed the order. Under the Maldivian Constitution the MNDF is answerable to the President, who serves as Commander-in-Chief.

”At 4:15pm the hearing was to be conducted but the presiding  judge decided that the case could not be conducted in the absence of Judge Abdulla and cancelled the hearing,” Ameen said.

MNDF Spokesperson Major Abdul Raheem told Minivan News that the MNDF had no comment on the matter.

The MNDF was previously ordered to produce Judge Abdulla Mohamed to dispute the legality of his detention, however the MNDF did not respond to any orders.

Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested by the 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 has acknowledged receipt but not replied to Supreme Court orders to release the judge.

Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz lately joined the High and Supreme Courts in condemning MNDF’s role in the arrest as unlawful, and requesting that the judge be released.

PG Muizz ordered an investigation by the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM), and will evaluate the situation following the commission’s findings.

Lawyers of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed has requested the Supreme Court not to hear any case related to Judge Abdulla before the court decide on the request made by the lawyers to issue a writ to free the judge.

Former President’s Member of the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, has contended that while the government cannot keep the judge detained indefinitely without conducting an investigation, “releasing him is a threat to security.”

I have heard Vice President Mohamed Waheed Hassan calling for him to be released. Abdulla Mohamed is not under arrest – but his freedom of movement and communication would be a danger at this moment. We are at the point where we really and truly need to get to the bottom of this and act upon the constitution,” she told Minivan News.

“We talking about cleaning up the judiciary, and this is not talking outside the constitution – this is the foundation of the constitution. The constitution is build upon having three separate powers. The judiciary is perhaps the most important power. The other powers come and go, politics change, but the judiciary is the balancing act. When that is out of balance, action is necessary.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Citizen sheep

A Maldivian chronicler once recounted an anecdote of the late Prince Hassan Farid Didi who remarked back in the 1930’s that granting democracy to Maldivians is like giving a handkerchief to a monkey. “The monkey doesn’t know what a handkerchief is used for and soon it will wipe its bottom with it,” the Prince reportedly said.

A lot of Maldivians take offense at being compared to primates, but the past few weeks of political volatility has definitely called into question the country’s ability to shoulder the responsibilities of being a democracy.

The current crisis was sparked after the armed forces were commanded to forcibly detain Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed of the Criminal Court, after he ordered the release of two opposition leaders who were being prosecuted for “hate speech”.

The DQP leaders, Dr Jameel and “Sandhaanu” Ahmed Didi, had publicly accused the government of coming under the influence of Jews and Christian missionaries “to destroy Islam”. Religious hyperbole is frequently used for political slander in the Maldives – an unfortunate outcome of the country’s failure to adopt a secular constitution in 2008.

The military detention of the judge has led to a series of increasingly violent, opposition-led street protests in Male’ for the past 10 days. Protesters have allegedly attacked journalists, uprooted trees, damaged public property and vandalised a Minister’s house.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court, High Court, the Opposition parties, the SAARC Secretary General and the Vice President have all spoken out against the detention calling it unconstitutional. Even the Prosecutor General has declared the detention unlawful.

This wouldn’t be the first time President Nasheed has exercised his uncanny willingness to shake things up.

In August 2010, he commanded the armed forces to lock down the Supreme Court after the Interim Supreme Court bench boldly decided to declare itself permanent. Following the siege, the major political parties managed to do some quick backroom negotiations to appoint a new panel of judges.

While the President’s latest salvo has successfully brought into the mainstream public conscious, for the first time, the long ignored issue of the runaway judiciary, it does raise concerns about the Executive setting unwelcome precedents for the future.

Runaway Judiciary

Aishath Velezinee, the former Judicial Services Commission whistle-blower, has publicly alleged that there is a collusion between senior opposition parliamentarians and the judiciary, which exercises undue influence over the JSC.

The JSC, which is supposed to be the independent watchdog of the judiciary, is itself dominated by judges and opposition allied politicians – and its record thus far is less befitting a watchdog, and more indicative of a lap dog.

Velezinee alleges that this is tantamount to a ‘silent coup’, where the judiciary is hijacked by a nexus of corrupt judges and opposition leaders, and the courts are used as an instrument to protect members of the old establishment that was overthrown during the democratic uprising.

The Criminal Court

The charges against Judge Abdulla Mohamed are extremely serious – ranging from corruption, to obstruction of police duties, to questionable judgments and poor professional conduct.

In February 2010, the judge ordered the release of a murder suspect – who would then stab another man to death within the next month.

The judge has in the past demanded that an underage sexual abuse victim re-enact her abuse in the public courtroom. These allegations were first reported in 2005 by then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed, whose political party is now among those leading the charge to release him.

The police have in the past accused the judge of delaying search warrants by several days, allowing major drug traffickers to get away. The Home Minister accuses him ordering the release of suspected criminals “without a single hearing”. He also stands accused of arbitrarily dismissing court officials.

It does not help allegations that the courts are in bed with tainted politicians when the same Criminal Court Judge also bars the media from covering corruption proceedings against opposition-allied Deputy Speaker Nazim.

A February 2011 report released by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) also highlighted the failure of the politicised courts to be impartial in providing justice.

The Rule of Law

While there are obviously dark clouds looming over Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s record, and the state of the judiciary is less than acceptable, does this automatically excuse the executive’s decision to forcibly detain the judge on a whim?

The unilateral actions of the very first democratically elected executive sets a rather poor precedent.

Will it be the case in the future that any elected President can arbitrarily command the armed forces to detain errant officials or citizens without the any court approval, or warrant or legal backing?

Will all future presidents be similarly entrusted to be the ultimate judge of when the Rule of Law can be subverted – if they feel it is in the larger interests of society? Will their judgements always be enforced through the brute force of the military?

The ruling party and the President’s apologists offer the explanation that given the nature of the allegations against Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, and the cartel-like behaviour of the judiciary, drastic action needed to be taken to ensure justice.

Yes, drastic action was indeed required – but did it necessarily need to be initiated from the President’s Office? Does not ultimate power rest with the voting public anymore?

Citizen Sheep

It has proven surprisingly difficult to get the public involved in a debate over the many, many allegations against the judiciary – that less glamorous wing of state power where the primary actors work behind closed doors, hidden from the media limelight.

When former MP and Chairman of the Special Majlis Drafting Committee Ibrahim “Ibra” Ismail expressed alarm in September 2011 over the growing excesses of the judiciary, the Supreme Court fantastically reprimanded him in a press release, asserting that criticising the Courts went “against the principles of civilisation” and that the constitution forbade such criticism.

In a democracy, the power rests with the people. However, Maldivians so far have shown little inclination to hold their state office bearers accountable.

In the neighbouring country of India, tens of thousands of outraged members of the public poured out onto the streets in recent months to protest against corruption in high offices.

The impact of overwhelming public sentiment and the willingness of the Indian public to hold their elected officials accountable worked. Several cabinet ministers and powerful provincial leaders previously thought to be untouchable by law suddenly found themselves behind bars.

Despite their every natural instinct, both opposition and ruling party leaders in India were forced to bend to public will and draft legislation that would create a new constitutional authority – an ombudsman that would be empowered to investigate corruption at the highest levels, including the Prime Minister’s office.

In contrast, the Maldivian public seems to be lethargic, and content with mindlessly echoing whatever slogan is aired by whichever party they happened to plead allegiance to.

Thus, we had ten thousand protesters mindlessly follow their sloganeering political leaders last month to complain about monuments and a host of other trivial non-issues, but there wasn’t a murmur to be heard about the serious charges of corruption and undermining of the judiciary by the same politicians who were on stage blathering about some imagined grief caused by invading Jews.

Pray where were the hordes of MDP loyalists that today defend the President and speak in angry tones against the Criminal Court judge, when the judiciary made a mockery of the constitution throughout the whole fiasco involving the appointment of judges?

Does anyone know the views of the opposition protesters on the state of affairs of the judiciary?

Are they not concerned about the under-qualified, under-educated, and sometimes convicted criminals of poor moral calibre that now occupy the benches of their courts?

If they are worried about the abuse of executive power, why are they not concerned about the abuse of judicial and legislative power?

Perhaps the Maldivian public is simply uneducated on the gravity of these issues due to the lack of any avenue for factual, impartial information – and having access only to a bunch of partisan propaganda outlets masquerading as ‘the media’, with the choice to pick one that most panders to their views.

The slant of the State media coverage of the recent protests is eerily similar to the language employed by Gayoom-era news propaganda. Similarly, the bias and sensationalism spewed by opposition-allied TV networks would make Fox News and The Daily Mail blush.

A second revolution

An argument can be made that the task of democratic transition still lies incomplete, and that democratic reforms only changed things in the executive, leaving the judiciary and parliament to remain bastions of the old guard.

The President and the ruling party have the right to educate the public and complete the task of democratic reform in all areas of governance.

However, if they feel that more drastic, revolutionary actions are necessary, then perhaps they ought to relinquish the position of the executive, return to the streets as ordinary citizens, and organize a grassroots campaign to cleanse the country’s courts and Parliament.

It simply does not bode well for the country’s democracy when the powers bestowed to one arm of the State is unilaterally employed to twist the other arm.

The country has already had one failed attempt at democracy before. If the actions of the democratic leaders causes the general public loses faith in democratic institutions and the rule of law, then there’s no reason to believe it won’t fail again.

The Maldivian public needs to realize that the ultimate Constitutional power is not vested in the President’s residence of Muleeage, but in the hands of voting citizens, and that if they are serious about completing the task of Judicial reform, then it is up to the citizens themselves to rise up and sort out the Judges.

Echoing the sentiments of the Prince Hassan Farid Didi, Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom once said in an interview that Dhivehin are not ‘ready’ for democracy.

Recent events suggest that both the Pharaoh and the Prince appear to be correct.

Four years after we voted in our first democratic government, the Maldivian public continues to be as clueless as the monkey with the handkerchief – and it is under our watch that politicians and judges wipe their bottoms with the constitution.

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)

Lawyers forward Chief Judge’s case to International Criminal Court

A group  of lawyers have forward a case concerning the government’s arrest and detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s by military forces has been forwarded to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Maldives became a member of the ICC after acceding to the Rome Statute late last year.

According to the Rome Statute, “the jurisdiction of the [ICC] shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”, notably genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. The ICC does not deal with small cases, even if the victims may be in the hundreds.”

The case was forwarded by a group of lawyers contesting the conditions of the judge’s arrest and detention at a Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) training facility on Girifushi.

Maumoon Hameed, a member of the legal team, said the case was submitted “as the continued detention of Judge Mohamed is in clear violation of the International Convention on the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearance.”

Hameed told local media that ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Occampo, would investigate the matter. Minivan News is currently waiting for a response from the ICC.

The judge was arrested by MNDF forces upon police request after he attempted to block his own police summons in the High Court. Allegations against him include corruption, political bias and poor professional conduct, such as requiring underage victims of sexual abuse to re-enact their experiences during court hearings.

MNDF did not release details of the judge’s whereabouts for 48 hours following his arrest, prompting the opposition to define the act as “enforced disappearance”.

The military has not complied with High and Supreme court orders to release the judge. Officials from the military and police forces were today questioned on the matter by Parliament’s 241 Committee for safety and security, and further hearings are pending.

Opposition parties have claimed the judge’s detention as a ‘crime against humanity’, leading to a string of increasingly violence protests since last week. Over 40 people have been arrested in the past four days, and several individuals have been sent to the hospital.

Opposition Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) President Ibrahim Shareef termed the arrest an inhumane “kidnapping”, while Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed surprised the govenrment by expressing shame over the action calling it “the first possible violation since the dawn of democracy in our country”.

The European Union (EU) also expressed concern over the judge’s arrest in a statement in which it encouraged all parties to “act in accordance with these [democratic] principles and to refrain from inflammatory language or other action which could incite hatred.”

Acting on these and other concerns, Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) last weekend visited the judge on Girifushi and reported that he was in good health and conditions, drawing criticism from the opposition for allegedly “backing down” from its duties.

Meanwhile, the government has maintained that the judge’s arrest was lawful and that invoking the term ‘crime against humanity’ is only a political strategy.

“The government of Maldives is taking appropriate action in extraordinary circumstances involving allegations of serious corruption and gross misconduct by a senior judge. Public statements seeking to define his detention as a human rights issue are part of the web of protection which surrounds Judge Abdulla Mohamed,” said a government legal source.

Citing the ICC’s Rome Statute, the legal source has noted that “detention of a person can only be construed as a ‘crime against humanity’ if that detention is committed by a State as part of a widespread systematic attack on a civilian population, and if that detention is followed by the refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom, and or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of that person with the intention of removing the person from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.

“The detention of Judge Abdulla Mohamed is not part of a systematic attack on a civilian population and the government has acknowledged his detention to both his family and the public at large,” the source stated.

The source described the allegations against the Chief Judge as “of serious concern to the Maldivian government and community” and claimed to hold evidence of “gross misconduct” against the Judge.

In particular, the government claims that the judge exercised “undue influence” over at least one member of the Civil Court to prompt a ruling against the Judicial Services Commission’s (JSC) investigation of the Judge last year.

Observing that the High and Supreme courts remained silent during the affair, the government accused the judge of “tacit acceptance of a ploy to prevent the JSC from exercising is powers under the constitution.”

Furthermore, by accepting the Civil Court’s ruling the JSC indicated its own subscription to biased input, the source claimed.

Speaking today to Minivan News, in his own capacity, opposition Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) member Abdul Rasheed Nafiz endorsed the gesture of sending the case to the ICC.

“Right now, this is a legal argument. The opposition says the military cannot arrest judges, and the President says he has the authority as commander-in-chief. The Supreme Court tried to resolve the matter but it has had some problems. We need a mediator, and now it’s time for the international community to get involved”, he said.

Among the criteria for the ICC to take on a case in the Maldives is doubtful willingness and capacity of the country’s own judiciary to handle the case in question.

Speaking to Minivan News in September, President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said it was important for the Maldives to have access to an international judiciary

“This is a big step for a country whose previous leaders have been accused of human rights violations. I believe their cases would be fairly addressed in the ICC,” he said, while an ICC official hoped membership would help the Maldives proceed with judicial reform.

Towards that end, the Foreign Ministry has requested an international legal delegation from the United Nations’ Human Rights Commission to help resolve the current impasse in the nation’s judicial system.

Meanwhile, former President’s Member on the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), Aishath Velezinee, today told Minivan News “I would like it if the ICC were to accept this. Not because of Abdulla Mohamed, but because it will mean they will have to look into why he was taken.”

Velezinee has accused the opposition of subverting the judiciary for political purposes, with the aim of protecting their supporters from prosecution and retaining control over the judges as previously held by the former Ministry of Justice.

“It was a coup,” she told Minivan News today. “Now they are asking the Supreme Court to investigate – the same Supreme Court which has asked the authorities to investigate people who criticise the judiciary. No single person has criticised the judiciary more than me – and I say this because I have all the evidence, and all the papers.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM still asking for Chief Judge’s release as violent protests continue

Police and Maldives National Defence Forces (MNDF) last night arrested 19 people during a violent protest outside the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) building near Republic Square, in which four police officers received minor injuries.

“The protest became violent when people started throwing bricks and other things,” said police Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef. “We tried to disperse them, and the protest spread throughout Male’ city.” Haneef said the protests continued until 1:25 am on Monday morning.

‘Sandhaanu’ Ahmed Ibrahim Didi, a council member of minority opposition Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP), has been released. The other 18 individuals remain in custody.

However, Mulaku MP Abdulla Yameen was summoned to police headquarters this morning for questioning in regards in to an ongoing investigation. Local media reports that Yameen was due to leave for Sri Lanka this evening to meet foreign diplomats.

Police officials estimated that between 300 and 400 individuals associated with political opposition parties participated in last night’s protest, part of a trend which began when several opposition figures were detained for “hate speech” against the government nine days ago. Opposition-led protests demanding freedom of expression escalated when Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested by military forces seven days ago, shortly after he declared the arrest of the politicians unlawful.

Sub-Inspector Haneef said the protests were “of a high concern to the Male’ police service”, observing that last night’s protest was part of a developing trend of increasingly violent demonstrations.

Stating that military forces are prepared to assist police upon request, MNDF spokesperson Major Abdul Raheem added that “anytime there is violence it is a big concern of ours. We are always on alert and want to make sure Male’ is safe for residents.”

Meanwhile, the Security Services Committee (241 Committee) questioned MNDF Chief Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel and Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh  regarding the detention of the chief judge and the string of protests.

Local media reported that further hearings will be held. However, Minivan was unable to confirm the report with members of the 241 Committee at time of press.

Concerns about the protests were raised at Parliament’s National Security Committee last week by PPM MP Ahmed Mahlouf.

According to Committee Chair and MDP MP Ali Waheed, Mahlouf subsequently withdrew the case “because he didn’t want (MDP MP) ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik to be involved, and he didn’t like the way the investigation was going.”

“We offered dialogue, because we don’t want to stop work, we want to be democratic. In a committee we should be able to have dialogue and make a solution. But the opposition is trying to disrupt the process and make trouble everywhere in the country so the government can’t focus,” Waheed claimed.

Stating that the protests “are an issue of national security”, Waheed warned that disrupting committee procedures were “a means to an end.”

“Right now there are many ways to terrorise a country. Some use guns and bombs, some use language, and even now the way [former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives] is acting is a type of terrorism – they are trying to stop the whole system”, he said, observing that as the protests carry on with blocked roads and vandalised homes, “Male’s roads should not be used only by PPM.”

PPM MP Mahlouf had not responded to phone calls at time of press. However, party member Abdul Rasheed Nafiz said he understood that Mahlouf’s case was voted down during a committee session when MP Yameen was absent, and did not believe that the National Security Committee had the mandate to address the protests.

Nafiz said the protests were important for public expression however he believed the response was overblown.

“Police and military forces are both involved, which is a concern. Force is not required, when these people are gathering they keep silent until the police decide to disperse the crowd,” he claimed.

Acknowledging that a regulation prohibits demonstrations after midnight and at certain locations – such as Republic Square, located next to the MMA building – Nafiz pointed out that “neither side has obeyed that regulation, and even a small regulation can’t limit the freedoms granted in the Constitution.”

During his time as a Parliament member, Nafiz said, he suggested regulations on public protests “because Male’ is a small place and people are saying things that are hard for families and small children to hear. We have a culture and a religion to respect as well. But at the time the proposal was attacked and now people can hold protests when and where they like.”

Nafiz said he believed restoring peace “depends on the chief judge’s release.”

“Opposition parties are willing to bring an end to the protests through negotiation, but the government should release the judge first,” he said, noting that a group of lawyers had today forwarded the case to the International Criminal Court (ICC), of which the Maldives recently became a member.

“This is really a legal issue, and a mediator is needed. The question is ‘who’. Now is the time for the international community to get involved”, he said.

Yesterday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that it had requested an international legal delegation from the United Nations’ Human Rights Commission to assist the Maldives.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP vows to pressure Supreme Court if it fails to investigate Abdulla Mohamed

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Vice President and MP Alhan Fahmy met on Sunday with Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Ahmed Faiz, presenting two cases against Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed and demanding the cases be concluded in 48 hours.

Before going to the meeting Alhan met with the press and said that he will present two cases relating to Abdulla Mohamed: one regarding the Civil Court’s ordering the judicial watchdog – the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) – to delay taking action in a judicial misconduct case against the chief judge, and a second regarding the High Court’s ruling that he did not have to obey police summons on January 16.

The latter ruling led to police requesting the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) assist in the arrest of Abdulla Mohamed, and his subsequent detention on the MNDF training facility of Girifushi where he remains.

Alhan told press outside the Supreme Court after meeting with the chief justice that the MDP would put pressure on the Supreme Court if it did not conduct the cases.

He then told a group of MDP supporters waiting for him outside that if the Supreme Court did not conclude the case in 48 hours, the MDP would “raise its voice”.

The whereabouts of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed following his arrest were not revealed until January 18. The MNDF has acknowledged receipt but not replied to Supreme Court orders to release the judge.

Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz has joined the High and Supreme Courts in condemning the MNDF’s role in the arrest as unlawful, and requesting that the judge be released.

According to the PG, police have to go through the PG’s Office to obtain an arrest warrant from the High Court.

According to government officials, military assistance was sought for reasons of national security. Judge Mohamed has been implicated in 14 cases of obstruction of police duty, Afeef alleged.

Actions include ordering unlawful investigations, withholding warrants for up to four days, limiting the issuance of warrants to himself exclusively at times, disregarding decisions of higher courts, strategically delaying cases involving opposition members, and barring media from corruption trials, according to Afeef.

Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfan has said police had sent a letter to the armed forces on Monday, January 16, “requesting assistance to carry out its legal duty under article 71 of the Police Act, stating that the Criminal Court was not cooperating with police and that as a consequence of Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed obstructing police work, the country’s internal security was threatened and police were unable to maintain public order and safety.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government using constitution on selective basis: Yameen

The government is selectively announcing that the Constitution is in jeopardy, Mulaku MP Abdulla Yameen claimed yesterday during a press conference held by opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).

Yameen, the half brother of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, accused the government of using the Constitution according to its own needs and condemned President Mohamed Nasheed’s remark that the “constitution is at a standstill” as a “serious issue” and must be investigated.

Yameen added that the President does not have the constitutional authority to be involved in or enforce the judicial system.

However speaking yesterday at a rally held by ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), President Mohamed Nasheed said establishing justice and fairness through a modern and competent judiciary was “one of the main reasons MDP came out to change the government.”

Referring to the constitutional stipulation to evaluate sitting judges for reappointment during the two-year interim period, President Nasheed said the judges who were sworn in were not held to the criteria now specified as Parliament had not yet passed a Judges Act at the time.
In spite of this lag, the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) reappointed the judges and conducted the swearing-in ceremony in the face of vocal opposition from former President’s Member of the JSC Aishath Velezinee.
In May 2010, Nasheed said he informed the JSC that its approved criteria was not in alignment with constitutional standards or public expectations. The concerns were ignored, Nasheed said, and the JSC proceeded to reappoint judges from the former government.
When the constitutional interim period elapsed in August, then Supreme Court Chief Justice Abdulla Saeed “declared on his own that he was permanent” and that the interim bench had tenured itself.
Saying he did “what has to be done at the time” as elected head of state, Nasheed said he then ordered the Defence Minister to lock the interim Supreme Court because “the opportunity to institute a judiciary envisioned by the constitution was narrowing.”
Eventually, Nasheed explained, he agreed to a cross-party compromise on enacting the Judges Act and confirming the Supreme Court bench because “in my view, it was essential to institute a Supreme Court.”
After ignoring complaints against the judiciary, the JSC attempted to investigate Judge Abdulla late last year, however the body was blocked by a Civil Court ruling.
“If the general principles of the Maldivian constitution is to be upheld, in my view it is not a judge who would overrule [the civil court decision] but the head of state,” Nasheed observed.
The judge was arrested on Monday, January 14 after attempting to block his own police summons at the High Court.
According to Yameen, the judge was “kidnapped” by Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF), inciting claims that the Maldives had become a military dictatorship.

The Judge is being held at an MNDF training facility in Girifushi, the same island used to base the famous underwater cabinet meeting in 2009.

PPM has asked the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) to provide round the clock surveillance of the judge’s well being while in custody, Haveeru reports.

Meanwhile, President Nasheed explained that the decision to take Judge Abdulla into military custody was not made “with the intention of causing misery or a loss to anyone” or “for the satisfaction of arresting a person.”

The government would “never support or encourage inhumane treatment or anything unlawful,” he said.
“Our only purpose is to establish a court house envisioned by the constitution and hoped for by the people,” he added.

Nasheed also suggested that the democratic transition in South Korea had precedent of military intervention to assist the transition.

PPM announced that peaceful protests against the “abduction” will continue, but urged protestors not to engage in violent or destructive acts, local media reports.

According to local media, PPM yesterday consulted lawyers to file the issue in court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP to petition for removal of Prosecutor General

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) intends to file a petition with parliament to remove Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz from office.

The petition was announced during a party rally last evening at MDP headquarters during which MP Mohamed Shifaz requested MDP Chairperson MP Moosa ‘Reeko’ Manik “do this on behalf of our members who are always calling for a better judicial system”.

Shifaz said there are “many reasons why we don’t have confidence in the PG, and why many politicians have legal issues with the PG not sending cases to court.”

“Also he has good relations with [Chief Criminal Court Judge] Abdul Ghazee, people say they are always having coffees. We believe they shouldn’t have this kind of relationship in public.”

Calling for the PG’s arrest, Fuvahmulah MP Shifag Mufeed accused Muizz of incompetency in investigating corruption cases.

“To be honest, it’s the PG’s obligation to investigate the alleged US$800 million corruption case and the fact that he has failed is testament to his incompetence and violation of constitutional law”, Mufeed told local media earlier today.

The corruption case implicated former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s half brother Abdulla Yameen for alleged involvement in an international money laundering racket involving the Burmese oil trade.

PG Muizz could not be reached at time of press.

Deputy Prosecutor General Hussain Shameem has said the PG Office has not been contacted by MDP, but noted that nothing required the party to communicate with the accused.

“To remove the PG a party would have to first send the motion to a committee, which would forward the motion to the Parliament floor, where the motion would only be passed with a two-thirds majority,” Shameem explained.

“But previously the PG’s position has been that if the government files a ‘no confidence’ vote in Parliament, he will resign.”

Shifaz told Minivan News that the petition would be available for signing at MDP Haruge after 8:00pm this evening, and that all citizens of any party are invited to sign.

“Our main aim is to build a better judicial system. What happened in the past, we don’t want to see again,” Shifaz said, adding that the party hoped for 5,000 signatures. He said the matter still needed to be discussed by MDP’s parliamentary group.

Local media has reported that the party intends to submit the petition to Parliament within the next two days. Parliament is currently on recess until March. However, Parliament’s petition committee president and MDP MP Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed has been requested to expedite the process.

Nasheed said, “if I get any petition I will go according to house rules.”

MDP’s motion comes 24 hours after the PG sided with the High Court and Supreme Court in requesting the release of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed was arrested on January 16 for corruption and for “allowing his judicial decisions to be determined by political and personal affiliations and interests”, according to a statement by Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem.

The courts subsequently cancelled hearings, and the Supreme Court ordered the Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) to release the judge. The MDNF today confirmed that the judge was still being held and no decision had been made regarding the court order.

PG Muizz yesterday told media that police are required to consult the PG before taking a judge into custody.

Article 223 of the Constitution requires the PG to “(a) to supervise the prosecution of all criminal offences in the Maldives” including “(d) to oversee the legality of preliminary inquiries and investigations into alleged criminal activity; (e) to monitor and review the circumstances and conditions under which any person is arrested, detained or otherwise deprived of freedom prior to trial.”

Police provided crowd control outside judge’s home at the time of the arrest.

MNDF confirmed that their officers had taken the judge into custody but did not wish to comment on matters concerning their level of obligation to the PG.

Meanwhile, in a hearing of the case filed by the judge against the police summon Deputy Solictor General Ahmed Usham said MNDF does not have the authority to make arrests related to criminal offences, reports local media.

Ushaam alleged that the Attorney General’s (AG) Office had received no details of the arrest except from what had been reported by local media.

The Criminal Court also ordered the PG to prosecute the the Chief of Defence Forces within the next three days, along with others involved in “contempt of court”.
A group of lawyers filed a similar case at the High Court yesterday after MNDF ignored orders from both the High Court and Supreme Court for Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s immediate release.
Shifaz maintained that MDP’s petition “has nothing to do with the Chief Judge’s arrest”.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM “will definitely win”: Mundhu

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has announced it will now contest in every upcoming election, and will be establishing party offices in atolls nation-wide.

Spokesperson for former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and member of PPM’s interim counci, Hussain ‘Mundhu’ Shareef, told local media that although the party “did not contest in elections in order to draft the party’s charter and strengthen internal factors”, the party would now engage in campaigns “and will definitely win.”

PPM did contest in a December 31 council by-election in Shaviyani Atoll Milandhoo this year, however it lost to ruling Maldivian Democratic Party candidate Abdulla Athif.

In November, PPM member Abdulla Mohamed Didi won the mid-Fuvahmulah atoll council seat by running as an independent, as PPM had not completed the registration process. Didi received 52 percent of the votes while MDP candidate Mohamed Abdulla Didi received 46 percent.

Opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) received only eight percent of the votes.

PPM MP Ahmed Mahlouf noted that the Kaashidhoo seat in parliament may be vacated pending a ruling at the Supreme Court. Anticipating a ruling on the matter within a month, he said PPM would contest for the seat.

A win for the Kaashidhoo seat would allow PPM to be officially recognised by Parliament–according to Section 29(d) of the parliamentary rules of procedure, which states that “political parties in parliament shall be parties with a member or members that contested in the name of the party and was elected to parliament.” At the moment, the eight MPs who currently identify with PPM officially operate as independents within the Majlis.

PPM’s statement comes a year and a half in advance of the 2013 presidential elections, the first since President Mohamed Nasheed took office in 2008 in the country’s first multi-party elections that marked the end of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s 30-year dictatorship.

While the new government has been primarily challenged by DRP, the opposition appears to be shifting in sizeable strides toward PPM, which is headed by former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Since PPM completed its registration process in late October with 3,600 membership forms submitted to the Elections Commission (EC), it has received 11,000 members directly from DRP, Mahlouf claims. He added that 1,800 had switched over from MDP, 1,000 had joined from other parties, and several thousand more who had not previously belonged to a political party had registered.

“Our first target was to get DRP members to join us,” Mahlouf explained. “Now I believe 90 percent of DRP members support Gayoom, so I expect most will join PPM.”

According to the party registry, however, DRP has only lost approximately 6,000 members since November.

Still, DRP’s current membership is lower than it was before an acrimonious split that saw the Z-faction breakaway in 2010 and go on to form PPM under the leadership of DRP ‘honorary leader’ former President Gayoom.

Meanwhile, PPM is currently facing tense relations with the EC.

“Of the 20,000 registration forms we’ve submitted, 6,000 have been rejected,” Mahlouf complained. “The EC is citing small mistakes like use of English instead of Dhivehi, the way fingerprints are done, whether we have two witnesses for the form, and they will only accept valid national ID cards, not passports or licenses.

“When MDP and DRP registered it was very easy,” he recalled.

Gayoom recently accused the EC of unfair procedures. “We know the state of affairs in the country right now – election results do not turn out the way people vote. So what are we going to do?” he said during a party rally. His statement elicited a condemnatory response from EC while the MDP suggested that his remarks were made because vote rigging was involved during his 30 years as president.

Eyeing the annual general assembly at the end of April, however, PPM has announced it will be campaigning in the atolls to “meet the islanders and raise our membership,” Mahlouf said, adding that the party’s target of 40,000–double it’s current alleged membership of 23,000– “is not a difficult target for us.”

As of January 8, the party registry recorded PPM as the nation’s third largest party with nearly 14,000 members, and 245 pending registration forms. DRP remains second largest on record, while MDP ranks first with upwards of 47,000 registered members.

While there are strong signs that DRP will indeed fade into the PPM ticket, Minivan News asked whether PPM anticipated a highly competitive presidential election in 2013.

“Thasmeen will run [for DRP], but I doubt he’ll received many votes given what happened in Fuvahmulah,” Mahlouf said. “I think it will be competitive and fruitful, I certainly hope for a free and fair election.”

DRP has said it will be addressing comments made by PPM’s Hussain ‘Munduh’ Shareef during a press conference tomorrow.

MDP officials could not be reached at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)