Tag: MDP

Second suspect charged with murdering MP Dr Afrasheem Ali

The Prosecutor General’s (PG’s) Office has filed murder charges against a second suspect over the attack on the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Dr Afrasheem Ali, who was killed outside his home in Male’ last year.

An official for the PG’s Office confirmed to Minivan New that Ali Shan of Henveiru Hikost House in Male’ is now facing charges of intentional murder at the Criminal Court. Shan has also been charged with providing false testimony at the country’s Juvenile Court, according to local media.

Back in January, the Criminal Court extended the detention period of Shan, the second main suspect arrested in connection with the death of the late MP and well-known religious scholar Dr Afrasheem.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News that the Afrasheem case remained open, with information on three separate individuals having so far been sent to the PG’s Office relating to the attack.

The trial of Shan’s co-accused Hussain Humam has already begun, with the suspect having pleading not guilty to charges of murder and requesting the opportunity to appoint a lawyer.

A Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) representative and Abdulla ‘Jaa’ Javid – son-in-law of opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik – were also detained by police over having alleged involvement in the case.  Both were later released by the courts, according to the Sun Online News agency.

Javid had spent 45 days in detention in connection to the Afrasheem murder, which his lawyer argued at the time was unconstitutional owing to there being no evidence to support keeping him in custody.

In December last year, the MDP accused the police of attempting to pin Afrasheem’s murder of MDP members instead of going after those guilty of the crime.

MP attack

MP Afrasheem was stabbed to death on the night of October 1, on the staircase of his home.

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz has previously alleged the murder of the MP was well planned and worth MVR 4 million (US$260,000).

In a presentation shown to a press conference last year, Riyaz claimed that 11 suspects were initially arrested. He added that about 200 items had been analysed as evidence, including forensic and digital evidence, which he claimed were enough to prosecute the prime suspects.

“Over 500 hours of CCTV footage have been analysed, more than a hundred people have been interviewed and about 13,000 phone call recordings have been analysed out of which 12,000 were from one single tower,” Riyaz said at the time.

The commissioner claimed Afrasheem was last seen alive inside the premises of the state broadcaster, Television Maldives (TVM). The presentation suggested that Afrasheem was seen leaving the premises in his car around 11:04pm, according to nearby CCTV camera footage.

Afrasheem left the station after participating in a religious TV program called “Islamee Dhiriulhun” (Islamic Life), with Deputy Minister of Islamic Affairs Mohamed Qubad Aboobakuru.

In his last words, aired on the show, Afrasheem said he was deeply saddened and asked for forgiveness from citizens if he had created a misconception in their minds due to his inability to express himself in the right manner.

Minister of Islamic Affairs Sheikh Shaheem Ali Saeed was quoted in local media as saying that the Islamic Ministry had not forced Afrasheem to offer a public apology for anything during his last television appearance and disputed that there was any religious motivation in the death of the moderate scholar.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“The JSC cannot form a court”: JSC Vice Chair Abdulla Didi grilled by Parliamentary Oversight Committee

The Vice Chair of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi, attended parliament’s Independent Committees Oversight Committee to answer its queries about the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the appointment of the panel of judges hearing the Nasheed trial.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed is being tried for his detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Abdulla Didi attended the committee despite the chair of the judicial watchdog, Adam Mohamed, disputing that the JSC was answerable to parliament on the grounds that the summons referred to an “ongoing case”.

Asked if he believed Adam Mohamed had acted legally in unilaterally deciding that the JSC would not abide by the oversight committee’s summons, Abdulla Didi responded that he “will not say that the Chair acted against the law,” and that he “cannot make any comments on the matter.”

“I personally believe that we must be answerable to the oversight committee. That is why I am here today,” he said.

Conflict of Interest

Before discussions on the scheduled topic began, Abdulla Didi requested that Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed leave the committee.

Didi said Ali Waheed currently had a case against him in the Criminal Court of which he the judge, and hence he believed there is a conflict of interest to have the MP question him during Thursday’s meeting.

“I wouldn’t have felt any hesitation if all the JSC members were here. But since I am being questioned separately, I don’t think it is a good idea to have someone who has a criminal case against him question me here,” Abdulla Didi said.

Ali Waheed said he believed he was not required to leave the committee as per the constitution, but was willing to do so as it was “ethically the right thing to do.”

Chair of the committee MDP MP Ahmed Sameer informed Abdulla Didi that Ali Waheed had previously informed the committee that he would not be asking any questions from the JSC member, and that he was only participating in the meeting due to the quorum requirements needed to have the meeting.

“Abdulla Didi is here as a JSC member, and not as a Criminal Court Judge. Likewise, it is the citizen Ali Waheed who has a pending case in the court, not the MP for Thohdoo constituency. As there is no conflict when viewed in the light of the capacities in which you both are participating in this meeting, I am of the opinion that MP Ali Waheed is legally allowed to stay and question you. I would like to state here that if Ali Waheed is leaving, it is only out of his personal accord,” Sameer stated.

Later in the meeting, Sameer referred to Ali Waheed’s voluntary exit from the meeting as an example of abstaining from action in cases of conflict of interest, and asked Abdulla Didi why he had not similarly abstained from voting on deciding the panel overseeing Nasheed’s case.

“You are a member of the JSC which voted on choosing judges for the Hulhumale’ Court panel of magistrates. You also serve as a judge in the Criminal Court. The case which this panel is to preside over concerns the Chief Judge of the court you serve under, Judge Abdulla Mohamed. Under these circumstances, why didn’t you abstain from the vote which decided upon magistrates for the Abdulla Mohamed case?” Sameer asked.

“I had no such intentions like what you are implying. The short answer to that question is that we did not decide on the panel to preside on an ‘Abdulla Mohamed case’. It disturbs me when you refer to the case as such,” Didi responded.

“It is a case regarding the arrest of Abdulla Mohamed, in which some other people are accused of having committed criminal acts. The case is about them, not Abdulla Mohamed,” he said, shaking his head.

Sameer also asked about alleged conflict of interest in the vote taken by the JSC to continue running the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court itself.

“JSC Member Ahmed Rasheed, who is the husband of a Hulhumale’ Court Magistrate, was among the members who voted to establish or continue the said court, isn’t he? And you voted, too. This is extremely concerning, and so I repeat: the case concerns the detention of the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court by the then government. You are a judge serving in that court. Rasheed’s wife is a magistrate in the court trying this case. Do you think this decision is impartial under these circumstances?” Sameer asked.

Didi attempted to dodge the question, stating he was unaware how Rasheed had cast his vote. MP Sameer, however stated he had seen the related documents, and informed him that four members had voted, including Rasheed and Abdulla Didi.

Didi still insisted that he “found it difficult” to answer the question, or decide on the validity of the decision.

The Vice Chair of the judicial watchdog stated that as a norm, if a member felt that he had a conflict of interest in any matter that the commission was taking a vote on, he would state the reasons and excuse himself. He further stated that if a member failed to excuse himself, and yet JSC Chair Adam Mohamed believed such a conflict existed, the chair would then point it out and discuss with the relevant member an agreeable way to proceed.

MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor asked if any such issues had arisen during the vote taken to appoint magistrates to the Hulhumale’ Court panel.

“I cannot recall if any members declared any conflict of interest. Nor can I at all remember whether the Chair noticed such a conflict,” Abdulla Didi said.

The panel

Didi said that discussion about the panel of judges of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court initially began in the JSC after the then head of the court requested the commission assign judges from other courts to preside in a pending case at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

“Once this request came in, we discussed the matter and proposed names for the bench. We then sent these names to the Supreme Court bench, otherwise known as the Judicial Council, for comment. They decided on those names and sent it back to the JSC. This is how the process went,” Didi told the committee.

“This is also completely in line with what the laws state, I refer to Articles 47 to 49 of the Judges’ Act. I might be referring to the previous Judges’ Act. There were some amendments made to it later, which may have changed the order of these articles I quote. I am not sure, I haven’t reviewed it that much,” Abdulla Didi said.

Article 47 of the Judges’ Act states “If a judge is temporarily transferred to preside over a case in a different court, he must be transferred to a court of the same level as the one he is serving in.”

Article 48 states “A judge can be temporarily appointed to another court in the instance that the court is unable to sufficiently complete assigned work, or if the court had difficulties providing services, or if the judges serving in the court has been suspended from their duties, or if other circumstances which may cause a delay in the completion of work assigned to the court occur.”

Article 49 states “It is the Judicial Services Commission, with the counsel of the Judicial Council, which will come to a decision on the transfer of judges to oversee cases in other courts.”

After listening to Abdulla Didi’s version of events, Sameer presented the information previously gathered by the commission.

“The laws state that the JSC has no right to decided on the judges on a panel. Only the head magistrate of the relevant court has the powers to do so,” Sameer said.

“Now, the Chief Magistrate at this court at the time, Huraa Magistrate Moosa Naseem, sent in three names for the panel to JSC asking only for your commission’s comments. The list included his name as well. Can you then tell me what legal right the JSC has to disregard these three names and appoint three completely different magistrates?”

Abdulla Didi said in response: “We at the JSC considered the important cases pending at the Hulhumale’ Court. So we proposed other names with the intention of assigning qualified, experienced judges. I don’t believe this conflicts with any existing laws. What I am saying is, I did not come to any decision. It was after discussion with the other JSC members that we passed it through a vote.”

MDP MP Ahmed Abdulla asked the JSC member why, if the selection was based on merit and experience, the three magistrates proposed by the Hulhumale’ Court had been disregarded while all three were currently serving as chief magistrates of their respective courts.

“Let me explain. According to the Judge’s Act, no judge had the power to bring in judges from other courts to preside on cases. JSC considers the good magistrates in the atoll… That is not to imply that any magistrate is bad at their work, just that because of the nature of this case, we took special care to appoint the most able and appropriate judges who will treat the case with extra care and contemplate the matter deeply,” Abdulla said.

Didi insisted that the JSC that held legal powers to appoint magistrates to the panel, at which point the Chair of the parliamentary committee intervened and advised the judge to refrain from making misleading and non-factual statements.

“I am deeply disturbed that you are making these comments and passing it off ‘as what the law says’. The law says perfectly clearly outlines the role of the chief magistrate, and that if other magistrates are temporarily being brought into a court, they must be from the same judicial jurisdiction,” Sameer intervened.

Didi also claimed the JSC had appointed the panel after the Hulhumale’ Court requested additional magistrates to assist with their work.

However, member appointed from among the public to JSC Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman, who had been interviewed by the committee prior to Abdulla Didi on Thursday, had stated that the request for additional magistrates and other support for the court had come after the appointment of the panel of magistrates.

MP Ghafoor questioned if the bench had been appointed after Nasheed’s case had been referred to the Hulhumale’ Court, to which Didi replied in the affirmative.

Asked if Didi was aware that one of the magistrates appointed to the bench had allegations of disciplinary issues, sexual offences and corruption against him, he responded that he was not aware of such a case.

When MDP MP Rugiyya Mohamed said JSC Member Sheikh Rahman had confirmed that indeed such an allegation was being looked into by the commission, Abdulla Didi then responded that he had heard such rumours via media and had asked administrative staff to look into the matter.

He later said he “did not believe any of the magistrates on the bench would have done anything of the sort.”

“I cannot confirm whether such a matter exists. The thing is, if we are to consider an allegation or a complaint, there has to be some solid reasons that should support the allegation, whether it be proved or not. If it is a solid and believable allegation, then I might not agree to have him on the bench,” he continued.

“I don’t think just being alleged of anything is reason enough to remove any magistrate from the bench. The allegation itself must carry some weight. However, such allegations can only be cleared once the relevant authority investigates it. So, I do believe any such investigations must be expedited. I don’t see any reason why such a magistrate cannot sit on the panel in the meantime.”

Is the Hulhumale court legitimate?

Asked directly whether Abdulla Didi believed the court to be a legitimate entity, he answered, “I am not saying it is a legitimate court. Then again, nor I am I saying it is illegitimate. All I can say is I don’t believe it will be liquidated.”

“I think the JSC cannot establish a court through a vote. I can’t really recall the law too well at this moment, but the JSC certainly cannot form a court,” Abdulla Didi confirmed in response to a question posed by Sameer.

Sameer then asked if the Vice Chair of JSC had cast his vote on the matter of forming the Hulhumale’ Court.

“That’s a huge misunderstanding. We never voted to form a court. We voted to establish that, in accordance with the laws, the Hulhumale’ Court will not be automatically cancelled. The court was in existence even before [the vote],” Abdulla Didi answered.

However, Sameer challenged Abdulla Didi’s statement. He stated that in 2007, the President’s Office had created an administrative office called the Hulhumale’ Courts Section, and not a court, saying that the existence of a magistrate court in Hulhumale’ is not noted on any paperwork.

“We have documents proving that after the ratification of the Judicature Act, that under a decision of the JSC itself, the budget, stamp and even staff of this Hulhumale’ Court Section office were transferred to the Family Court in Male’. And then, out of the blue, your commission decided there is a Magistrate Court in Hulhumale’,” Sameer stated.

“You are aware that a case against the Hulhumale’ Court was filed in a lower court. The JSC then referred it to the Supreme Court. Then JSC Chair Adam Mohamed, who is a Supreme Court Judge, cast the deciding vote on the case. Do you believe this was conducted in due process?” Sameer asked.

Abdulla Didi refused to answer the question on the grounds that he could comment on a decision of the Supreme Court. He said “there is no way I can call that a bad ruling.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Religious obligation” to bar Nasheed from upcoming election: Home Minister Dr Jameel

Additional Reporting by Mohamed Naahii

Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has claimed it is a religious obligation to bar former President Mohamed Nasheed from contesting the upcoming presidential elections, scheduled to take place on September 7.

Speaking at a rally held by Progressive Party of Maldives’ (PPM) presidential primary candidate Abdulla Yameen on Saturday (March 9), Jameel accused Nasheed of being a “coward” who ran away after resigning from power, adding that he no longer had the courage to lead the country.

Highlighting Nasheed’s recent stay in the Indian High Commission, Jameel stated that “it was a shame that Nasheed fled when he was supposed to face justice,” before claiming that he would not give the opportunity for someone like Nasheed to come to power.

“Nasheed of Canaryge does not have any chance to come to power. We would not give that chance [to him]. That is something we ought to do. It is both a national and a religious Farḍ (obligation),” he said.

According to local media, the Home Minister stated that “if we complete that task,” God would grant success to those leaders in the upcoming presidential election.

Jameel claimed the country had fallen into a “deep mess” in almost all areas, adding that the country is desperate for a determined leader who can revive the economy.

He contended that Nasheed did not have the qualities the country was expecting from its future leader.

“Unlike Nasheed, President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom whom Nasheed is saying that he would beat easily, had the courage to appear before police for questioning when he was called in,” Jameel said.

He argued that anyone other than Nasheed possesses courage to face law and justice.

Jameel – a former Justice Minister under President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s 30 year autocracy – has previously expressed urgency in concluding Nasheed’s trial before the upcoming elections.

In January, Jameel told local media that it was “crucial to conclude the case against Nasheed before the approaching presidential elections, in the interests of the nation and to maintain peace in it.”

“Every single day that goes by without the case being concluded contributes to creating doubt in the Maldivian people’s minds about the judiciary,” the home minister said at the time.

In January 2012, Jameel – who served as vice president of Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) – was questioned by police after Nasheed’s government accused DQP of attempting to incite religious hatred.

A pamphlet released by the DQP called on the public to “rise up and defend Islam”, whilst accusing Nasheed’s government of “operating under the influence of Jews and Christian priests”.

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Maldives must curb external interference in its internal affairs

Also speaking at the rally on Saturday (March 9), half-brother to former President Gayoom, Abdulla Yameen, claimed that there was no need to allow “outside influence” in the internal affairs of the country.

The PPM presidential primary candidate said that should he be elected, he would protect the independence and sovereignty of the Maldives against the most powerful of nations.

Yameen’s comments come after Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission in Male’ last month.

For 11 days the former President stayed inside the high commission building, subsequently avoiding a trial hearing at Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The international community has since called for free, fair and inclusive presidential elections in the Maldives.

Earlier this month Nasheed, who exited the Indian High Commission on February 23, was detained by police and produced at Hulhumale’ court, despite an alleged “understanding” between India and Maldives that he would be able to compete in the upcoming elections.

Nasheed is facing criminal charges over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed during the last days of his presidency.

Speaking at the campaign rally, Yameen criticised the Prosecutor General’s (PG) statement made on March 7, which stated that the PG did not object to delaying the trial until presidential elections scheduled for later this year are over.

“The PG is not entirely an independent individual. The PG becomes independent when he executes his responsibilities in accordance with these procedures. The PG cannot say that he has no reservations in delaying Nasheed’s trial for four weeks.

“The PG cannot say for instance that it is alright to put off the trial after the elections. This is something that the PG cannot say,” Yameen was quoted as saying in local media.

Yameen stated that an impartial trial against Nasheed must be held for his actions, and that any other presidential candidate should be held liable for their actions at any given time.

“Why can’t the foreign ambassadors accept the fact that anyone [competing for the Presidential elections] who violates the law must be disqualified.

“We also might fail to meet the criteria. In such a society it is possible for us to violate an individual’s right. If so even I must spend the day in court. How can Nasheed be an exception,” local newspaper Haveeru quoted Yameen as saying.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC member Sheikh Rahman criticises JSC decisions on Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court in parliament committee

Parliament’s Independent Commission’s Oversight Committee on Thursday separately questioned two members of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) about the legality of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the appointment of the panel of magistrates to the case against Nasheed, for his detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Of the nine members currently serving in the judicial watchdog, Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman – the member appointed from among the public – attended the first committee session on Thursday.

Arbitrary appointment of magistrates

In response to questions posed by committee members, Sheikh Rahman stated that the JSC had arbitrarily appointed three magistrates from courts across the Maldives to Nasheed’s case, after dismissing the three names first submitted to the commission by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

“Moosa Naseem (from the Hulhumale’ Court) initially submitted names of three magistrates, including himself. This means that he had taken responsibility for overseeing this case. Now once a judge assumes responsibility for a case, the JSC does not have the power to remove him from the case,” Sheikh Rahman explained. “However, the JSC did remove him from the case, and appointed three other magistrates of their choice.”

Sheikh Rahman stated that the commission had referred to Articles 48 to 51 of the Judge’s Act as justification.

“But then I note here that the JSC breached Article 48 itself. They did not gather any information as per this article. They stated that it is due to the large number of paperwork that needs to be researched that they are appointing a panel. However, this is not reason enough to appoint a bench,” he said.

“Later, when Mazeed assumed responsibility for the Hulhumale’ Court, I remember seeing a letter he sent saying that the Hulhumale’ Court had a huge number of cases and that they needed additional magistrates to oversee the cases. However, this was after the panel was already appointed,” Sheikh Rahman stated.

“The surprising thing here is that this court has been functioning with two magistrates serving there. There have never been workload complaints. It was only after the appointment of the panel, and Mazeed going there, that this problem has arisen. This itself is a questionable matter,” Sheikh Rahman alleged.

Responding to a question posed by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed, Sheikh Rahman spoke of the “questionable moves” within JSC which led to the removal of Moosa Naseem from the case.

“Two members of the JSC, if I remember correctly it was Abdulla Didi and Saleem, asked for Naseem to be removed from the panel, stating as a justification that he was ‘disturbing’ the panel. Somebody even submitted a letter to the commission saying so. The majority of the committee however dismissed this as it was believed to be not enough of a reason,” Sheikh Rahman said.

“If a Head Magistrate goes on leave, or is unable to attend work, then the JSC can appoint someone in his stead. This used to be my responsibility. Then suddenly, this responsibility was taken away from me and handed over to Saleem and Abdulla Didi. The next thing I heard was that they had replaced Naseem with Mazeed,” Sheikh Rahman alleged.

“This is in direct breach of the law. They cannot appoint someone else to the post unless it becomes vacant.”

Hearing this response, Ali Waheed then alleged conflict of interest inside the commission.

“I think it is all becoming very clear now. The MDP’s competitor, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) prospective presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen’s close friend, and Deputy Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Nazim’s former lawyer Ahmed Saleem is on the JSC as [President] Waheed’s appointee. They are working from inside the JSC to eliminate the candidacy of Mohamed Nasheed,” MP Waheed alleged.

Vice Chair of the parliamentary committee MDP MP Ahmed Sameer stated that according to the Judicature Act, only the Supreme Court and the High Court preside over cases with panels of judges as a norm.

He explained that it is only under rare and special circumstances that magistrate courts are allowed to form panels, and that even in such cases it is the Head Magistrate of the particular court that is mandated to make a decision on the matter.

Sameer then proceeded to ask Sheikh Rahman if, in light of these laws, he believed it was legitimate for the JSC to exclude Kaafu Atoll Huraa Head Magistrate Moosa Naseem, who was in charge of the Hulhumale’ Court, from the bench for Nasheed’s trial. He further inquired if the member believed it was a politically motivated move on the side of the JSC.

“In case a court requests more magistrates, the JSC can appoint additional judges to a court. However, I am not aware that the commission is under any circumstances allowed to assign judges to particular cases,” Sheikh Rahman responded.

“As for politicisation, I wasn’t at the meeting where this particular decision was made, so it is difficult to comment on the motivation behind it. However, I did notice from the recording that once one member proposed this idea, there was immediate approval and no amount of discussion was further carried out.”

JSC role in running “illegitimate court”

Referring to the provisions in the Judicature Act, Sameer further asked Sheikh Rahman if he believed that the JSC had acted in breach of the constitution and laws to maintain the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, which must be automatically liquidated following the ratification of the said act.

“At the time, I too was lacking the necessary information and voted in favour of running the Hulhumale’ Court. The documents provided by the JSC did say that there was a magistrate court in Hulhumale’ even in 2007. On later review, this too turned out to be untrue,” Sheikh Rahman stated. “I cannot say what their objective was, but there certainly was a lot of misinformation.”

“It is the JSC who decided to run the Hulhumale’ Court despite the Judicature Act. The decision was made with four votes, including that of Ahmed Rasheed. This member’s wife serves as a magistrate in the Hulhumale’ Court. This matter was then submitted to a lower court for review. However, Adam Mohamed redirected the case to the Supreme Court. He then cast the deciding vote in the Supreme Court. Do you believe this proceeded in a fair and just manner?” Sameer asked of Sheikh Rahman.

“Adam Mohamed should not have been there. I have raised the matter even in the JSC. I have also spoken with the Chief Justice about this,” the member responded.

“He said there is nothing he can do about this, and said that it had been a decision of the Supreme Court bench. I insisted that regardless of who had made the decision, there is no way a wrong can be considered otherwise,” he continued.

“The Chief Justice then said that Adam Mohamed may perhaps recuse himself from the case. However, Adam did not do so either.”

JSC Chair Adam Mohamed has responded to the committee’s summons through an official letter, refusing to be answerable to the committee as the matter in hand referred to an “ongoing case”.

However, JSC Vice Chair Abdulla Didi and Speaker Shahid spoke against the Chair’s decision, stating the commission must be answerable to its oversight body at all times, adding that Adam Mohamed had made a unilateral decision without consulting the majority members of JSC.

Shahid left on a trip abroad despite having agreed to attend Thursday’s parliamentary committee meeting.

At the committee meeting, Sheikh Rahman also stated that he did not find Adam Mohamed’s justification acceptable.

“It is the JSC which has the powers to look into complaints about this bench in question. It is also the JSC that holds the powers to dismantle the bench should need be. Hence it makes no sense to say we cannot discuss the matter at any point in time,” he stated.

Sheikh Rahman also criticised Adam Mohamed’s decisionto not attend the committee summons without consulting other members of the commission.

He further said that he did not believe the serving members of the JSC were able fulfil their duties as per the pledges they had taken, alleging that the commission had become subject to political influences.

Sheikh Rahman made similar remarks in a live television appearance last week. He is the second JSC member to blow the whistle. The first, Aishath Velezinee, challenged the JSC’s “unconstitutional” reappointment of poorly educated and ethically dubious judges in August 2010. She was subsequently stabbed three times in the back in broad daylight on Chandeenee Magu, Male’s main tourist strip.

The JSC is currently comprised of Chair Supreme Court Judge Adam Mohamed, Vice Chair Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid, High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed, MP and government aligned Jumhooree Party (JP) Leader, MP and Presidential Candidate Gasim Ibrahim, lawyer Ahmed Rasheed, Attorney General Azima Shakoor, Presidential Appointee Mohamed Saleem and Member appointed from the public Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police arrest man on suspicion of assaulting Mariya Didi

A 26-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of assaulting Maldivian Democratic Party MP Mariya Ahmed Didi, a year after the alleged assault took place.

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef told local media that the man was arrested on 4 March 2013 in relation to the assault that took place on 7 February 2012.

According to local media, police have been investigating the videos of the unrest that followed the controversial change of power in February 2012.

The police have been criticised by various institutions for a failure to investigate several incidents that took place on February 7 and 8, 2012.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MPs raise concern over “spy devices, toxic gas, poison” in parliament

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Abdulla Jabir has claimed that security forces have planted ‘spy devices’ throughout parliament, local media reported.

During today’s parliament session, Jabir claimed that ‘information’ had been received regarding the bugging and that security forces were not listening in to the conversations of MPs, a report in local media stated.

In response to Jabir’s allegations, Parliament Speaker Abdulla Shahid said that the matter is to be taken up as a “matter of serious concern”.

Local media reported that immediately after Jabir’s claim, Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed then claimed that he had information that meals provided in parliament were laced with drugs.

“Various effects were felt even yesterday after consuming some of the food,” Rasheed was quoted as saying in local newspaper Haveeru.

A further claim was then made by Milandhoo constituency MP Ali Riyaz, who said that he had received more information that toxic gas would be put into the air-conditioning in parliament to poison the members.

Shahid assured the MPs that the allegations would be thoroughly investigated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Tension surges in Male’ as police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed

Photo courtesy Jaawid Naseem, Jade Photography

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has been arrested by police ahead of his trial hearing at Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, scheduled for 4:00pm tomorrow (March 6).

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef confirmed that Nasheed had been arrested and taken into police custody at 1:30pm today (March 5).

“We have received the order. Police have taken Nasheed into custody in order to produce him at Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court 16 hours from now,” Haneef told Minivan News.

Photos of the arrest showed several dozen police wearing balaclavas and black riot gear, several armed with rubber bullet guns, entering Nasheed’s family home in Male’ and emerging with the former president.

Shortly after the arrest, Minivan News observed President Mohamed Waheed’s brother Ali Waheed forced off his motorcycle by several dozen angry demonstrators on the main road Majeedee Magu, at the turnoff to Nasheed’s house. A second, larger group pulled Ali Waheed to safety, abandoning his motorcycle. The first group then attacked a parked military vehicle, smashing a window.

A group of people including Nasheed’s representative on the Commission of National Inquiry, Ahmed ‘Gaha’ Saeed, blocked the road, trying to calm the more violent protesters. One man had laid down in the middle of the street as part of a silent protest.
“People have waited a year since the coup and are very angry and unlikely to act reasonably. They could bring Male’ to a standstill,” Saeed said.
Former Environment Minister Mohamed Aslam, arriving at the scene, said “There is no plan. People are agitated, they are angry. There is no plan, there is just outrage.”

Nasheed’s latest trial hearing follows his exit from the Indian High Commission last month, after the Maldivian and Indian government came to an alleged “understanding” that he would be able to conduct a peaceful campaign and participate in an inclusive election.

The former president told Indian media on Sunday (March 3) that while he had ended his 11-day stay in the Indian High Commission, he was still not entirely free and feared an arrest warrant would be issued against him any day soon.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor confirmed to Minivan News that there were Special Operation (SO) officers outside Nasheed’s residence earlier today prior to his arrest.

“He has been taken away to Dhoonidhoo [prison], we are still in a state of shock,” Hamid said.

The former President sought refuge inside the High Commission building on February 13 after Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court ordered police to produce Nasheed at his trial hearing scheduled for later that day.

Nasheed has maintained that the charges against him – of detaining the Chief Criminal Court judge during his final days in office – are a politically-motivated effort to prevent him contesting the 2013 elections.

Nasheed spent 11 days inside the commission building before making an unannounced exit on February 23.

Following his exit from the High Commission, the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court issued a travel ban to Nasheed, preventing him from leaving the country.

UPDATES

2:30pm: Shortly after Nasheed’s arrest, Minivan News observed President Mohamed Waheed’s brother Ali Waheed being pulled off his motorcycle by several dozen angry demonstrators on the main road Majeedee Magu. A second, larger group pulled Ali Waheed to safety, abandoning his motorcycle. The first group then attacked a military vehicle, smashing a window as it tried to move past the group.

3:00pm: More people are arriving outside the City Council Building near the demonstration, nearing a hundred people or so in size. Shops in the vicinity are closed, and one man is lying down in the middle of the road, stepped over by the occasional pedestrian. People on motorcycles are stopping to look, and turning around to find another route.

3:10pm: A separate group of two dozen men are turning away traffic at the next intersection, in an apparent attempt to shut down Male’s main road. No sign of police presence yet. A man passes through the blockade with a young girl on a motorcycle, to shouts of “baghee” (traitor).

3:12pm: Nasheed’s brother Dr Nashid tweets: – “given all clear to go to Dhoonidhoo [detention centre]. Waiting for Laila [Nasheed’s wife]”. In a second tweet, he adds that Nasheed’s bodyguards “were changed this morning.”

3:28pm: President Waheed tweeted: “Assaulting my brother Ali Waheed will not help Nasheed escape justice.”

3:30pm: A pickup truck is circling Male’ calling on people to come out on the streets. Light rain earlier has since cleared up.

3:37pm: Photos circulating on social media appear to show one of Nasheed’s bodyguard being restrained by police as the former President was escorted outside his family home.

3:39pm: Approximate 30 police have arrived at the scene. Demonstators threw plastic bottles at officers, who subsequently departed after detaining former Environment Minister Mohamed Aslam. The crowd numbers around 200 people.

3:42pm: SunOnline reports that protesters on Majeedhee Magu have pushed off a uniformed police officer from his motorcycle as he was driving through the protesters. The policeman abandoned his motorcycle and left on foot when the crowd moved to attack him, Sun reports.

3:44pm: Abbas Faiz, South Asia Specialist for Amnesty International tweets: Amnesty investigating concerns that former prez Nasheed arrest politically motivated and his safety uncertain.

3:46pm: A masked man climbed up the posts on which CCTV cameras are mounted on the junction of Majeedhee Magu and Alikilegefaanu Magu and spray-painted the camera, reports Sun Online.

4:01pm: A video of Nasheed outside his house has emerged on DhiTV, titled ‘Anni’s Quarrel’. In the video, a Special Operations police officer states: “We will accompany you there.” Nasheed: “Well, let’s go then. I won’t go in that way. I am doing what is good for you… I will know better than you. Let’s go already.” [Former Foreign Minister] Naseem: “He is going, isn’t he? What is wrong with you baaghees (traitors)?” “Nasheed: Sigh. What more can I say? Even I would know these laws and responsibilities. For God’s sake, let’s just go. Let’s go quickly. Let’s just go quickly.”

4:03pm: The Maldivian Democratic Party has issued a statement condemning the arrest:

President Nasheed was arrested while walking down the street in Male’ at approximately 13:45 local time today. He was apprehended by numerous armed and masked police officers, who did not identify themselves, nor produce an arrest warrant or court summons. Nasheed’s lawyers were not informed of the arrest, or of any court summons.

President Nasheed was taken to Dhoonidhoo Island detention centre – the facility in which he was tortured during the former regime of Maumoon Gayoom.

Commenting on the arrest, the MDP’s international spokesperson Hamid Abdul Gafoor said: “Once again Dr Waheed has proven that he can’t be trusted to hold a free and fair election – despite his assurances to the international community.

“Nasheed was supposed to be on an election campaign trip but instead he is languishing in jail.

“This arrest comes just days after the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, said the judges overseeing President Nasheed’s case had been appointed “arbitrarily”.

“Dr Waheed, in collusion with his friends in the judiciary, is pulling out all the stops to prevent President Nasheed competing in the elections.”

The UN Special Rapporteur also said that the Judicial Services Commission, which established the court trying President Nasheed, was “politicised” and subject to “external influence”.

4:07pm: The Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) has issued a statement condemning an attack on Sun journalist and a VTV cameraman:

Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) strongly condemns the violent attacks carried out against a journalist and a cameraman while covering the arrest of former President Nasheed today.

The journalist from sun.mv was attacked and tore his shirt and snatched his mobile phone while VTV cameraman was attacked and snatched his video tape in his camera. Both the incidents was happened near former president Nasheeds residence. We strongly call on all parties to allow media to do its duty without any harrasements. And also call on all responsible authorities to investigate the above incidents and call on media regulatory authorities to not to allow ‘hate speech’ on media.

4:11pm: President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad told Minvan News: “I have already told Indian and local media that the Maldives government has made no deal with the Indian government over Nasheed’s exit from the Indian High Commission. It was never said there would be a delay in Nasheed’s trial hearing, or his court case or any other matter involving him.”

“[The government] cannot make any delay or decision based on legal matters because it is not our business, it is the judiciary’s decision,” Masood said.

Asked if Nasheed’s arrest would harm relations between Maldives and India, Masood said: “If we had made a deal and broken it, then that would be an issue. But we have not made any deal, and there has been no deal between India and the Maldives regarding Nasheed’s case. There was no understanding between the respective governments. If Nasheed thought there was an understanding, it must have been something he understood. There is no dealing between us and the judiciary on Nasheed’s judgement, It is totally up to the judiciary, we will have have no interference with the court. I did not know that the court would order police to summon Nasheed today.”

4:21pm: Scuffles are breaking out between protesters and passerbys they deem to be “baghees” (traitors). One woman clung to a man screaming as the crowd surrounded them. “There is hatred here,” said one protester. “He was asking for it. He could see there was a [blockade] but came through anyway.”

The attitude of the crowd is divided between the angry and those appealing for calm. Around 20 riot police have arrived with shields.

4:30pm: Police reinforcements have arrived at an nearby intersection, heckled by the crowd of 200 demonstrators blocking the road.

4:31pm: A middle-aged women was arrested after heckling and singing songs, and was dancing in the back of the police truck. A further five or so individuals have been arrested.

4:36pm: Police have brought the area under control and are now directing traffic.

5:30pm: The US Embassy in Colombo has issued a statement:

The United States is increasingly concerned about ongoing events in Malé. We understand that both the Police Integrity Commission and the Human Rights Commission are monitoring the situation, and that the Human Rights Commission has requested access to Former President Nasheed.  We urge all sides to remain calm, reject the use of violence, and avoid rhetoric that could increase tensions. Former President Nasheed must be accorded due process under the law regarding his pending court cases.

We urge that the Presidential elections scheduled for September 7, 2013 be free, fair, credible, transparent and inclusive. The integrity of and public confidence in the Maldivian electoral process must be maintained. Accordingly, we note that all parties participating in these elections should be able to put forward the candidate of their choice. We also call upon the Government of the Maldives to implement all the recommendations of the Commission of National Inquiry (CONI) report, including the recommendations related to judicial and governmental reforms.  We continue to urge all parties to chart a way forward that strengthens Maldivian democratic institutions, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

5:30pm: Sun Online reports that protesters have rolled over a Redwave van (owned by shop owner Eydhafushi MP Ahmed Saleem) near Male’ City Council. The van was broken into, milk packets were taken and subsequently distributed to protesters.

5:51pm: British entrepeneur Richard Branson has tweeted on the Nasheed arrest: “Maldives former president Nasheed arrested, in court tomorrow. Hope he is treated with respect & fairness”.

6:31pm: Local media has reported that police have once again left Majeedee Magu.

7:10pm: Some 150 demonstrators remain on Majeedee Magu, situated around 20 metres from the Male’ City Council building. No police presence is witnessed by Minivan News at the current time, although traffic is still being diverted as a result of the makeshift blockade.

8:52pm: At a press conference held this evening, the Maldives Police Service have said that a total of 47 people were arrested so far during demonstrations today on Majeedee Magu.  Of those arrested 31 were male, 16 females were also detained.  Among those arrested was MDP MP Ahmed Easa, who authorities said was later released.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Illegitimate address by coup president warrants no official response”: MDP PG Leader Ibu Solih

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Parliament Group Leader Ibrahim Mohamed Solih (Ibu Solih) has stated that the party will not be responding to the presidential address delivered by President Mohamed Waheed Hassan during Monday’s parliament opening ceremony.

Solih said the statement held no legitimacy as Waheed himself was an illegally installed president, and hence warranted no official response.

“Waheed is in his position through a coup d’etat. A year having passed since does not change that fact. That is what we demonstrated in parliament today,” Solih told local media.

“We are only obliged to respond to a presidential address given by a legitimate leader.”

If Waheed were to be a legal president, then he would be representing MDP. Were it so, then MDP would not need to respond to the address, and the task would be for some other party. So, in either of those instances, MDP has no obligation to respond to Waheed’s statement,” he continued.

MDP also refused to respond to Waheed’s address in 2012.

Parliament regulations state that the majority and minority parties in the parliament besides the one that the President represents must issue a response to the presidential address within a period of 14 days after it being issued.

Solih furthermore expressed concern over some actions during Monday’s parliamentary session.

“While the session was in a recess, an MNDF officer attacked one of our MPs. I saw this happen with my own eyes. I have already lodged a complaint about this with the parliament speaker. The security officer was removed from the parliament halls at the time. Incidentally, we have also identified him,” Solih alleged.

Solih also alleged that the party’s objective during this parliamentary year was to pass many of the important bills that have been pending for long periods of time.

“I believe this year we will see a lot of productive work being completed here. One of these pending bills is the Penal Code. Hopefully, this bill will be passed as law within the month,” Solih stated.

Presidential Address in six hours, six attempts

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan delivered the presidential address in parliament on Monday through six separate attempts made through nearly six hours.

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs staged protests inside the parliament chambers while simultaneous protests by party supporters carried on outside parliament, with thousands of supporters chanting “coup president resign now” and “we want an interim government now”.

While normal procedure during previous instances where a president speaks in a parliament is to fly the presidential flag alongside the national flag and the parliament flag, no such flag was hoisted during Monday’s session.

Waheed was prevented from entering the main parliament hall twice, and he proceeded to deliver the presidential address in four separate installments. Local media reported that Waheed had omitted much of the 17 page speech that had been distributed to media ahead of the parliament meeting.

Three of these times, he was led out of the hall by Parliament Speaker Abdulla Shahid due to disruptions caused by MDP MPs who were echoing the chants of “baaghee” [traitor] inside.

After Waheed concluded his presidential address, MDP MPs joined the street protests which were being carried out on Sosun Magu.

Former President and MDP Presidential Mohamed Nasheed joined to greet the MPs as they entered the gathering to the sound of loud cheering from party supporters.

Before the protest was concluded, MP Ali Waheed addressed the crowd, stating that the party would continue protesting against what he alleged is a “coup government.”

“What we have witnessed is the beginning of the end of Waheed’s coup administration,” MP Waheed told the gathered crowds.

“Just like the old dictator Maumoon had to retreat into his cave, Waheed will have the same fate,” he said.

“The events we saw in Majlis has proven a lot of things. The fact that members from all the other parties stayed quiet and did not attempt to intervene in our protests say a lot. They have said ‘no to Waheed’ in the loudest form that they can while they are still part of this current government,” Ali Waheed said.

“Around 30 of our MPs managed to hold Waheed back from speaking in parliament for over five hours despite him coming surrounded by police and army. There is hope that we will be victorious,” Ali Waheed said in conclusion of his address before the party marched off, bringing an end to Monday’s protests.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Court bans former President Nasheed from travelling abroad

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has said that the travel ban imposed against him will hinder his political campaign and party work.

Speaking to the Times of India, Nasheed stated that despite ending his 11-day stay at the Indian High Commission in Male’ last month, he was still not entirely free, adding that he “fears” an arrest warrant will be issued against him “any day”.

The former President sought refuge inside the High Commission building on February 13 after Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court ordered police to produce Nasheed at his trial hearing scheduled for later that day.

Nasheed has maintained that the charges against him – of detaining the Chief Criminal Court Judge during his final days in office – are a politically-motivated effort to prevent him contesting the 2013 elections.

Nasheed spent 11 days inside the commission building before making an unannounced exit on February 23, after a “deal” had allegedly been brokered between both Indian and Maldivian governments.

Despite Nasheed’s exit from the commission, the former President has now stated that the travel ban imposed by Hulhumale’ court – prohibiting him from leaving Male’ – shows the “politically motivated nature of the court”.

“I believe the Indian government is worried that if there isn’t a free, fair and inclusive election, there will be instability in the Maldives.

“However, if I am not allowed to travel outside Male and campaign, it means that there is no firmness to the understanding brokered by India. I fear the court might even issue a warrant against me any day,” Nasheed was quoted as saying in Times of India.

The former President claimed that there had been an understanding – rather than a deal – between the two governments that he would be able to conduct a peaceful political campaign and would participate in an inclusive election.

“The charges would not be dropped against me, but even if I became the president after the elections, the law would take its course. On my part I would create space for the Indian and Maldivian governments to settle the issue,” Nasheed said.

Despite Nasheed’s claims, an official from the Judiciary Media Unit told local media last month that the court had denied Nasheed’s request as he had not cooperated with the court on previous instances.

Responding to a question about President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik’s stance on the matter, Nasheed told Times of India that the President has yet to say anything.

“As president, he [President Waheed] should say clearly that the case against me is deferred. This deliberately created situation of suspended animation is going to harm our campaign,” Nasheed said.

President’s Office Spokespeople Masood Imad and Ahmed ‘Topy’ Thaufeeq were not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

An official from the Judiciary Media Unit told Minivan News that he would attempt to find out more information regarding the length of Nasheed’s travel ban, however he was not responding to follow-up calls at time of press.

The former President was invited to be the guest of honour at the opening of the Cultural Season 2013 in Abu Dhabi in the UAE, by Sheikh Nahayan Mabarak Al Nahayan, Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research.

Nasheed was also due to meet Commonwealth Secretary General Kamalesh Sharma, and was to visit Denmark on the invitation of the Danish government.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)