Tag: media

“Mandela of the Maldives” forced out by police mutiny: Independent

President Mohamed Nasheed was been forced to step down after weeks of opposition protests culminated in a mutiny by police, reports Andrew Buncombe for the UK’s Independent newspaper.

“Supporters of the President said he was the victim of what amounted to a coup.

The former political prisoner who some nicknamed the “Mandela of the Maldives” announced his resignation during a live television broadcast yesterday, saying he would rather stand down than use force against his own citizens. Foreign tourists who flock to the nation’s luxury resorts were not believed to be in any danger.

“I resign because I am not a person who wishes to rule with the use of power. I believe that if the government were to remain in power it would require the use of force which would harm many citizens,” he said. “I resign because I believe that if the government continues to stay in power, it is very likely that we may face foreign influences.”

The British-educated, former journalist was the first democratically elected leader of the Muslim Indian Ocean nation of more than 1,200 islands. But his opponents had recently been holding daily demonstrations and seized on the President’s decision to arrest and detain a judge – accusing him of acting undemocratically.

Among the protesters were members of the police force and yesterday they gathered outside the military headquarters where Mr Nasheed was seeking refuge, in the capital, Male. The mutinying police set fire to an office of Mr Nasheed’s party and seized control of the state broadcaster.

Soldiers fired tear gas at the police and demonstrators who besieged the military facilities, many of then chanting the name of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, the former President who served for 30 years and whom Mr Nasheed beat in a 2008 election. A number of reports have suggested the military persuaded Mr Nasheed to step down.

Last night, the country’s Vice-President, Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, was sworn into office. It is expected he will oversee a coalition administration until elections are held.

Mr Nasheed was apparently in protective custody, something disputed by his brother, who told the BBC he was being held against his will.

Mr Nasheed could not be contacted. But a source close to the former President told The Independent that police had taken control of all television and radio stations and that officials who worked for Mr Nasheed were not being allowed to leave. “It’s a coup. Elements of the former regime brought down the country’s first democratically elected President,” said the source, who asked not to be identified.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court injunction stops us taking action against Abdulla Mohamed: JSC

Judicial Service Commission (JSC) President Adam Mohamed has claimed the body is “impatient” to take action against the Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdullah Mohamed, and claimed that the only thing preventing the move is the Civil Court injunction filed by Abdulla Mohamed ordering the judicial watchdog not to take any action, until the court decided otherwise.

Adam Mohamed made the statements in response to questions asked at the Saturday’s meeting of parliament’s independent institutions committee where the JSC members, including opposition MP Gasim Ibrahim and Speaker of Parliament Abullah Shahid, were summoned to clarify the reason for delay in taking action against the judge.

In the committee meeting, broadcasted live, Mohamed restated that  it would be a “violation of law” to take any action against Chief Judge before the Civil Court injunction was overruled, stating that and the commission has to proceed within the legal bounds.

“If we take action against Judge Abdullah, we will be in violation of law. [Because] violating a ruling is violating the law. We are very cautious,” said Mohamed, the Supreme Court’s representative on the judicial watchdog.

“We are impatient to take action [against chief judge] within the legal bounds” he claimed, adding that the case had now been appealed in High court.

The civil court granted the injunction in November 2011 – on the judge’s request – during the 30 day period he was given to respond to the report completed by JSC in which was found guilty of violating the Judge’s Code of Conduct for making politically contentious statements on a local TV channel.

According to the JSC, a total of 11 complaints have been submitted against the judge.

While the JSC’s decision remains stalled due to the injunction, questions have been raised as to whether the civil court has the jurisdiction to rule against its own watchdog body.

Aishath Velezinee, former president’s member at the JSC, argues that “if the judicial watchdog can be overruled by a judge sitting in some court somewhere, then the JSC is dysfunctional. But that’s what has been happening,” she asserted.

While the injunction issued last November was appealed at the higher courts, JSC also cited that the commission does not consider that the civil court has authority to hear the case.

The JSC first appealed the case at Supreme Court, which instructed it to forward the matter to the high court.

The high court scheduled its first hearing on the case last Thursday, but was cancelled by the judge who decided the case cannot be heard in absence Judge Abdulla Mohamed, after the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) refused to produce him. He remains under MNDF custody on the training island of Girifushi.

The military arrested the judge on January 16 after he attempted to block his own police summons – subsequently all the courts , JSC, Prosecutor General Ahmed Muiz, and later Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed called for his immediate release citing the arrest as unlawful.

President Mohamed Nasheed met with some of the JSC members at a meeting held at the president’s office on Sunday to discuss his concerns related to the judiciary, local media reported.

UN calls for judge’s release

Associated Press (AP) has meanwhile reported that the United Nations (UN) has called for the Maldives to release the judge from custody or charge him with a crime, as the  body considers a government request for help resolving a dispute with the country’s judiciary.

“While acknowledging the challenges Maldives faces in reforming and strengthening its judiciary, we believe that Judge Abdulla should either be treated with due process, meaning he should be properly charged moved from military detention, and brought before a court, or released,”  Ravina Shamdasani, a spokeswoman at the UN human rights office told AP on Saturday.

She also observed that the officials are still discussing how to respond to the request made by the Foreign Ministry last week, requesting international legal assistance.

The government has meanwhile listed 14 cases of obstruction of police duty by Judge Abdulla, including withholding warrants for up to four days, ordering police to conduct unlawful investigations and disregarding decisions by higher courts.

Afeef accused the judge of “deliberately” holding up cases involving opposition figures, and barring media from corruption trials.

Afeef said the judge also ordered the release of suspects detained for serious crimes “without a single hearing”, and maintained “suspicious ties” with family members of convicts sentenced for dangerous crimes.

The judge also released a murder suspect “in the name of holding ministers accountable”, who went on to kill another victim.

“We have been working to improve the judiciary since we came to power, but we have not succeeded,” said Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem last week, calling for a delegation from the United Nations Human Rights Commission (OHCHR) to help resolve “an issue of national security.”

The first complaints were meanwhile filed against  Mohamed in July 2005 by the Attorney General at the time time Dr. Hassan Saeed, president of the minority opposition party, which is leading the call for judge’s release.

The allegations  included, misogyny, sexual deviancy, and throwing out an assault case despite the confession of the accused.

Meanwhile, group of lawyers have  sent a case to the International Criminal Court (ICC), appealing that the judge’s detention is an “enforced disappearance” under the ICC’s Rome Statute  – while opposition activists have  taken the fight to free the judge to the streets, as protests continue for a second week.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Religious intolerance sees Maldives drop to 73rd in Press Freedom Index

The Maldives has fallen 21 places on Reporters Without Borders (RSF)’s press freedom index between 2010 and 2011.

The country is now ranked 73, level with the Seychelles and below Sierra Leone but still well above many countries in both the region and the Middle East countries, including Qatar, Oman and the UAE.

The Maldives took a giant leap in 2009 to 51 following the introduction of multiparty democracy – in 2008 it had been ranked 104.

RSF has however recently expressed concern at the rising climate of religious intolerance in the Maldives and its impact on freedom of expression.

“A climate of religious intolerance prevailed in the Maldives, where media organisations were subjected to threats by the authorities and had to deal with an Islamic Affairs Ministry bent on imposing Sharia to the detriment of free expression,” RSF stated.

In November 2011 the organisation reacted to the Islamic Ministry’s order to block the website of controversial blogger Ismail ‘Hilath’ Rasheed, stating that “the increase in acts of religious intolerance is a threat to the Maldives’ young democracy”.

“Incidents involving media workers are rare but that is only because most of them prefer to censor themselves and stay away from subjects relating to Islam. The government should not give in to the fanatical minority but must do all it can to ensure the media are free to tackle any subjects they choose,” the organisation said.

Rasheed was subsequently arrested on the evening of December 14 for his involvement in a “silent protest” calling for religious tolerance, held on Human Rights Day. The protesters had been attacked and Rasheed hospitalised after being struck with a stone.

On his release without charge three weeks later, Rasheed expressed concern for his safety.

“The majority of Maldivians are not violent people. But I am concerned about a few psychotic elements who believe they will go to heaven if they kill me – people who don’t care if they go to jail for it. Those people I am afraid of, and I will not provoke the country in the future,” he told Minivan News.

In September 2011 the government published new ‘religious unity’ regulations enforcing parliament’s religious unity act of 1994, with a penalty of 2-5 years imprisonment for violation.

Under the regulations, the media is banned from producing or publicising programs, talking about or disseminating audio deemed to “humiliate Allah or his prophets or the holy Quran or the Sunnah of the Prophet (Mohamed) or the Islamic faith.”

More recently several journalists with the Maldives National Broadcasting Corporation (MNBC) were beaten, threatened and tasered after protesters from the opposition and ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) clashed outside the station. Both sides blamed each other for the attacks, while MNBC said it would no longer cover the ongoing protests on scene.

The government meanwhile claimed that its commitment to media freedom is “absolute and unwavering.”

“President Nasheed’s administration never has and never will do anything to undermine the independence, integrity or professionalism of the media,” said President Mohamed Nasheed’s Press Secretary, Mohamed Zuhair.

Zuhair’s comments followed allegations that Communications Minister Adhil Saleem had intimidated journalists by threatening to withdraw broadcasting licenses, which Zuhair claimed was “merely” a reaction to “certain TV news channels acting unprofessionally when airing footage of recent protests.”

Despite the fall, the Maldives was still ranked significantly higher than many other countries in the region.

Sri Lanka fell to 163, continuing a steady decline over the last decade (it was ranked 51 in 2002).

“The stranglehold of the Rajapakse clan [has] forced the last few opposition journalists to flee the country,” RSF said in a statement on the release of the 2011 Index.

“Any that stayed behind were regularly subjected to harassment and threats. Attacks were less common but impunity and official censorship of independent news sites put an end to pluralism and contributed more than ever to self-censorship by almost all media outlets.”

Bangladesh fared poorly (129) – “despite genuine media pluralism, the law allows the government to maintain excessive control over the media and the Internet” – while Nepal (109) showed modest improvement with a drop off in violence between the government and Maoist rebels.

India’s position fell (131) after the government unveiled the “Information Technology Rules 2011, which have dangerous implications for online freedom of expression. Foreign reporters saw their visa requests turned down or were pressured to provide positive coverage.”

Pakistan (151st) meanwhile remained the world’s deadliest country for journalists for the second year running.

Finland, Norway, Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland were ranked as having the greatest press freedom, while North Korea and Eritrea fared the worst.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: One captain, one course

These past weeks’ demonstrations, protests, and proclamations continually evoke the principle that constitutional powers must be separated, but conveniently ignore the checks and balances which are meant to be inherent to any functional democracy.

We have had one constitutional crisis after another precisely because our system is broken. The checks don’t work and our system is anything but balanced. The opposition claims the executive is all powerful, while the ruling party claims that both the legislature and the judiciary are trying to hijack the government. The only way forward is through leveling the playing field. I propose we do this in two ways; implementing a real power of veto and meeting our constitutional obligations regarding the judiciary.

At Democracy’s Doorstep

It is self-evident that the democracy we fought for against 30 years of tyranny has not come to pass. In November of 2008, we merely started the next leg of a voyage that pioneers like the President and Vice President started two decades earlier.

In that moment, it was fitting that they embarked on this next leg together. And though much hailed as the fruition of hopes and dreams for democracy, what we failed to grasp is that the journey was not yet complete. The legislature, when controlled by a hostile opposition can bring the state to a standstill, while the judiciary remains with strong political bias and an ethos that should have ended when the middle ages did.

Democracy is meant to function with representation from the people. The people choose a president and a plan for five years, and while the implementation of that plan should be vetted through the legislature and the rule of law safeguarded by the judicature, neither of the two subsidiary bodies are supposed to take the helm of the country. A ship is supposed to have one captain, who is advised and guided, but whose direction and vision guides the course that the ship takes.

The reason why we have a presidential system is because we have the right to choose the vision to guide our nation. We choose our President and Vice President as they are directly elected by us. We choose our path for five years.

But say they both, God forbid, die tomorrow. Our Speaker becomes interim President till elections are held. In parliamentary systems, those who control parliament head government as well, and they do fine – right?

Wrong. If the Speaker led government, we would have a man who represents only 0.2 percent of the voting population (having won his seat with a total of 305 votes). A delightfully clearheaded and capable man though he is, he would not represent the people. We would not have a say in how our country should progress.

In 2008, when we voted, we had our say. Fine, a bunch of people voted against the former President, rather than for this one – but that is one of the growing pains of overcoming dictatorship. We chose this path, so it is time we stopped institutional mechanisms from hindering it.

We stand here at democracy’s doorstep, afraid to cross the threshold because of our authoritarian past. But the point of government is not to constantly bicker and make governing impossible, but rather to provide for those who elected you to power – not through handouts but rather through policy that changes things rather than causes stagnation.

The Point of Majlis

All the Majlis has done for the last three years is to find ways to cause stagnation rather than governance. The opposition believes that every government policy is wrong and that instead of dialogue, the only avenue available is to block policy. It is not about helping the people – it is about making sure the government fails.

That is not the way a government is supposed to function. Apart from the fact that our newly elected Majlis members have no resources, guidance, or staff to assist them – we are also encumbered by a significant institutional failing: the President has no veto.

When the President sends a bill back to Parliament because it is either inconsistent with his vision, or because it may be damaging to the people, it is but a symbolic gesture in our country. In other nations, such an action can only be overturned by a stronger majority (such as two-thirds).

Yet in the Maldives, a simple majority can force a bill through. A simple majority can hijack government and change the course of our ship. This is not the way it was meant to be. Because of the electoral system by which our parliamentarians are chosen, and because of the other factors that influence parliamentary functions, that simple majority can never equal the weight of the office of the President. To change our course and to change the direction which our country follows, we must empower our president with the authority to stand against the tyranny of a minority, and only ever let the will of the majority override the vision we chose.

An Independent Judiciary

Yet a nation cannot function, unless the rule of law is safeguarded. We worked long and hard to ensure that the judiciary would be one that was independent and free from political and social bias. There is but one mechanism to keep the judiciary accountable; the Judicial Services Commission. Alas, this mechanism has failed. It was tasked with thinning the herd, with vetting our judges, and with maintaining some level of dignity on the Maldivian bench. As described by Dr Azra Naseem, we had our moment to hold the judiciary to some standard, and we collectively dropped the ball.

The constitution clearly empowers this commission to take disciplinary action, including dismissal proceedings, against judges for incompetence or gross misconduct. And yet, when they finally get around to finding that Abdulla Mohamed failed to comply with the required standard of conduct, on the 26th of November 2011, the same judge managed to have a court order issued preventing further proceedings. The one body charged with keeping our courts in check has proven itself powerless to fulfill its constitutional mandate.

Here, we have a judge whom most agree is corrupt – or at the very least unfit to sit in so high an office; we have a judge who is blatantly politically biased and admits as much on national television; we have a judge who has released criminals including rapists and drug dealers and who has been seen cavorting with defendants after his rulings; and yet we as a nation and a people are powerless to remove him from the office which he so flagrantly disgraces. Can there be a constitutional failing that is more evident than the one embodied in this man?

A Constitutional Amendment

Our path and our national progression are being hindered by mechanisms that do not function. We have a President determined to follow through on the promises he made when elected; to provide housing, healthcare, transportation, less drug abuse and a better standard of living. Yet even basic policies are refuted, not by the merit of the program, but rather by the party which proposed it. And now there are few avenues that are open to move forward. We need to move beyond stagnation as a policy for politics. We need to change the game. There is but one captain of this ship. For five years, we choose one captain, one direction and one path. In 2013 the path might change, but before that happens – let fix these mechanisms. Let’s become the democracy we were always meant to be.

www.jswaheed.com

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Communication Minister’s comment on withdrawing broadcasting licences “just advice”

The Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) and the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) have raised concerns over an alleged “threat” to the media from Minister of Transport and Communication Adhil Saleem, after he claimed that the broadcasting licence of media stations “misleading the public” would be revoked.

Adhil reportedly made the remarks during a meeting on Thursday with members of MBC, the broadcast media’s regulatory body.

Following the meeting, MBC held a press conference in which the commission President Badr Naseer contended that the commission legally reserves the right to suspend or renew a licence while according to section 44 of broadcasting commission courts hold the right to revoke a licence given to a media station.

Therefore, he argued, Minister Adhil’s threat “does not have any legal weight”.

He also said that the commission is deeply concerned by the “continous threats faced by the media despite the right to freedom of expression guaranteed under section 27, 28 of the constitution.”

Meanwhile, in a statement released by the MJA, the association condemned Adhil Saleem for “threatening to revoke the licence”.

The government is influencing the role of free media, and continuously attempting to defame some media organisation, the statement reads.

MJA also reiterated that it was the responsibility of the MBC and media council to monitor and take action against organisations breaching editorial policy and laws, not the government.

However, speaking to Minivan News today, Minister Adhil refuted the allegations.

“I did not threaten the media. It was just advice,” Adhil explained.

Adhil said that he met with the MBC members to notify them some of the TV stations covering the protest last night aired recorded content describing it as live events.

“I was watching the TV last night. What they showed was a mix. They showed recordings of yesterday and earlier protests with the live caption on-screen,” he alleged.

The stations must remove the live caption from screen if the telecasted events are not live, Adil argued, “otherwise it is misleading the public”

“I told [MBC] that as the governing body I expected the seven members – who are highly paid by the state – to monitor the situation, even if they don’t have the necessary means,” Adil said.

“If for whatever reason the regulatory body fails to monitor the situation, I said I will withhold the licence,” Adil said.

Speaking to Minivan News, senior officials from VTV and DhiTV insisted that the channels did not broadcast any “manipulated content” to deceive the public.

They also argued that using previous footage of interviews and scenes during live coverage was not something new, and was widely practiced in the international media.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President cancels Malaysia trip over political unrest at home

President Mohamed Nasheed has cancelled a scheduled trip to Malaysia for the International Conference on the Global Movement of Moderates.

The President was scheduled to depart for Kuala Lampur last Tuesday, January 17, 2011.

The trip was cancelled due to ongoing political unrest in capital Male’. Opposition supporters have protested the detention of opposition party members over an alleged “hate speech” pamphlet, as well as the arrest and detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, for the past six evenings.

Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair has said the President was prepared to address the conference before choosing to cancel his participation.

Finance Minister Mohamed Shihab will represent the Maldives at the conference in his stead.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Islamic Minister to investigate “Christian missionary” allegations against the State

Minister of Islamic Affairs Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari has consulted with President Mohamed Nasheed on allegations that the government has cooperated with Christian missionaries in an effort “to wipe out Islam”.

“The President is now considering the best way forward,” said Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair. “He will either form an independent commission to address the issue, or allow the Islamic Minister to consult with his colleagues. The Islamic Minister will advise the President in the matter.”

The consultation is in keeping with the government’s commitment to share decisions of religious matters with Islamic scholars.

Speaking to local media today, Dr Bari said “The President called very late yesterday and said he would request the Ministry to look into the allegations to understand the truth.” At the time, Bari had not received a formal letter stating the request but said he would cooperate with the request upon receiving such a document.

The Minister and officials at the Islamic Ministry could not be reached at time of press.

Over the past week, members of minority opposition Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed and ‘Sandhaanu’ Ahmed Ibrahim Didi have accused the government of cooperating with “Christian missionaries” and “Jewish parties” against the state religion of Islam- Didi claimed the President was “a madman and a Christian”- and of spreading undue fear with the claim that the islands are sinking.

Both men have been repeatedly summoned for police interrogations, prompting protests outside police headquarters and the Presidential Palace.

Speaking today with Minivan News, Zuhair called the allegations “a big lie that has been repeated since 2003, when Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) began to work abroad.”

He added that the claims were also raised in the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, in which currently ruling MDP won the election over the 30-year administration of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

“At that time Dr Hassan Saeed had made these allegations and the government carried out a full-scale, professional investigation in the United Kingdom. The ‘Operation Druid’ found no substance to any of the allegations. There was no evidence of any contact with Christian missionaries or priests. So it is surprising that members of Saeed’s party are again repeating these allegations,” Zuhair observed.

Operation Druid

In 2007, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s government contracted UK security and private investigation firm Sion Resources for a surveillance operation dubbed ‘Operation Druid’. According to the former Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed, Gayoom “had concerns” about the origins of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), exiles from which had fled to Salisbury where they had been sheltered by Nasheed’s high school alumni, David Hardingham.

Hardingham, founder of the Friends of Maldives NGO, and Sarah Mahir had previously ambushed Gayoom in the UN building in Geneva in May 2005, accusing him of complicity in human rights abuses.

“I think Gayoom was quite shaken by that, and afterwards he was not as complacent over the security given to him by his hosts, be that by the UK or UN,” Dr Shaheed told Minivan News, in an interview in June 2011.

Subsequently, “The government may have wanted to see what was going on [in Salisbury],” Dr Shaheed said.

“What these operations did was try to see who was who. And a lot of the operations the government felt were against it came from Salisbury, and I think the government of the day felt justified in engaging a firm to look into what was going on,” he said. “They felt they needed to check on that, and what came out was a clean bill of health. Nothing untoward was happening, and these people were by and large bone-fide.”

Back in the Maldives, Gayoom’s government released a leaflet accusing Hardingham and Salisbury Cathedral of conspiring to blow up the Islamic Centre and build a church.

“It was just a mischievous suggestion, a very mischievous suggestion,” Dr Shaheed acknowledged. “At the time everyone was accusing each other of being non-Muslim, and this accusation that the MDP was non-Muslim was getting very loud.

“There is this very, very deep reaction to anything un-Islamic in this country, and you can use Islam as a political tool quite easily. Therefore these allegations become political charges.”

Former Conservative Party MP for Salisbury, Robert Key, who had been instrumental in getting Nasheed an audience in British parliament, told Minivan News in February 2011 that Salisbury Cathedral had taken the accusation “at face value” .

“It was not true, and therefore we had to say ‘It is not true,'” he said. “The Dean of Salisbury Cathedral understood the issue, she took it at face value, and we sought security advice as necessary. But it was never a serious threat. It was a juvenile political ploy.”

For his part, Hardingham has dismissed the allegations that he is a Christian missionary as “absolute nonsense – I have never been a priest or anything associated with any church, and I challenge the people making the allegations to provide a shred of evidence to support their case.

“I was refused entry into the Maldives in April 2005. Government spokesperson at the time, Mohamed Hussein ‘Mundhu’ Shareef, told Associated Press that this was due to my involvement with an Islamic extremist group. So I have been accused of being an Islamic extremist and a Christian missionary – probably the fastest and most radical conversion in history.”

Government respects religion

Citing the Maldives’ commitment to be an Islamic state, Zuhair today pointed out that it was the government’s public responsibility to clarify that the allegations against it were baseless.

“Not only do these statements refer to the government, they also refer to our members and supporters and their respect for our religion”, he said, adding that the allegations involving Jewish parties came close to anti-Semitism – “and we don’t want to spread that image.”

In its efforts to staunch DQP’s “hate speech”, the government has drawn criticism from main opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) and Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) for “suppression of the constitutional right to free expression”.

Speaking previously at a press conference held in response to the allegations, which were broadcast on DhiTV news on January 8, Zuhair called “spreading baseless and demonstrably false claims” about the government a “criminal offence”, and the coverage of demonstrably false allegations of foreign religious influence a “violation of journalism ethics”–statements which drew prompt criticism from media associations and opposition parties.

“The government will not allow anybody to be influenced by the crime of incitement,” Zuhair clarified today, explaining that the opposition had put the media in a position of defending the general freedom of expression in order to promote their own agenda.

“It is very easy for any Maldivian or journalist to find out about the Druid operation or to see if we have been accepting payments from a Christian priest. Ask us. What is surprising is that this story has been going on for a week and yet none of the media have found out or reported what the grounds for the allegations are,” Zuhair said. “It’s part of journalistic integrity to at least get the five W’s right: who, what, where, when and why. Why are they being fooled?”

According to Zuhair, the findings of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and the court will be necessary to resolve the matter.

The matter continues to be investigated by the police, who have now summoned Didi and Jameel for four consecutive nights. Meanwhile, a protest supporting the freedom of expression has been scheduled for the Artificial Beach this evening.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC disputes allegations of discrimination from both MDP and PPM

The Elections Commission (EC) has hit back at criticism from several political parties, rejecting claims of discrimination against the parties.

In a press conference on Thursday, EC members and department heads claimed that the commission fully abides by laws and regulation, while undertaking the tasks mandated to the commission.

“We do not favor or provide any advantages to any political party,” EC Vice President Ahmed Fayaz contended.

EC made the comments following claims by both the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) that the commission was discriminating against the parties.

Speaking at the press conference, EC Director General Ahmed Tholal refuted claims made by MDP, which has complained that that the EC discriminates against the party when processing forms of party membership.

He clarified that the commission was processing the party membership forms based on the date of submission and assured that all the parties are treated equally.

“All the forms are processed as soon as they are submitted,” Tholal said, irrespective of which party it comes from.

EC President Fuad Thaufeeq meanwhile restated that the commission was not discriminating against PPM, while making an inquiry into the recent claim made by its leader Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom that “vote results does not turn out the way people want”.

Fuad noted that the issue has been resolved as Gayoom had later clarified in a letter to the EC that he did not imply that the commission is responsible for it.

However, PPM alleges EC of tarnishing peoples’ confidence in Gayoom and discriminating against the party.

PPM’s media committee president Mohamed Hussain ‘Mundhu’ Shareef has pointed out that court orders calling for a re-count of votes and deeming results of the first parliamentary elections under the 2009 constitution were false and suggest major flaws within the commission.

However, Shareef said that political parties have been asked to support the assumedly independent commission in carrying out certain duties.

“The delay in passing the political party bill is causing difficulties for EC, they have requested us (political parties) to expedite it, and EC also admitted having administrative problems,” he was quoted as saying to local media.

MDP Deputy Chairperson Mohamed ‘Inthi’ Imthiyaz meanwhile told local media that “some important decisions are made without discussing with all the parties and this is now how the commission should function.”

Inthi added that the EC had admitted its shortcomings and intends to resolve them.

MDP has also expressed concern that former secretary general of People’s Alliance Ahmed Shareef is inappropriately entrusted with EC’s administrative duties.

However, EC members countered that the commission is transparent, and functions do not discriminate against any party and are not subject to party influence.

All elections are free and fair and is conducted in the presence of political parties, independent observers and the media, they asserted.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Media monitoring report hints at bias of local media

Transparency Maldives has published a report monitoring the performance and bias of six media outlets between March 23 and April 4 of this year.

The six outlets evaluated were DhiTV, MNBC One and VTV (television), and Haveeru, Miadhu and Minivan News (print).

News content produced by these outlets during the reporting period was categorised by subject (corruption, politics, human rights, etc), the air time and centimetres of coverage recorded, and the tone assessed (positive, negative, neutral).

This was reported by three people who ranked the connotations of words and pictures from positive to negative on a scale of 1-5.

Transparency Maldives observed notable limitations in the report, most significantly the small time period (two weeks) of monitoring. There was also no analysis of the order of news stories indicating the priority of subjects to the Maldivian press, or the omission of coverage.

Content was also subject to the news agenda of the short reporting period, and the subject matter of stories analysed did not incorporate stories relating to crime, gender or religion.

Key headlines on Minivan during the reporting period included: ‘Death of tourist at Kuredhoo Island Resort last year was accidental, finds UK inquest’,  ‘Parliament falling short of public expectations despite work rate, says Speaker Shahid,’ ‘Mahlouf calls on DRP supporters to shun “Thasmeen faction” rally’, ‘Blackmarket dollar crackdown won’t address demand, warn businesses, financial experts’, ‘Judges legitimised JSC’s actions with their silence’, and ‘Staff threw stones at intruder and left him in the water to drown, alleges Baros staff member’.

DhiTV

DhiTV was the first private television station to be registered in the Maldives in 2008, by local businessman Mohamed ‘Champa’ Moosa. It faces allegations from the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) of favouring the opposition.

25 percent of DhiTV’s coverage of parliament and 36 percent of its coverage of government during the reporting period was negative. Other subjects with a high weight of negative coverage included President Mohamed Nasheed (41 percent),  Ahmed Thasmeen Ali’s faction of the opposition Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (43 percent), and the Maldivian Democratic Party (22 percent).

DhiTV’s most balanced coverage was of police, which was 80 percent neutral.

MNBC One

MNBC is a 100 percent government owned corporation that manages the assets of former state broadcaster Television Maldives (TVM) and Voice of Maldives (VOM). It is currently locked in a legal dispute for its assets with the Maldives Broadcast Corporation (MBC), a body created by the then opposition-majority parliament. It faces allegations from opposition parties of favouring the government.

Twelve percent of MNBC’s coverage of the government during the reporting period was positive,  and four percent negative (the remainder was neutral). 17 percent of the station’s coverage of President Mohamed Nasheed was positive and 83 percent was neutral – there was no negative coverage of the President during the reporting period.

All of MNBC’s coverage of the council, police and Adhaalath Party was neutral.

VTV

Villa TV (VTV) is owned and funded by local business tycoon and Jumhoree Party (JP) MP Gasim Ibrahim, and faces allegations of political bias due to the nature of its ownership.

VTV’s coverage of parliament was very neutral (90 percent), while its coverage of government during the reporting period was 35 percent negative.

Coverage of Ahmed Thasmeen Ali’s faction of the opposition (DRP) was overwhelmingly negative (67 percent), significantly more so than its coverage of the MDP (20 percent negative to six percent positive).

31 percent of VTV’s coverage of its owner’s Jumhoree Party (JP) was positive – only two percent was negative. The report noted that the space afforded the JP was “significantly high”.

Haveeru

Newspaper Haveeru is the largest national daily with a print run of 3000 copies. It was first published by Mohamed Zahir Hussain, who according to Transparency “has close ties with former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom”.

Haveeru’s coverage of the government during the reporting period leaned towards negative (12 percent negative, 7 percent positive), and coverage of the MDP was almost twice as negative as positive (21 percent to 10 percent). Coverage of parliament was more negative (27 percent) than positive (nine percent).

Coverage of the DRP was 29 percent negative and only one percent positive. 46 percent of its coverage of Thasmeen’s faction was negative (to six percent positive), while its coverage of Gayoom’s faction was more balanced (32 percent negative, 13 percent positive). Coverage of the People’s Alliance (PA), founded by Gayoom’s half brother Abdulla Yameen, was 60 percent negative.

Twelve percent of Haveeru’s coverage of police was negative, compared to two percent positive.

Miadhu

Miadhu was founded by Ahmed Abdullah, the Minister of Energy, Environment and Water under the former government.

“Miadhu boasts a record of having no complaints about their publications so far, according to the Editor Abdul Latheef,” the report noted. Miadhu claimed to be circulating 3000 copies.

Miadhu’s coverage of the government was 17 percent positive and 19 percent negative, however its coverage of President Nasheed was weighted towards the positive (18 percent positive to 3 percent negative).

The newspaper’s coverage of the DRP was more significantly negative (12 percent) than positive (two percent).

Miadhu’s coverage of police, council, court and the elections commission was neutral.

Minivan News

Minivan News was analysed by Transparency alongside with print media, despite it being an online publication. Articles were printed and content physically measured in centimetres.

Initially established by the MDP in 2005 “due to the futility of attempting to cover [then] opposition news in the conservative media outlets that existed then”, Minivan News and the now defunct print publication ‘Minivan Daily’ met with strong interference from the former government, with several of its foreign reporters being deported.

“Many staff of Minivan were subjected to police intimidation, threats and harassment,” Transparency’s report noted, while the newspaper’s office in Colombo was raided by Sri Lankan police after it was falsely reported to be “a hub for dealing in arms.”

Following the change of power in 2008 the Minivan Daily newspaper was disbanded together with all funding from politically-affiliated sources. The Minivan News website was passed to a succession of foreign editors who attempted to establish it as a credible and objective source of news of the Maldives, and it has since relied on income generated through banner advertising.

Minivan’s coverage of the government during the reporting period was more significantly negative (19 percent) than positive (four percent). Coverage of President Mohamed Nasheed was generally balanced at 9 percent negative and 10 percent positive.

Minivan’s coverage of key institutions was overwhelmingly neutral, including the President’s office (100 percent neutral), High Court (100 percent), Supreme Court (100 percent), Council (100 percent), Local Government Authority (100 percent), Anti-Corruption Commission (100 percent) and parliament (98 percent). The exceptions were the Judicial Services Commission, of which coverage was 19 percent negative and 0 percent positive, and the Civil Court (44 percent of coverage was negative).

Coverage of the DRP inclined towards negative (34 percent) over positive (6 percent). Coverage of Thasmeen’s faction during the reporting period was 76 percent negative, while coverage of Gayoom’s faction was 23 percent negative. Coverage of the PA was 62 percent negative.

Minivan’s coverage of the MDP was slightly more negative that it was positive (8 percent to 6 percent respectively).

Transparency noted that Minivan’s coverage of the Adhaalath Party was 100 percent positive.

Recommendations

Transparency Maldives’ Project Director, Aiman Rasheed, acknowledged that the results were impacted by the key stories and news agenda of the short reporting period, “but even though two weeks is the minimum reporting period possible, you can already see the patterns emerge.”

Transparency’s Director Ilham Mohamed said media’s coverage in the week of the local council elections was also analysed, but said the results would be shared individually with media outlets as one week was too short a reporting period for a statistically-sound analysis. Transparency was considering expanding the project to include a longer monitoring period, she said.

Key recommendations in the report for media outlets included ensuring that journalists employed are provided with professional training and apprenticeships, and curbing the influence of owners and financial interests.

“Editorial policies of all media outlets should respect the principles of fair and balanced coverage and provide all parties with equal opportunities to present their view,” Transparency stated. “This is especially so during election period where the election laws specifically call for fair coverage to all candidates.”

Several political parties had announced boycotts of various media outlets on the assumption that coverage was politically influenced, the report stated, calling for an end to such boycotts.

“Political parties should recognise and respect the independence of journlists and media to ensure equal access to interiews, press conferences, party functions and access to speakers at panel discussions.”

The report also called for groups such as the Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) and South Asian Federation for Media Associations (SAFMA) “to play a stronger role in advocating for media freedoms.”

Download the full report (English)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)