Comment: FDI and strategic security concerns

Blackstone Group, the US-based MNC with multifarious investment interests across the world, has bought majority shares in the only two Maldivian air-taxi companies, together owning a fleet of close to 50 sea-planes, for an undisclosed sum.

Coming within weeks of the government throwing out Indian infrastructure group GMR  from the airport construction-concession contract, questions need to be answered on issues relating to FDI and strategic security considerations.

The government can take pride that FDI has not dried up after the ‘GMR row’. Nor have perceptions of political instability in the country upset foreign investors into staying away. Together, they could ease pressures on future governments, too, in an election year, and presidential aspirants can now promise the moon both to the foreign investor and to their own local population.

Yes, larger issues, settled decades ago, may need to be re-addressed if the ‘GMR kind’ of problem does not end up showing up without notice on a later date.

There is a major difference between the GMR contract and the current Blackstone deal. The Male’ airport and the company were/are state property, whereas the two sea-plane companies are privately-owned, to the extent they stand on separate legs.

Yet when the issue of ‘national security’ and other national concerns were flagged in the GMR case, the same would apply to an overseas ‘monopoly’ having a near-free access to Maldivian air space as any other state-owned airliner.

Strategic assets and national assets

Procedural issues were cited in cancelling the GMR contract, yet the question of handing over the nation’s sole international airport to an ‘outsider’ was also flagged almost from the day the deal was proposed to be signed. The question remains if it was time for Maldivian government to frame laws and rules to monitor and clear FDI in ‘strategic sectors’, and define in the process, what these ‘strategic sectors’ could well be.

Or, will eternal uncertainty about the prospective nature of retrospective investment contracts become the order of the day, with near-arbitrary decisions taken at whim, causing concern all around?

For now, the controversial and equally-rushed Finance Act amendment of 2010, compelling the government to seek parliamentary approval for altering the nature of ‘national assets’ may require re-visiting.

Like the GMR contract, the Blackstone deal was a done deed the day they were signed by the parties concerned. Yet there is no knowing if a future dispensation in Male and/or a newly-elected parliament, if not the present one, will impose new conditions on private sector national players for inducting foreign investments and investors into their existing and prospective ventures.

The irony of the argument based on ‘national assets’ in the case of the GMR remain. The new definition and consequent distinction was made full 30 years after the Maldivian government of the day encouraged FDI in the resort tourism sector in a very big way. It is this that has changed the face of Maldives from being a small and far-away island community living in a past of compulsive contentment into a vibrant nation that has become the desired destination of the global community as a tourism centre and investment-attraction.

As is known, the resort companies, with foreign equity participation and an excessive number of overseas staff at all levels, have been in possession of isolated islets for developing idyllic resorts – most of whose guests are foreigners, too.

The Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) in the national capital of Male, too, has been brimming with foreign-registered aircraft in their dozens and foreign tourists in their thousands, for years now. There has been next-to-nil security-checks in these islands, barring an occasional clash between the owners and the employees, or in times of accidental death in the adjoining seas.

Against this, the airport that was leased out to the GMR group was brimming with personnel of the Maldivian security agencies, including the MNDF, MPS, Customs and others. Yet, the question of ‘national assets’ was not posed against the resort islands at inception, or posted against them, when the phraseology was included to impose parliament’s will on policy-making.

The American MNC’s concept and confidence in the nebulous run-up to the twin elections for the presidency and parliament in the next 15 months, all in the midst of the tentative nature of the political stability in the nation, is thus noteworthy.

Geo-strategic perceptions

Post-Cold War, the global perception of geo-strategic concerns in the Maldives has undergone a sea-change. ‘FDI’ in Maldives has acquired a new dimension than at a time when the nation was inviting in the tourism sector. It has come to such a pass that FDI in the utilities sector, like desalination and power-supply, have come to be viewed with suspicion from within and anxieties from the outside.

It is thus that the western perception of India’s strategic concerns for the Maldives has revolved around the ‘China factor’ flowing from the ‘String of Pearls’ theory, an American academic construct.

What should add to the national discourse at the time is the emerging scenario of the Maldives becoming an oil-producing country. At least two presidential aspirants, and both former Finance Ministers, have begun talking about exploring oil extraction prospects if elected President. Abdulla Yameen of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and Gasim Ibrahim of the Jumhooree Party (JP) are otherwise credited with pragmatism in politics and political administration as in the businesses that they run.

Gasim has since recalled how as a losing candidate in the 2008 presidential polls, he had flagged the issue. He has since pooh-poohed Umar Naseer, a contender for PPM nomination for the presidential polls along with Yameen, that oil exploration could affect on the tourism sector, the mainstay of Maldivian economy at present. Yameen has pointed out how in the past oil exploration could not be taken up for want of adequate technology, which is now available.

In these times of ever-increasing fuel costs impacting on national economies the world over, the ‘strategic importance’ of any oil-find has greater significance for post-Cold War Maldives than is acknowledged. An infant democracy, still experimenting with the respective rights and powers of its constitutional institutions, the Maldives will soon be called upon to define, and decide upon, the nature and definitions of ‘strategic assets’ before moving on to the next stage of declaring what the nation intends getting out of them, and is willing to give in, too.

After all, oil exploration, like air-taxiing and airport-development, involves big-time FDI, relative to the Maldives’ aspirations and requirements. If one were to acknowledge that the Maldives cannot fund such ambitious projects without external funding, technology and skilled labour, then identifying sectors and partners assumes as much significance as electing a domestic government, entrusted with that very task.

The writer is a Senior Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation

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)

No time for fair trial before elections, says former President

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed has said there is insufficient time to conduct a fair trial against him before the presidential elections scheduled for September 7.

The former President, who is being tried for the controversial detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed – charges Nasheed’s party contend is a politically-motivated attempt to bar him from contesting the election – said having the state arrest the MDP candidate and then hold elections would be “akin to play-acting.”

“The Maldivian people must receive justice. Therefore, God willing, I will come out to face that justice in 2018,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed also called upon Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz to temporarily halt the trial. He said the Chief Justice had previously taken a stand on similar cases of national interest, and hence must comment on the trial in question.

The former President also said that his legal team would appeal a verdict released by the High Court on Monday, after it upheld the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court where he is being tried.

“This trial that is to be held at the Hulhumale’ Court concerns a huge coup d’etat. The way I see it, this trial should have 30 or so hearings, at least. Lawyers should get a minimum period of 15 days between hearings. Otherwise, we cannot say this is a just process,” he said.

Nasheed said that if things proceeded at the current pace, the trial “will be still be ongoing when we win the upcoming elections.”

“A serving president cannot be tried in a court during his term without parliamentary approval. I don’t see that approval coming from the parliament,” Nasheed said.

“There isn’t a single person who hasn’t made some kind of comment about this trial now, from ministers to princes to island chiefs to imams,” Nasheed said, alleging that the government, too, had made a variety of comments in an attempt to influence the trial.

Nasheed said that he did not believe there was any chance of a fair trial under the present circumstances.

The UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Minister for South Asia, Alistair Burt, has meanwhile met with President Mohamed Waheed and “emphasised the importance of moving swiftly towards free, fair and inclusive elections later this year.”

“I also stressed the importance of all parties being able to participate with the candidate of their choice. I was encouraged to learn that the date for these elections has now been confirmed for 7 September 2013,” Burt said in a statement.

The former President has meanwhile departed on an official visit to India.

MDP seeking arrest of police commissioner

Nasheed also stated that work was underway to ensure the arrest of Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz, whom he accused of “illegally ascending to the post of Commissioner after the coup d’etat.”

“We are working to bring all those who participated in orchestrating the coup d’etat to justice. It is only a small number of police and army officials who have brought about this coup. Now they are arresting innocent citizens,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed said the core issue now facing the country was resolving the alleged “coup d’etat” brought about by Abdulla Riyaz and the Minister of Defence Mohamed Nazim.

Nasheed made the remarks during a press conference on Tuesday (February 5) in relation to a former member of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and a Councillor of the island of Narudhoo in Shaviyani Atoll, Hussain Siraj, joining the MDP.

With Siraj joining MDP, the party has now gained a majority in the Narudhoo Island Council.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed departs to Egypt for OIC summit

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik has departed on an official visit to Egypt for participation in the 12th summit of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the President’s Office website has said today.

The summit, which started last Saturday ( February 2), will continue until February 7 and is expected to see leaders or senior representatives for 57 OIC members states gather to discuss greater political and economic cooperation, according to the StarAfrica news service.

Back in August 2012, President Waheed attended the fourth extraordinary session of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Conference in Saudi Arabia following an invitation from King Abdulla Bin Abdul Azeez.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

UK urges “free, fair and inclusive elections later this year”

The UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Minister for South Asia, Alistair Burt, has called on all parties in the Maldives “to work together to strengthen the country’s institutions and economy.”

Burt’s comments follow the Minister’s recent visit to the Maldives, during which he met with President Mohamed Waheed, Foreign Minister Dr Abdul Samad Abdulla, and politicial leaders including former President Mohamed Nasheed.

“Many changes have taken place in Maldives since my last visit in 2011 and the UK has been following developments with great interest and concern,” Burt said.

“It is now time for all parties in Maldives to focus on the future, rather than the past, and to work together to strengthen the country’s institutions and economy.

The UK remained keen to support Maldives in its democratic transition, Burt said.

“It is important that the historic gains made in the last few years are consolidated to ensure a truly democratic future. To this end, in my meeting with President Waheed on Saturday, I emphasised the importance of moving swiftly towards free, fair and inclusive elections later this year. I also stressed the importance of all parties being able to participate with the candidate of their choice. I was encouraged to learn that the date for these elections has now been confirmed for 7 September 2013,” he added.

Burt also urged the government and other parties to work towards institutional reform “and to fully investigate all allegations of police brutality, as recommended in the CoNI report.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

US private equity fund buys both Maldivian seaplane operators for undisclosed sum

US-based private equity fund Blackstone has bought a controlling stake in both the Maldives’ seaplane operators, Trans Maldivian Airways (TMA) and Maldivian Air Taxi (MAT).

Blackstone, with annual revenue of US$3.119 billion and total assets of US$18.845 billion, bought the seaplane operators for an undisclosed sum.

Senior Managing Director and Chief Investment Officer at Blackstone’s Private Equity unit based in New York, Prakash Melwani, said the investment “will enable us to build a strong partnership with the Maldives.”

“We are excited to partner with MAT and TMA, whose seaplane operations have contributed significantly to the development of resort islands further away from Male and making them accessible to tourists. Blackstone manages, through its portfolio companies, the largest number of hotel rooms in the world and this transaction marks our sustained enthusiasm for the travel and tourism space,” he said.

Founder of MAT Lars Erik Nielsen and majority shareholders of TMA, Lars Petré and Hussain Afeef, will retain “a substantial shareholding and continue to play a significant role in the companies, including serving as directors on the board,” Blackstone said in a statement.

“The Maldivian economy will gain from the presence of one of the world’s largest and most respected investment firms,” said Petré.

Nielsen stated that the move will benefit the career growth of the workers employed by the two airlines.

“In addition, together we look forward to delivering more efficient services to the tourists coming to the Maldives and the resorts in which they are staying. This combination will increase service efficiency to our resorts,” he said.

TMA Director Afeef said Blackstone would “bring to Maldives a wide global experience and an established track record in the tourism and hospitality sector. Incorporating global best practices would be beneficial not just to the companies but to the tourism industry, in general.”

TMA was started in 1988 as a helicopter operator under the name ‘Hummingbird’, which was changed to TMA in 1998 after the fleet was switched to Twin Otter aircraft. Competing operator MAT was set up in 1992.

Together both airlines operate over 40 aircraft and play both an iconic and critical role in the country’s tourism industry, transferring arrivals at Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) to resorts in neighbouring atolls and greatly expanding the capacity for tourism around the capital. Domestic air travel over longer distances – to destinations such as Addu Atoll – is served by conventional aircraft.

The substantial investment comes months after the Maldivian government expropriated the main international airport from Indian infrastructure giant GMR, declaring its concession agreement void and ordering it out of the country within seven days. The US$511 million project was at the time the country’s single largest foreign investment.

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb said the Blackstone investment was a sign of confidence in the Maldivian economy, and represented a “green light” to other foreign investors.

“When a large company such as Blackstone invests in the Maldives, it shows that investors have confidence in the Maldives. Moreover, investors have set their sights on Maldives and is on their radar,” Adheeb told local media.

Deal creates a monopoly in critical sector

Former Minister of Economic Development Mahmood Razee, also former Minister of Civil Aviation, noted that the purchase “is not really a foreign investment since no additional equity is being brought into the country. Another firm has just bought the shares,” he said.

Moreover, the purchase of a controlling stake in the only two seaplane operators by a single company had effectively monopolised the market, he warned.

“This is a very exclusive market, and critical to the tourism industry. Even though both MAT and TMA operate the same aircraft, they have not previously been willing to cooperate,” Razee said.

“Now, without any discussion, they have been taken over and effectively become a monopoly,” he said, explaining that the Maldives did not have anti-monopoly laws which may have otherwise obstructed the sale: “We were looking at these when we were putting together the economic reform package [under the former government].”

Previously, resort managers could approach both companies seeking the better price for seaplane services, upon which they were reliant for the vast majority of their guest arrivals: “Now there is no effective competition, as the major shareholder is one and the same,” Razee said.

He acknowledged that “in an ideal world” prices could come down, as the two companies have been operating identical aircraft but duplicating maintenance and other services. However the end of this practice could affect jobs, he suggested.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Local media links proposed foreign expert for CoNI review to MDP-commissioned report

A foreign legal expert sought by parliament’s Government Accountability Committee to help review the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) was also behind a report concluding former President Mohamed Nasheed had resigned under duress, local media has reported.

According to local media, a legal team including Associate Professor of Public International Law and Director of Centre for International Justice at University of Copenhagen Anders Henriksen was selected to help oversee the parliamentary review.

The Sun Online news agency today reported that Henriksen, who had been chosen to oversee parliaments CoNI review – delayed late last month over a reported lack of funds – had previously been commissioned by the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to produce a legal report on February’s controversial transfer of power.

The report was published in July 2012.

“To the extent that a ‘coup d’etat’ can be defined as the ‘illegitimate overthrow of a government’, we must therefore also consider the events as a coup d’etat,” read the analysis co-produced by Henriksen, entitled ‘Arrested Democracy’.

The legal team were one of two parties that applied to oversee the review, according to local media.

Sun Online cited sources within the commission as claiming that Henriksen had been chosen after being identified as the most capable party to conduct the review.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Commonwealth must reopen CoNI in light of new evidence

Dear 
Secretary 
General Kamalesh Sharma,

New 
evidence 
has 
emerged which
 casts
 doubt
 over
 the
 validity
 of 
the 
final 
report
 by
 the
 Commission
 of
 National
 Inquiry 
(CoNI),
 published
 in
 August
 2012.

Following
 its
 publication,
 CoNI’s
 report
 was
 sent
 to 
the 
relevant 
Maldivian 
parliamentary 
oversight
 committee, 
who
 decided
 to 
investigate 
the 
facts 
and
 procedures 
of 
the 
report
 to 
ensure
 its 
accuracy. 
Through
 careful 
review
 of 
the
 report, 
it
 has 
been revealed
 that 
vital 
evidence 
relating 
to 
CoNI’s 
core 
mandate was
 ignored
 and 
no 
explanation 
was 
given 
as 
to 
the 
reason
 for
 this,
 despite 
claims 
by 
CoNI
 that 
no 
information 
was 
disregarded.

CoNI’s
 mandate
 was 
to 
investigate 
whether 
President 
Nasheed
 resigned
 under 
duress,
 due 
to
 threats
 to
 his 
life, 
or 
not. 
The 
committee
 summoned
 Former
 Commissioner 
of 
Police, 
Ahmed
 Faseeh; 
Former 
Chief 
of 
Defense
 Force, 
Moosa 
Ali 
Jaleel;
 Brigadier 
General,
 Ahmed
 Nilam; 
Former 
Chief 
Superintendent 
of 
Police, 
Mohamed 
Hameed 
and 
Former 
Superintendent
 of Police, 
Mohamed
 Jinah
 under
 the 
power
 vested 
in 
a
 parliamentary 
committee
 by 
Article
 99 
of 
the 
Constitution.

Former 
Chief 
of 
Defense 
Force 
Jaleel; 
Former 
CS
 Hameed
 and
 Brigadier
 General 
Nilam
 confirmed
 to 
the 
committee’s
 investigation that
 there 
was 
a 
plot 
to
 assassinate
 President
 Nasheed
 and 
that
 on 
the 
7th 
of 
February
 2012,
 the 
environment
 was 
such
 that 
President 
Nasheed
 had 
reason
 to 
believe 
that 
his 
life 
was 
in
 danger.

This 
information 
was 
further
 verified
 when 
PPM
 Deputy 
Leader,
 Umar
 Naseer,
 in 
an 
interview 
with 
Minivan 
News, 
confirmed 
that
 the
 ousting
 of 
President 
Nasheed
 “did
 not
 happen
 automatically” 
and
 that 
“planning, 
propaganda
 and 
lots 
of 
work” 
went
in 
to
 oust 
the 
constitutionally‐elected 
President. 
Mr 
Naseer 
refused
 to 
cooperate 
with 
the
 Commonwealth
 approved
 CoNI.

In
 addition,
 former
 cabinet 
minister
 (for
 the
 present
 government),
 Ms
 Dhiyana Saeed
 has 
published
 a 
memoir
 regarding 
the
 events 
of
 7th 
February
 2012,
 and
 states
 that 
a
 certain 
‘Mr
 X
 and 
Mr
 Y’
 (later
 revealed
 as 
Deputy 
Speaker
 of 
the
 Parliament,
 Mohamed 
Nazim
 and
 MP 
Mohamed
 Nasheed
 respectively)
 had 
spoken
 to 
her
 of 
a
 plan
 to
 assassinate
 President
 Nasheed,
 in 
which
 the 
present 
Minister 
of 
Defence
 and 
the
 Commissioner 
of 
Police 
were
 involved.

It 
is 
a 
grave
 matter 
of 
concern,
 that 
none 
of 
these 
issues 
were
 highlighted 
by 
the 
two observers 
appointed 
by 
the 
Commonwealth
 to 
CoNI’s 
investigation.

In 
light 
of 
the 
above,
 it 
is 
evident
 that 
the 
validity 
of 
the 
CoNI 
report 
is 
questionable. 
These 
are 
the 
three 
issues 
we 
would
 like 
to 
see 
the 
Commonwealth
 focusing
 on:

1. 
Reopening 
the 
CoNI 
report
 in 
the 
light 
of 
the 
latest 
information
 and 
establishing why
 these 
testimonies 
and 
evidence 
from
 leading
 members
 of 
the 
military 
and
police 
were 
not 
included
 in
 the 
CoNI
 report.

2.
 Overseeing 
a 
further 
inquiry 
into 
the 
threats
 against
 the 
life 
of 
the 
former 
head
 of 
state, 
President
 Mohamed
 Nasheed.

3. 
Pressuring 
the 
current
 president
 to 
establish 
a 
caretaker 
government
 until 
free 
and
 fair 
elections 
can 
be 
held.

Lucy Johnson is a member of UK-based NGO, Friends of Maldives

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)

No police involvement in motorcyclist’s death: Police Integrity Commission

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has concluded its investigation into the death of Abdulla Gasim Ibrahim and determined that his death was not due to police negligence, or due the use of disproportionate or unwarranted force.

Abdulla Gasim Ibrahim died following an incident outside the Justice Building on August 17 last year, in which an officer attempted to stop a fleeing motorcyclist and passenger by stepping in front of the vehicle and appearing to strike the riders with his baton.

Leaked CCTV footage of the incident shows the motorcyclist and his passenger colliding with Gasim, who was parked on the side of the road, resulting in his death. The police officer then leaves the scene, as others arrive and bundle Gasim into a police vehicle. Police made no mention of police involvement at the time of the incident.

Following the release of the CCTV footage, Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz  told Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee that the Police Standards Command had concluded that Constable Moosa Shamil – the officer seen in the leaked video footage of Gasim’s death – had used the baton to stop a suspected criminal in accordance with regulations.

The PIC statement listed six reasons as to why the commission agreed with the police service’s conclusion.

Firstly, it stated “there is reason to believe from the movements of the two policemen who stopped the motorcycle, that they came out in front of the Justice Building 20 seconds before the accident occurred, having received an instruction to stop a fleeing motorcycle.”

The statement then said that since the motorcycle was suspected to be stolen property, section 4 (c) paragraph 2 of “the Regulation Governing the Utilisation of all Lawful Powers and Discretions of the Police” allowed the policeman to attempt to stop the vehicle.

However, initial police reports only stated that the men had a stolen mobile phone in their possession. The motorcycle was said to be stolen property only in December 2012, after the case against the motorist and his passenger was sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

The PIC also justified the use of the baton to stop the speeding vehicle driven by “someone showing disobedience”, citing section 2(b), 2(c) and 3(d) of the “Regulation Governing the Holding and Use of the Baton.”

Furthermore, “having examined the video footage, it is not certain whether the baton used by the policeman came into contact with [the riders] on the motorcycle, and where it is deemed that there was contact, it is believed that the contact would have been on the back of the person sitting at the backseat of the motorcycle; and that no identification was made to confirm that the speed or the movement of the motorcycle altered because of any police movement.”

The last point noted on PIC’s statement read: “having examined the video footage received by the Commission, it is known that Abdulla Gasim stopped the motorcycle behind the policemen after the policemen had gone to the centre of the road; and therefore given that the attention of the policemen at that moment was on what was happening in front, there is no room to find that the policemen were aware that Gasim was standing where he stood, as a spectator.”

“No hope of justice when police investigate themselves”: Gasim’s widow

“There is no hope of justice when it is the police themselves who are investigating their actions,” Gasim’s widow, Naseema Khaleel, told Minivan News, adding that she was “appalled” by the PIC’s conclusion.

“These are things that even a mere child won’t accept. In the leaked video I can the seen the policeman standing in front of the motorcycle and swinging his baton. How, then, can the PIC say that it would have hit the passenger, and that too on his back?

“And as for the speed and direction of the motorcycle not being altered after the driver was hit with the baton – the video doubtless says otherwise. Judging by these observations by the PIC which go against the video evidence, it seems they perhaps watched a completely different video,” Naseema said.

She referred to where the report described Gasim as a “spectator” who had stopped at the scene.

“The report calls Gasim a spectator who stopped there out of curiosity. I found that most hurtful. According to this country’s regulations, when there is a vehicle approaching from behind with its sirens blasting, drivers are to move to the side of the road. That’s what Gasim did. He wasn’t waiting around to pry,” Naseema said.

Naseema said that she felt that along with Constable Moosa Shamil, he other officers who were seen in the leaked video to be active on the scene ought to be questioned about the day’s events for a more complete investigation.

Parliamentary investigation

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee has meanwhile decided to summon Constable Moosa Shamil for questioning.

“We believe that since Constable Shamil is alleged of having committed this act, we must give him an opportunity to speak in his defence. This is why we are summoning him,”said Chair of the Committee, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed.

In view of Naseema’s remarks, Ali Waheed said that the committee had not previously thought to summon the other policemen at the scene.

“If members in the committee feel there is need for further deliberation, we will proceed as such. Speaking with the other officers there is an option we will take into consideration.”

Waheed said that if the committee felt it necessary, the parliament regulations allowed them to summon the PIC in relation to the matter they were investigating.

“Now that the PIC has also reached a conclusion, we will be looking into that too. We will be setting the schedule for these meetings soon,” Waheed said.

The committee summoned Gasim’s family on January 29. At the meeting, Gasim’s son Mohamed Gais said police had summoned him to obtain a statement in relation to his father’s death.

“The only question the police asked was if I wanted the death penalty to be given to the person responsible for my father’s death. I told them no, we want them to pay damages instead,” Gais said.

Naseema stated at the meeting that in spite of police having denied involvement, in light of the information available, she felt the police were still responsible for the death of her husband.

Police cover-up

Article 41(c) of the Police Act states that the Maldives Police Service should inform the PIC upon the occurrence of death or infliction of grave bodily injury to a person due to the use of force by a police officer.

Asked in December if police had in accordance with the said article notified PIC of the incident, PIC Director General Fathimath Sarira stated: “Police have notified the commission about the accident in a phone call. Although, when we first heard of the case, it was only said that a speeding motorcycle had collided with a parked one and led to a death. But then later, we got the footage too.”

Police Media Official Sub Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News in January that police had not mentioned the involvement of Constable Shamil to either the PIC or the public because “Initially even I knew of it as an accident. We wouldn’t know all the details at once. We learn facts as the investigation moves forward. It was portrayed as a cover-up in coverage, but we say it was an accident as that is what our investigations state it is.”

With regard to the PIC report, Minivan News asked Haneef if Constable Shamil had acted “having received an instruction to stop a fleeing motorcycle”, and if so how it was possible that police had not initially known of the police involvement as he had previously stated.

“Yes, he was responding to instructions and communication was made through our walkie-talkies. We had reports of the robbery and the accident as two separate incidents,” Haneef said.

PIC President Abdulla Waheed’s phone was switched off and Director General Fathimath Sarira was not responding to calls at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court to rule in appeal on Hulhumale’ court legitimacy

The High Court is expected to rule Monday (February 4) on a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) appeal against the Supreme Court’s decision to back the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed, who is currently facing charges in the Hulhumale’ court over the detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, today appealed against the legitimacy of the legal body alongside lawyers from the MDP.

Nasheed’s legal team have claimed that the Supreme Court ruling legitimising the Hulhumale’ court could be ignored by a lower legal body in the country, if oversights were made in the original verdict.

The High Court hearing follows attempts by the MDP to file a Civil Court case against serving Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed over allegations he had sought to influence the judiciary against the former president.

Dr Jameel was himself arrested under the Nasheed administration last year after the President’s Office requested an investigation into so-called “slanderous” allegations he made that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives.

Minivan News was awaiting a response from Jameel at time of press.

“Per incuriam”

According to MDP spokesperson and MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, Nasheed’s legal team today invoked the principal of “per incuriam”, whereby an order from a superior court could be ignored in cases where “oversights” where found in the legal body’s ruling.

“In this regard, there are many precedents where the High Court has ruled against the Supreme Court,” he claimed, without specifying examples.

Hamid contended that rather than arguing the appeal hearing on just a legal technicality, the principal of “per incuriam” was relevant to what he claimed were the questionable grounds by which the Hulhumale’-based court was founded.

“The existence of Hulhumale’ magistrate Court is illegal. Our lawyers have submitted proof such as letters by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom showing this,” he claimed.

Nasheed came under international criticism last year after detaining Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed. The arrest followed his successful blocking of investigations into his alleged misconduct by the judicial watchdog and quashing of his own police summons.

The former government also accused the judge of political bias, obstructing police, stalling cases, having links with organised crime and “taking the entire criminal justice system in his fist” to protect key figures of the former dictatorship from human rights and corruption cases.

Nasheed’s government faced ongoing protests following the detention that led to his controversial resignation on February 7, 2012.

The MDP has maintained that the charges against Nasheed, which would potentially see him facing possible imprisonment or being banned from running for office in elections scheduled for later this year, were politically motivated.

Nasheed, who also spoke at the trial, observed that the chief presiding judge at the hearing had formerly served under Home Minister Dr Jameel during his tenure at the now defunct Ministry of Justice, during the autocratic rule of former President Gayoom. The MDP alleged that the judge, having previously reported to directly to Dr Jameel during his time as justice minister, had a conflict of interest.

Appeal aim

Hamid claimed that should the appeal be upheld by the High Court, the invalidation of the Hulhumale’ Magistrates Court would also call into question the nature of the charges against former President Nasheed.

He claimed additionally that the state was “on the back foot” in the case, with the Prosecutor General’s (PG’s) Office not contesting the issue today during the hearing.

Hamid added that Attorney General Azima Shukoor and a representative for the court watchdog, the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), had also declined to turn up for the hearing.

He was critical however of the chief judge providing the MDP just 20 minutes with which to present the opposition’s case against the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ court.

The three presiding judges are expected to deliver a verdict on the appeal by tomorrow.

Action against home minister

Meanwhile, President of MDP’s Male’ City Branch Mohamed Rasheed Hussain ‘Bigey’ filed a case at the Civil Court Thursday (January 31) concerning Home Minister Dr Jameel’s comments regarding the trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

The case, which has been accepted by the court, is currently in the process of registration.

“We are submitting this case to the Civil Court requesting that they order current Minister of Home Affairs Mohamed Jameel Ahmed to stop making remarks to local media that will stand in the way of judges presiding over cases fairly and in a manner free of influence,” Hussain said.

Aishath Leesha, the lawyer representing the MDP in the case, claimed that the home minister’s comments concerning an ongoing case were outlawed not only under the Judicature Act and Judges Act, but by previous Supreme Court rulings and the Maldives constitution.

“Hence, we are asking the court to declare that neither Jameel nor anyone else can make comments of this nature,” Leesha said.

Dr Jameel was reported in local media as stating 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.”

He alleged that delays to the trial were due to “various reasons”, and would very likely have “adverse effects on the political and social fabric of the nation”.

“If things happen this way, people will start believing that it was due to the failure to address some issues in the Maldives’ judicial system, which need to be looked into. And in my opinion, the courts will have to take responsibility for this,” Jameel said in his interview with news website Haveeru.

Expressing concern that it would be an “extremely worrisome matter” if people started speculating that the reason for the delay in prosecuting Nasheed was that the country’s judiciary was not performing to par, Jameel said, “Every single day that goes by without the case being concluded contributes to creating doubt in the Maldivian people’s minds about the judiciary.”

http://minivannewsarchive.com/politics/mdp-accuses-home-minister-of-influencing-former-presidents-trial-52062
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)