Tag: MDP

Independent Institutions Committee disrupted after disagreement over summoning JSC

A meeting of Parliament’s Committee on Independent Institutions on Wednesday was disrupted due to heated verbal exchanges between Chair of the committee independent MP Mohamed Nasheed and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s Parliamentary Group Deputy Leader Ali Waheed.

On agenda for the meeting was a motion submitted by MDP MPs Ali Waheed, Hamid Abdul Ghafoor and Ahmed Sameer, who is also Vice Chair of the committee.

The motion was in reference to the establishment and continuation of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the appointment of judges to that court.

Speaking on the issue, Ali Waheed proposed to summon the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) to the committee, reports local media. However this proposition was not supported by MDP MPs Ahmed Sameer and Ahmed Abdulla.

Nasheed had responded that certain documents needed to be acquired by the committee before summoning the JSC, adding that there was “no need to rush the matter” since PPM MP Abdulla Yameen also agreed to summonthe commission.

Nasheed further said that the committee’s decision would “hold more weight” if all parties reached a consensus, adding that if this was the case the JSC would not face any difficulties in obeying the decision.

The official parliament website reports that it was been decided at the meeting that all documents prepared by the JSC regarding the Hulhumale’ court after 21 October 2010, any documents submitted to JSC regarding the Hulhumale’ court, the minutes of any meetings held regarding the appointment, transfer or any other matters that were in relation to judges, were to be obtained and further researched at the next meeting of the committee.

Ali Waheed alleged that PPM was attempting to prolong the Hulhumale’ court issue in the committee by not attending the meeting. He also said that the committee lacked “seriousness” when dealing with the matter.

He further alleged that there were “some persons within the MDP who wished to see [former President] Nasheed convicted”, saying that they would not stay by idly while Nasheed’s presidential candidacy was on the line.

Despite attempts by Sameer to escort Waheed out of the committee meeting hall, Waheed continued to pace around the room and make loud statements aimed at MP Nasheed.

The meeting was discontinued when Nasheed started responding in kind to Waheed’s loud statements, making it impossible for members in attendance to speak over the noise.

Wednesday’s meeting was attended by independent MP Mohamed Nasheed, MDP MPs Ahmed Sameer, Ali Waheed, Ahmed Abdulla, Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Rozaina Adam and Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MPs express concern over Addu airport bidding process, while AIA MD Shahid denies corruption allegations

Jumhoree Party (JP) Leader, MP, and chairman of the Villa Group of businesses, Gasim Ibrahim, denied in parliament today that he had spoken against the sale of shares of Addu International Airport (AIA) with the intention of buying shares himself. He claimed he had done so “in the best interests of Addu and the country.”

“If Gasim wanted shares, Gasim would have bid for them,” Gasim said in response to some MPs, who had alleged he was himself interested in buying the shares.

Referring to his offer in his letter to President Mohamed Waheed Hassan to reclaim land for the project free of charge “using my own dredger, employees and machinery with the government only providing oil,” Gasim said that the costs of the work would come up to US$7 million.

“I am very concerned that they have gone ahead and sold the shares without even considering the offer of free aid of this size,” Gasim said.

Gasim further stated that although he did want to see the Addu airport developed, the shares had not been sold in the right manner, adding “things won’t go very well” due to how the shares had been given away.

JP MP Alhan Fahmy echoed Gasim’s statement that he, too, wished to see the Addu airport developed, but that he was concerned with how the sale of shares had been carried out. Fahmy said that 30 percent of shares being sold off for MVR 60 million (US$3.89 million) was “nothing but daylight robbery”.

“The shares have been sold far too cheaply. Our problem is that they’ve done this while there are many other ways obtain the funds needed for development,” Fahmy explained.

A number of MPs from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) stated that the party supported the concept of privatisation, adding that the development of the Addu airport was originally an MDP initiated plan. They, too, however, expressed concerns over how the bidding process had been carried out.

MDP Parliamentary Group’s Deputy Leader Ali Waheed criticised Gasim Ibrahim for his “lack of conviction” when speaking about the issue in parliament.

Waheed said that Gasim had not dared to criticise the government even after it had sold the shares, despite Gasim’s allegations that major corruption had been involved in the deal.

Referring to Gasim’s common name “Buruma” (‘drill’), Waheed said, “There is no use for a drill without electricity”, alleging that the JP leader had been “too cowardly” to even speak of the issue openly during today’s parliamentary session.

“Cowards need not contest in the coming presidential elections,” Waheed further declared.

Gan Airport development to start in January: Shahid

MD of AIA and STO Shahid Ali said in a press briefing on Monday that the Addu Airport development work is set to begin in January.

Ali said that the pre-bid meetings had been held with the three shortlisted contractors and that the bids were scheduled to be submitted by November 28.

The development plans include an extension of the runway, repairing of the apron, placing an extra layer of tar on the runway and setting up a sea plane base.

He also stated that contrary to general speculation, the airport had not been “sold”, but rather shares from the company AIA that had been sold to KASA Holdings.

He also refuted allegations of corruption, saying that KASA Holdings had been given higher priority since it was a local company and that all proceedings had gone through the bidding process in a matter which was completely free of any corruption.

“It is often said now that 30 percent of the airport has been sold to a private party. The truth is that 100 percent of the land of Gan, the infrastructure of the airport and its facilities are with the government, because Gan Airport Ltd is a company which is 100 percent owned by the government. So all the assets are owned by them. Then this company has leased the airport to AIA for 50 years,” Ali explained.

Ali said that therefore it was clear that selling 30 percent of the shares of AIA, a joint company formed by the Gan Airport Ltd, STO and the Maldives Airports Company Ltd, was not a sale of the airport itself.

Leave politics aside

Addu City council has released a statement welcoming the signing of the contract which they said would lead to the development of the Addu airport.

The statement further notes “the importance of leaving politics aside and for the good of citizens in letting the venture bring positive changes to Addu’s economy.”

Meanwhile, MDP released a statement on Monday urging “not to let political feuds, political needs and power play interfere in important work directly related to the development of Addu City citizens, and generally all Maldivian citizens.”

The statement also condemned Gasim’s threats against Shahid Ali, stating “This party calls on political leaders to refrain from making unlawful threats through the greed for power and political wants.”

In a uncommon move, 18 citizens from Addu held a press conference on Monday, speaking in support of the Addu airport development.

The citizens welcomed the selling of shares to KASA Holdings, stating that it was not a sale of the airport itself. They further said that the citizens of Addu were happy that although the airport has so far remained the same, development work is scheduled to begin early next year.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Parliament orders Elections Commission to drop fingerprint verification for party membership forms

Parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee has requested the Elections Commission (EC) cease requiring fingerprints on applications for political party membership.

According to local media, the parliamentary committee today decided that no law or regulation existed that required the EC to request fingerprints to verify the authenticity of new party members.

The committee members questioned the efficiency of fingerprinting technology, arguing that no mechanism or database presently existed in the Maldives that could store the required amounts of information.

However, local NGO the Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN) told Minivan News that while it was unsure of the efficiency of the previous fingerprint system, fraudulent membership registration for Maldivian political parties remained a significant problem that needed to be addressed.

“The problem that exists right now is that there is a lot of fraudulent membership within political parties. Often, people are not aware they have been signed up,” MDN stated. “It is imperative that it is down to an individual to decide which party they want to belong to and no one else.”

MDN Executive Director Humaida Abdul Gafoor said it was vital that some form of verification mechanism was in place to ensure party memberships were genuine, adding that a bigger issue facing the committee should be finding an alternatives to the fingerprint technology, rather than simply halting it.

“We don’t know if the EC’s adoption of fingerprinting was a move in the right direction in first place,” she added.

Verification systems

Explaining the decision to discontinue the EC’s request for fingerprints, Deputy Chairman of the Independent Institutions Committee, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ahmed Sameer, said that the Maldives did not presently have a mechanism or system to collect and store such information.

“In regards to issues with the fingerprinting system, the EC, Department of National Registration and the Maldives Police Service all agreed they didn’t have enough records or verification systems available,” he told Minivan News.

The Department of National Registration, which had also been summoned before the committee, was reported to have confirmed that no fingerprint database presently existed in the Maldives.

Elections Commission President Fuad Thaufeeq was not responding to calls at time of press.

System critics

One critic of the EC’s fingerprint system is MP Ahmed Mahloof of the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).

Back in September, Mahloof alleged via local media that close to 8000 membership forms from his party have been rejected by the Elections Commission (EC) – mainly due to the quality of fingerprints appearing on the forms.

The MP claimed that the fingerprint issue had arisen because the EC did not have sufficiently modern machinery to look at the fingerprints, relying instead on the perception of its staff – drastically limiting memberships numbers for the party.

A spokesperson for the EC told Minivan News at the time that similar complaints had been received from other political parties including the Jumhoree Party (JP), Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP), and the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

“Party membership forms go through a 50 step verification process. We are doing this to minimise chances of fraud. After we introduced this procedure, we are no longer receiving any complaints from individuals who have been placed in parties without their knowledge,” the spokesperson said.

The EC accepted that did not have machinery to verify fingerprints, but claimed that it had been able to forward complaints to the Maldives Police Service, which was able to use its resources to look into the matter.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed denounces DQP’s economic criticism of GMR contract

Former President Mohamed Nasheed on Sunday slammed a pamphlet released by the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) which claims to detail the financial loss caused to the country through leasing the international airport to Indian infrastructure giant company, GMR.

“I assure you that no loss at all would be caused to the Maldivian people through having a foreign company manage the airport,” Nasheed assured the crowds of over 1500 supporters gathered at Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s rally grounds Usfasgandu on Sunday night.

During his speech, Nasheed broke down the figures published in the book titled “Loss and Challenges of the long-term leasing of Male’ International Airport to GMR” written by current Special Advisor to the President, Dr Hassan Saeed. He further emphasised the inconsistencies that those figures held in comparison with the values he put forth with reference to external sources and the GMR contract.

“I am inclined to think that these people who have written this book must have studied their mathematics in an opium field in Afghanistan’s Kandahar. There is no other way that they could have gotten their arithmetic so completely wrong,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed said that while the book cites the MDP government’s estimation of a profit of MVR 45 billion in the next 25 years if GMR managed the airport, it went on to state that if the government took over management, they stood to receive a profit of MVR 60 billion (US$3.9 billion).

Elaborating on what the book had provided as backing for the said claim, Nasheed said “The first estimate they’ve made is that airport growth will increase by 25 percent every year. However, the IFC, World Bank, and other relevant international entities tell us that the rate of growth will be between 3.5 and 4.5 percent.”

“What is being said here is that the number of people coming to our airport far exceeds the number of tourist beds in the country. Even taking this to account, I see that they have sneaked in MVR 12 billion (US$778 million) to reach this 60 billion,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed added that the book had failed to consider the expenses that the Duty Free shops would pose, instead noting only estimated earnings.

“Usually expenses add up to 75 percent of earnings. Therefore, MVR 19.5 billion (US$1.26 billion) has been sneaked in to reach that 60 billion figure,” Nasheed stated.

“They also say that GMR is to invest MVR 4.8 billion (US$311 million) [over the lifespan of the contract] but I can without a doubt tell you that in accordance with the contract, GMR is to invest MVR 8.9 billion (US$577 million),” he further said.

Nasheed also pointed out that while the book claimed the government would finance the airport through a direct loan, they had omitted payment of any interest on the loan.

“In their accounting, they have not put down any expenses for the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL). These expenses are at least a MVR 110 million (US$7.14 million) per year, so again MVR 2.7 billion (US$175 million) needs to be taken out from this said MVR 60 billion.”

“In conclusion, the actual figures show that if MACL manages the airport, the government will receive MVR 18 billion (US$1.16 billion) over the next 25 years. Whereas if GMR manages it, the government will receive MVR 45 billion (US$2.92 billion) – that is MVR 1.6 billion (US$103.7 million) per year,” stated Nasheed.

Nasheed further claimed that under the contract, the Passenger Service Tax (US$18 US from foreigners and US$12 from locals) which used to be paid to MACL was now paid directly to the government.

“Thus in addition to the figures I’ve just shared, an additional MVR 324 million (US$21 million) will go into the government budget,” Nasheed claimed.

“No truth in government’s claims to nationalise airport”: Nasheed

Nasheed said that statements regarding “reclaiming” the airport from GMR were “highly irresponsible”, stating that such words from a government could cause irreparable damage to the country.

“Most of us citizens will doubtless understand that putting up banners with slogans all over the streets of Male’ and raising voices against India holds no benefits at all for the country,” Nasheed said, criticising the current ‘Airport Week’ being marked by the unity government parties.

Nasheed further alleged that airport nationalisation was a topic currently being used by political actors for their own personal interests .

“They are talking about the airport, and the religion of Islam, nationalism, national heritage and patriotism for the sole purpose of pulling the wool over people’s eyes and to orchestrate the coup,” Nasheed continued. “Even today they are not really trying to take the airport back from the GMR. This talk about the Adhaalath Party and Waheed’s government nationalising the airport has no amount of truth in it,” he said.

“I remember one mutinying officer on February 7 saying that he was there because the MDP government had sold the airport his father and grandfather had built. I want to say that the airport is still there. The only difference is that it roof is no longer leaking,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed ended his speech sharing his wish that the airport was developed by a capable company and that it would in future become the best of its kind across Asia.

Minivan News tried contacting Hassan Saeed, but he was not responding to calls at time of press.

DQP Secretary General Abdulla Ameen, President of the Adhaalath Party (AP) Sheikh Imran Abdulla, and Minister of Islamic Affairs and AP Member Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed were also not responding to calls.

The Adhaalath Party has previously called on President Mohamed Waheed Hassan and other coalition parties to not conduct any communication with GMR which might disrupt the government’s push for airport nationalisation, a push it praised as “national jihad”.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

Parliament rejects resolution on MVR 300 million BML loan

Parliament yesterday rejected 27-17 a resolution submitted by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ahmed Sameer calling for an inquiry into the government borrowing MVR 300 million (US$19.5 million) from the Bank of Maldives.

The loan was obtained without parliamentary approval as required by the Public Finance Act.

The government had previously told local media the the BML loan was borrowed instead of US$65 million loan programme previously approved by the Majlis for budget support, and contended that further approval from parliament was therefore not required.

However, Counsellor General Fathmath Filza told the Finance Committee that the US$65 million loan was only to be borrowed from foreign lenders and that the government has to seek parliamentary approval before borrowing from a local bank as per the Public Finance Act.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP gathering calls for judicial reform ahead of Nasheed trial

Maldivian Democratic Party on Tuesday night held a march around the capital island Male’ calling for judicial reform ahead of the next hearing of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s trial, scheduled for November 4.

Over 500 protesters marched around Male’ with banners and placards displaying messages on the importance of judicial independence and holding the judiciary accountable.

A number of leading MDP figures joined the march, including former Minister of Environment and Housing Mohamed Aslam, MP Ilyas Labeeb, former Ministers of Education Shifa Mohamed and Musthafa Lutfi, former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmed Naseem and former Minister of Home Affairs Hassan Afeef.

Some of the messages on the banners observed by Minivan News said: “Do not destroy justice for the sake of political gain” and “No one will benefit through spoiling the judiciary.”

The protest march began in front of the MDP office on Sosun Magu and protesters walked on the streets of Male’ despite the rainy weather. The march stopped at some street junctions where party leaders gave speeches to the gathered crowds. Speakers included Musthafa Lutfi and Shifa Mohamed.

MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Gafoor said that a main focus of the protest was asserting that the judiciary too must be held accountable.

The three judges presiding over the Nasheed case have continued to refuse to attend parliament committee meeting despite repeated summons.

Trial against Nasheed

On October 9, the police presented Nasheed to the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court for the first hearing on the case concerning his arrest of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

He was arrested on the island of FaresMathoda on the previous day and held in the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility until the hearing, prompting protests by hundreds of his supporters.

After the first hearing, Nasheed was released from custody, though they maintained the previously imposed travel ban, requiring him to get a special permission from the courts prior to any travelling.

Nasheed alleged that the Prosecutor General’s sole purpose was to bar him from contesting in the upcoming presidential elections, stating, “If, as the President of the Maldives I arrested the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, then it is not as small a crime as is stated in Article 81 (of the Penal Code). The Prosecutor General’s only objective is to ensure that I cannot contest in the next presidential elections. To do so, he has identified an article which would provide just the required period of detention to cancel my candidacy.”

Nasheed’s legal team has previously raised concerns about the trial, stating that case proceedings were against laws and norms. They raised questions about the legality of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and procedural issues with the three judge panel presiding over the case.

While the next hearing has been scheduled for November 4, two among Nasheed’s lawyers have been barred from court.

Meanwhile, following an application for a temporary injunction by Nasheed’s legal team, the High Court has declared that it will hold the next hearing of the injunction case on the same day coinciding with Nasheed’s next hearing at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MPs claim bill on the right to remain silent contradicts constitution

Parliament has divided opinions on the Bill on the Right to remain silent submitted by independent member of parliament, Mohamed Nasheed.

The bill had its second reading in parliament on Tuesday, following the first reading on October 3. During the ensuing one hour debate, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs mainly spoke against the bill, while most MPs aligned with the ruling coalition supported the bill and advocated for it to be expedited.

“The right to remain silent is a fundamental basis on which the criminal justice system in many other countries are built upon. They do not have to explicitly define this in their laws as it is already well established in their respective societies,” Nasheed explained in parliament today.

“Our case is different. We first heard the phrase ‘the right to remain silent’ with the ratification of the 2008 constitution,” Nasheed said, adding that unlike other countries, Maldivians did not have any local material to refer to for better understanding of the right.

He said that the bill therefore aimed to define clearly what comes and what does not come within the boundaries of the right to remain silent, where this right can be applied and the legal outcomes that may ensue.

No threat to MPs

A number of MPs, some from the ruling coalition parties and some independent, spoke in favour of the bill. They insisted that narrowing the right to remain silent would assist in police investigations, thereby contributing to bringing down crime rates.

Some MPs stated that this bill only caused inconvenience to criminals, explicitly stating that it posed no risk to MPs and politicians.

Independent MP Ahmed Amir said that the MPs themselves needed to prove to the nation that all of them were people who refrained from getting involved in criminal activities, asking “Why then must we be concerned about this bill? I do not believe any member here needs to be concerned about this bill.”

Amir said the parliament had narrowed the same right in the Act on Sexual harassment against children, adding “why then are we so reluctant to pass an act to narrow down this right as a whole? That this may cause a loss to us, or the nation, is in my view an irresponsible stance to take.”

Meanwhile, DRP MP Mausoom stated the importance of expediting the bill, pledging complete support to the draft bill.

“At a time when we started moving towards democracy, one reason which led to a number of citizens expressing discontent with a democratic system is that the rights of criminals began exceeding those of regular citizens,” Mausoom said, stating that it was of extreme importance that the bill on the floor be sent to the relevant committee and passed at  the earliest.

PPM MP Ahmed ‘RedWave’ Saleem also supported the bill, and put forward his opinion in parliament.

“On judgement day you cannot exercise the right to remain silent. If you do, your organs will speak for you. However, organs cannot speak today, and so we must speak with our own tongues. If police ask you if you have committed a crime, you can simply say no even if you have committed it, so what is there to be afraid of?” Saleem said.

Addressing the MDP MPs Saleem said, “I want to tell my MDP brothers that this poses no threat to them, only to criminals. There is no threat to any politicians either.”

Contradictions with the Constitution

MPs who spoke against the bill pointed out that the bill directly contradicted articles in the constitution.

Article 20 of the proposed bill states that should a person choose to remain silent, after which sufficient evidence is provided in courts to prove without doubt that he is guilty as accused, then his decision to remain silent can be viewed as further proof against him. It further says that this is because instead of trying to prove his innocence, the accused had chosen to remain silent.

MDP MPs Ali Riza and Ali Waheed stated that this article was in direct contradiction to Articles 51(a), 51(c), 51(d), 51(e), 51(h) and 52 of the constitution.

Ali Waheed further stated, “I do not believe that any Act has the power to completely turn around a right guaranteed in Chapter 2 of the Constitution.”

From the government coalition parties, Jumhoree Party MP Abdulla Jabir also spoke against the proposed bill.

“We have heard in the past that two or three people would be arrested, tortured, forced to confess, and then claiming the investigation to be completed, these people would be sentenced undeservingly. Are we to move back into that again?” he said.

Jabir stated that he would not support the bill as he felt it would bring back the culture of torture, forced confessions and convictions of the innocent.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

PPM wins by-elections in Faafu, Meemu and Laamu atolls

Candidates from the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) have won all three by-elections held on Monday for vacant atoll and island council seats in Meemu Atoll Mulaku constituency, Faafu Atoll Bilehdhoo and Laamu Atoll Maabaidhoo.

According to provisional results from the Elections Commission (EC), PPM candidate Ali Ibrahim won the contest for the vacant Meemu Mulaku constituency atoll council seat with 677 votes (50.45 percent) against Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate Ibrahim Latheef with 478 votes (35.6 percent).

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) candidate Adam Hassan was placed third with 187 votes (13.93 percent).

In the February 2011 local council elections – which took place before the PPM was formed by the breakaway ‘Zaeem’ faction of the DRP – the then-opposition candidates Yousuf Sidqee and Zahira Mohamed from the DRP along with Ahmed Sulaiman from the People’s Alliance (PA) won the three atoll council seats for the Mulaku constituency with 949 votes, 736 votes and 855 votes respectively.

The fifth placed MDP candidate Mohamed Adil received 711 votes.

In May 2009, then-PA Leader Abdulla Yameen secured the Mulaku constituency parliamentary seat with 856 votes (45 percent).

Meanwhile, in Laamu Maabaidhoo, PPM candidate Hassan Adil won the vacant island council seat yesterday with 198 votes (43.52 percent) against Abdul Rasheed from the MDP who got 168 votes (36.92 percent) and Independent candidate Ahmed Shujau in third place with 89 votes (19.57 percent).

In February 2011, the five seats of the Maabaidhoo island council were won by two independent candidates and three DRP candidates.

While independent candidate Mariyam Didi came first with 283 votes, MDP candidate Ali Rasheed in 15th place received 81 votes.

The constituency including Maabadhoo was won by the PA in the parliamentary election. The then-minority opposition contested the parliamentary elections in a formal coalition with the DRP.

Meanwhile, independent candidate Shareef Idrees – who is a member of PPM – won yesterday’s by-election for a vacant seat in the Faafu Bilehdhoo island council with 342 votes (53.44 percent) against MDP candidate Ramzeena Afeef who got 298 votes (46.56 percent).

Four independent candidates and one MDP candidate were elected to the Bilehdhoo island council in February 2011.

In February 2011, the highest placed independent candidate Ali Saleem was elected with 390 votes while fifth placed MDP candidate Imran Rasheed received 309 votes.

In a by-election in November 2011 for a vacant atoll council seat for the Bilehdhoo constituency, MDP candidate Ibrahim Naeem came on top with 674 votes (53 percent) against Jumhoree Party contender Mohamed Musthafa, placed second with 539 votes (42 percent).

The former ruling party had won all three atoll council seats from the Bilehdhoo constituency in February 2011.

Moreover, MDP MP Ahmed Hamza represents the Bilehdhoo constituency in parliament.

Following yesterday’s results, PPM Spokesperson and MP Ahmed Mahloof noted that the party has won nine out of 12 by-elections held since its inception in October 2011.

Meanwhile, a by-election scheduled for Monday to elect a candidate for a vacant seat in the Alif Dhaal Dhidhoo island council was decided without a vote after only the Jumhoree Party (JP) fielded a candidate. The EC announced on October 1 that JP candidate Ahmed Niyaz had won the seat by default.

Turnout

The turn-out in all three by-elections on Monday was relatively low compared to previous elections, with 55 percent in Mulaku, 82 percent in Bilehdhoo and 79 percent in Maabadhoo.

Of 2,441 eligible voters in the Mulaku constituency, 1,360 cast their ballots (18 were declared invalid).

In the island of Maabaidhoo in Laamu Atoll, 462 voters out of 661 eligible voters participated in the by-election. Seven votes were declared invalid.

In Bilehdhoo, out of 784 eligible voters, 650 citizens cast their ballots with ten declared invalid.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Legal order” last option to compel judges to attend committee: MDP

A “legal order” from parliament is the last available option to compel three judges of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court to attend parliament’s Government Oversight Committee, following their refusal to answer two previous summons, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) said in a statement on Saturday.

The press release stated that “the excuses” offered by the three magistrates on administrative grounds – contending that as judges of the lower courts they doubted whether they could answer questions regarding the Commission of National Inquiry’s report and that they needed to await a decision by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) – were “reasons that lacked any principle.”

“Therefore, the party notes that the measure left to be taken to bring the summoned judges to the Majlis committee is to issue a legal order to that effect,” the statement read.

Asked for clarification on the “legal order”, MDP Spokesperson MP Hamid Abdul Gafoor said that the statement did not refer to a court order contrary to the “assumption” by Sun Online and Haveeru.

“No mention was made of a court order in the news brief. Sun appear to have assumed so. The Majlis can bring out an ‘amuru‘ [order] according to house rules,” Hamid explained.

‘Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court’

The MDP also contests the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, which was created by the JSC before the enactment of the Judicature Act in October 2010.

A constitutional case concerning the magistrate court is currently pending at the Supreme Court.

Writing in his personal blog on October 9, Independent MP for Kulhudhufushi South, Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed, explained that a magistrate court could not be established at Hulhumale’ as the Judicature Act states that magistrate courts should be set up in inhabited islands aside from Male’ without a division of the trial courts (Criminal Court, Civil Court, Family Court and Juvenile Court).

According to appendix two of the constitution, Hulhumale’ is a district or ward of Male’ and not a separate inhabited island. The former magistrate court at Hulhumale’ should therefore have been dissolved when the Judicature Act was ratified, Nasheed argued.

The three magistrates of the contested Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court are Shujau Usman, Abdul Nasir Abdul Raheem and Hussain Mazeed.

“Summon any person”

The MDP statement meanwhile observed that article 99(a) of the constitution states that the People’s Majlis or any of its committee has the power to “summon any person to appear before it to give evidence under oath, or to produce documents. Any person who is questioned by the People’s Majlis as provided for  in this article shall answer to the best of his knowledge and ability.”

However, following the first attempt to summon the magistrates, the JSC and the Supreme Court made public statements insisting that the JSC was the only authority empowered by the constitution to hold judges accountable.

A statement by the JSC on October 9 citing the constitution, the Judicature Act and the Judicial Service Commission Act contended that no other state institution could interfere with the work of judges or make any attempt to hold judges accountable.

Under article 159(b) of the constitution, the JSC is empowered with the power and responsibility “to investigate complaints about the judiciary, and to take disciplinary action against them, including recommendations for dismissal.”

Parties in the ruling coalition have meanwhile condemned the decision to summon the magistrates as an attempt to influence the trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court on charges of illegally detaining Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

The formerly ruling MDP has a voting majority on the Government Oversight Committee.

While Speaker Abdulla Shahid sent the summons issued by the committee on October 9, local media reported that parliament’s Counsel General Fathmath Filza had advised that summoning judges was not within the mandate of the committee.

Meanwhile, following the judges’ snub of the second summons, MDP MP Ali Waheed told reporters outside parliament on Wednesday that the actions of the magistrates and the JSC as well as the Supreme Court’s encouragement of their behaviour was a “cat and mouse game” played by the judiciary.

“What we are witnessing is a ‘cat and mouse’ or a ‘hide and seek’ game being played between parliament and judiciary. If that is the case, we are going to play the cat and mouse chase, because we are not going to step back from our responsibilities,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)