Tag: minivan

EC maintains impossibility of expedited election after government request

Elections Commission (EC) President Fuwad Thowfeek has told Minivan News he does not believe it is possible to expedite the fresh round of presidential elections – currently scheduled for November 9 – despite requests to do so from the government and the three presidential candidates.

The candidates held a meeting on Sunday evening, agreeing to ask the EC for a November 2 poll. The EC, however, rejected the request stating that the commission does not have the facilities to do so in such a short period of time.

Vice President Mohamed Waheed Deen held discussions with the EC today (October 29), requesting – on behalf of the government – that the election date be brought forward.

Meeting at the EC offices, in addition to asking for an expedited poll, Waheed Deen enquired as to whether the EC needed further support to go forward with early elections.

“I have come here today to ask the EC what the government can do for them, whether we need to empty out some state institutions and give the EC extra space, or find more staff members for them,” Waheed Deen is quoted as saying to local media.

The Vice President is further quoted as saying that the commission members came across as being “very positive” in today’s meeting, and that they would get back to the government “very soon” with a list of what they require.

Waheed Deen further said that although he understands that there are some difficulties in bringing the polling date ahead from November 9th to the 2nd, he believed that it is possible to hold elections “somewhere around the 5th”.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad told Minivan News today that he has not received any information on the matter.

Earlier this afternoon, he was quoted in local media as confirming that the government had decided to give all possible assistance to the EC to speed up the preparations.

Masood was further quoted as saying that the government would like elections to be held in a manner which is in the best interests of the nation and to elect a president by November 11.

Earlier poll impossible, regardless of additional resources: Thowfeek

EC President Fuwad Thowfeek, however, feels that there is no possibility of bringing the date forward regardless of the support promised.

“In today’s meeting, we did provide them with all possible information that they requested for. However, since this is something we do together with the citizens, I do not believe it will be possible to bring the polling date forward, despite the offer to provide us with more resources, funds, equipment or manpower,” Fuwad told Minivan News today.

The EC announced November 9 as the date for a fresh first round of elections after the police forcibly brought a Supreme Court ordered re-vote to a halt on October 19.

The commission said then at the timea that if a second round was necessary, it would be held on November 16, 5 days after the date constitutionally mandated date for the swearing in of a new elected president.

At the time, EC President Fuwad Thowfeek said that the commission had held discussions with the president, the cabinet, and political parties on the earliest possible date for a new election before deciding on the date.

“We have said, when we get to a certain point, when a certain party doesn’t do what they must do, it should not affect the entire election. If that is the case, we will never be able to hold an election,” he said then, referring to the police obstruction of polls after Progressive Party of Maldives candidate Abdulla Yameen and Jumhooree coalition candidate Gasim Ibrahim failed to sign on the voters’ registry as mandated by the Supreme Court’s 16 point guideline.

“They assured us that they will not allow for these kind of obstructions in the upcoming election. Ministers have given us commitment that they will find a solution and facilitate this. That is why we have started work again.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Human Rights Commission alleges police intimidation of its staff

The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) has alleged that the police are attempting to intimidate commission staff members following the start of its investigations into what they maintain is police obstruction of the October 19 presidential election.

“The commission believes that what we are facing now is serious, unprecedented and unjustifiable intimidation from the police. We will continue the investigation, while also ensuring that we continue protecting every one of our team members,” HRCM member Jeehan Mahmoodh has told Minivan News.

Jeehan stated that, after criticising the police for acting outside of their mandate when obstructing the Elections Commissions (EC) efforts to conduct the presidential election on October 19, they have been facing what the commission believes to be attempts by the police to intimidate its staff.

Jeehan said that the police had requested the HRCM provide “complete details” of the staff members who witnessed the police’s actions outside of the EC on the morning of October 19.

“In the history of HRCM, we have never before had such a request, where details of individual staff are asked for in relation to an investigation. This just cannot be done,” Jeehan said.

“We responded, invoking Article 27 of the HRCM Act and informed the police that the commission will not compromise the safety of any of our staff members. We also explained that as this is an ongoing investigation we cannot compromise it by providing detailed information regarding the matter,” she continued.

Article 27 of the HRCM Act has two parts, with part (a) stating that, “No criminal or civil suit shall be filed against the President or Vice- President or a member of the Commission in relation to committing or omitting an act in good faith whilst undertaking responsibilities of the commission or exercising the powers of the Commission or the powers conferred to the Commission by a law”.

Part (b) of the same article says “The Commission can only be questioned or a suit can be filed against the Commission in court regarding a component in a report published by the Commission following an inquiry, should sufficient evidence be available to prove the component is false”.

Speaking out on human rights violation is our duty: HRCM

After Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz tweeted saying, “HRCM to seek information after findings revealed!!”, Jeehan’s response echoed the HRCM statement released following the police’s initial suggestions that the HRCM had not made a balanced assessment.

“This is definitely not the first time HRCM has made comments in the instance that we observe a breach of human rights, regardless of who the instigators are. If a human rights violation becomes apparent to the commission, then we have both the right and the responsibility to promptly share this with the general public,” she said.

“For instance, after the events of February 8, 2012, HRCM immediately made a public initial statement on the matter…The police are well aware this is the norm,” she continued.

“Putting it in a different context, let’s say the police see a crime being committed, and arrests a person red-handed at the crime scene. They don’t wait for their full investigation to end, and nor does their investigation end there. But since they saw it happen, they get to make a stand. Similarly, when it is evident that a human rights violation has been committed, the commission will take a stand,” she said.

October 19

Jeehan also spoke to Minivan News about the HRCM’s work on October 19, the date intended for a fresh round of elections after the initial September 7 poll was annulled by the Supreme Court.

“Our team – it’s full strength including the commissioners – was on duty by 5:30am on October 19, as we were ready to carry out election observation. We then received reports of police obstructing EC officials, and immediately dispatched investigators to the EC offices. Our staff spoke with the EC Secretary General Asim Abdul Sattar, as well as a number of police officers there. Thereby, our staff are witnesses to the events that took place that day,” she explained.

“HRCM Vice President Tholal was in charge as Commission President Azra was away on hajj pilgrimage. Tholal tried multiple times to reach the police focal point – incidentally the same as the focal point for the EC – Assistance Commissioner of Police Ali Rasheed by phone, and finally sent a text message. ACP Rasheed did not respond to even the text until nearly midnight,” Jeehan continued.

“Tholal then called the Acting Home Minister [Ahmed Shafeeu], who is in effect the oversight over the police force. He asked the minister, and I quote, “why have police obstructed elections?”. The Minister informed us that the obstruction is not a police initiative or decision, and that they are following orders after much deliberation. Contrary to some media reports, the Home Ministry’s statement did not deny our claims that we contacted him and got this response, but rather confirms it,” Jeehan said.

“Police did not act in their own accord”: Home Minister

A press statement of the Home Ministry reads, “As the letter sent by the HRCM to the Police alleging that the police obstructed the elections scheduled for October 19 reveals that when they contacted the Acting Home Minister via phone and asked him why police had obstructed elections, he responded that the police had not acted out of their own accord but on orders that they had received, this ministry feels we must clarify what happened.”

“On the 19th of this month, in a phone conversation, Vice President of HRCM Ahmed Tholal asked why the police had acted in a manner against the government’s statement that it will provide cooperation to holding the election.”

“In response, the Minister had said that the police had not acted on their own accord, and that it had been in accordance with the advice of the relevant government bodies which was based on the verdict of the Supreme Court,” the statement concluded.

Police asks HRCM to identify officers they spoke with on October 19

Jeehan said that the police had also requested the HRCM provide identification details of the police officers that the commission’s investigators had spoken with on the morning of October 19.

“This is information that the police must have. They ought to know which of their officers they dispatched there, and what they did in their line of duty. That was the commission’s response to them, shouldn’t they know who it was?” Jeehan asked.

Jeehan also said that the commission has requested the police to provide an incident report on the events of October 19, as well as copies of all communication they have exchanged with any other institution after the date of the initial annulled election.

“It isn’t at all like the police are claiming on various media. We are not asking for information after reaching a conclusion. We made that initial statement that police obstructed elections based on our observations, and the fact that our staff were witness to it. We are now conducting a procedural investigation of the matter,” Jeehan explained.

“Furthermore, we have asked for copies of any communication between the police and any other institution from beyond the date of the obstructed election for an investigation that is based on other additional information we have received. We cannot yet reveal the details of this as it may compromise the investigation, but it will be made public upon completion,” she continued.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives’ Elections Commission calls on “all friends of democracy” for help conducting presidential poll as scheduled

The re-registration process for the presidential election first round – scheduled for November 9 – ends today at 10pm tonight (October 25).

Newly eligible voters and those who will be voting in a location other than their home island can collect forms from the Elections Commission Secretariat in Male’, from Island Council offices and online.

After re-registration is completed, the EC will receive rejected re-registration forms tomorrow (October 26). On the same day, the names of elections day officials will be sent to candidates for vetting as outlined in the SC guidelines.

“The Elections Commission of Maldives calls upon all friends of democracy to help us deliver a free, fair, transparent and inclusive presidential election as scheduled on 9 November 2013”, said a commission statement yesterday.

“So far over seventy million Maldivian Rufiyaa [US$ 4,566,240] has been spent on the unsuccessful attempts to hold the Presidential Election in the Maldives,” the Elections Commission (EC) stated in a press release issued Wednesday (October 23).

State-funded programs had to be halted in order to hold the October 19 re-vote, Minister of Finance and Treasury Abdulla Jihad has said previously.

This is the fourth time in two months the EC is preparing to hold a poll for the Maldives’ presidential election.

The September 7 first round poll received a unanimous positive assessment by more than a thousand local and international election observers, before Jumhooree Party (JP)’s leader, Gasim Ibrahim, who placed third in the poll refused to accept the results.

After agreeing to hear Gasim’s complaints, the Supreme Court then issued an injunction on September 23 to indefinitely delay the presidential election’s second round, before the police physically halted the EC’s ongoing preparations for the September 28 run-off.

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled to annul the first round – citing a secret police report which alleged electoral fraud, but was never presented to the EC’s lawyers – and delineated 16 guidelines to hold a revote by October 20.

With just 11 days to prepare for the next round of the presidential election – a process that usually requires a minimum of 45 days –  the Supreme Court issued subsequent rulings dictating managerial and administrative tasks the EC must undertake while preparing for the repeat first round.

The apex court’s guidelines also mandated police play a substantive role in handling the logistics and security of the election and ballot papers, as well as demanded that all parties sign the voter lists, effectively giving presidential candidates veto power.

The day before the scheduled October 19 election, candidates Abdulla Yameen and Gasim had still not signed the voter lists and were not responding to phone calls from the EC or officials sent to their homes. The pair subsequently demanded extensive fingerprint verification of the new voters’ registry – another stipulation of the Supreme Court midnight rulings.

The same evening both candidates sought a Supreme Court ruling demanding that the election be delayed.

Receiving only a brief instruction from the court to follow its guidelines, the EC prioritised the guideline requiring an election before Oct 20 and proceeded with the vote.

However, an hour before polls were due to open on October 19 police obstructed EC staff attempting to leave the commission’s office with ballot documents and equipment – later stating that police had decided not to provide cooperation to the EC as it had not followed the 16-point guidelines imposed by the court.

The Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) has since concluded that police illegally blocked the EC from conducting the re-vote of the presidential election on October 19 in contravention of the constitution, the Police Act, and the Elections Act.

Following the rescheduling of the election for November 9 – just two days before the end of the presidential term – Elections Commissioner Fuwad Thowfeek labelled the Supreme Court’s guidelines “restrictions” and expressed concern that they effectively allowed political parties to stop elections from happening.

The Elections Commission’s statement issued Thursday (October 24) recounts the presidential elections saga that has taken place over the last two months:

As mandated by the Constitution and Electoral Laws of the country, Elections Commission of the Maldives (ECM) held the first round of the presidential election 2013 on 7th September 2013. The conduction of the election was smooth and orderly without any serious cause for concern. National and international observers praised the election as free, fair, transparent and inclusive. In fact many international observers described the conduction of the election as one of the most peaceful and best they have observed. ECM was hailed for the way they have carried out such a smooth and peaceful election. One of the non-governmental organisations (NGO)’s stated that compilation of the voters’ list was excellent with a probable error rate lower than one percent. However one of the competing parties (Jumhooree Party) filed a case at the Supreme Court of Maldives to invalidate the election mostly arguing on the accuracy of the voters’ list. The Supreme Court after 22 days of deliberation found that the ECM had over five thousand (5000) fraudulent names on the voters’ list and annulled the result of the election. Since no candidate had achieved over 50 percent of the voters in the first round, ECM was on the verge of conducting the second round of the presidential election on 28th September 2013 when the Supreme Court ordered to annul the first round of the election. And as a consequence of annulment of the first round, the runoff was cancelled.

The main reason for the annulment of the election was based on discrepancies in the name or addresses of the voters. Nine hundred and fifty two (952) votes were invalidated due to slight differences in the name of the voters (some examples of discrepancies included Mariyam Sheran Mohamed Waheed Deen in the voters’ list as opposed to Mariyam Sheran Waheed Deen in the National Register and Ali Rila in the voters’ list was spelled as Ali Riza in the National Register etc.). Two thousand eight hundred and thirty (2830) votes were invalidated because the address in the voters’ list differed from their permanent addresses in the National Register even though their National Identity Card number and date of birth were the same and their National ID photo matched with the person who voted.

The Supreme Court ordered re-polling under a 16 point guideline set out by the Supreme Court and ordered that first round of the presidential election to be held before 20th October 2013 and should a runoff be required, to hold the second round before 3rd November 2013. One of the most contentious clauses in the guideline was clause number five which gives veto power to candidates to reject the voters’ list.

The first round of the presidential election was set to take place on 19th October 2013. After the lists were finalized candidates were given time to sign the final voters’ list. Mr Gasim Ibrahim (Jumhooree Party) and Mr Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom (Progressive Party of Maldives) refused to sign the voters’ list. The reason for refusal being that they were unable to verify the voters’ list. Mr Mohamed Nasheed (Maldivian Democratic Party) signed the voters’ list. Even though two candidates refused to sign the list, ECM was preparing to go ahead with the election as scheduled. However due to police action in the early hours of 19th October 2013 (polling day) ECM was prevented from conducting the election. The police refused to provide security to the ballot paper and also prevented election related materials being taken out of the ECM office making it impossible to hold the election.

ECM has now again rescheduled the first round of election to take place on 9th November 2013 and to hold the second round (if required) on 16th November 2013. ECM has requested assurances from President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik that this time, election should not be disrupted by security services and to facilitate the smooth conduction of the election.

So far over seventy million Maldivian Rufiyaa has been spent on the unsuccessful attempts to hold the presidential election in the Maldives. Elections Commission of Maldives calls upon all friends of democracy to help us deliver a free, fair, transparent and inclusive presidential election as scheduled on 9th November 2013. The runoff (if required) is scheduled to take place on 16th November 2013.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Virgin tycoon calls for elections in the Maldives “as soon as possible”

British business tycoon Sir Richard Branson has called for free elections “as soon as possible” in the Maldives, after police blocked the election from taking place on October 19.

The head of the Virgin Empire, who has previously blogged on the Maldives’ political turmoil, said he had drafted an article several weeks ago “to praise President Waheed for taking his country back into free and fair elections and bringing true democracy back to the country.”

“But before I had chance to publish it, the Maldives police intervened and stopped the ballot boxes reaching the polling stations,” Branson said.

His comments follow findings from the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) that the police stopped the election illegally, in violation of the constitution.

Additionally, a leaked Human Rights Commission (HRCM) report obtained by Minivan News questions the credibility of the evidence used by the Supreme Court to annul the first round of presidential polls, and the court’s authority to issue guidelines effectively permitting candidates to effectively veto future elections.

“Knowing President Waheed as I do, my instinct is that he is not behind the blocking of the election process, and that other people who didn’t do well in the first round of the elections are trying to stop a fair election taking place,” the tycoon suggested.

Waheed, who received 5.13 percent of the vote in the annulled first round, has withdrawn from the revote and publicly stated that he has no intention of remaining in power after the end of the presidential term on November 11.

“I am not comfortable to stay on. It would be my preference that there be an elected President. And it would also be my preference that if this is not possible, then there would be some other arrangement made,” Waheed told The Hindu.

Branson however observed that while the election had been rescheduled for November 9, “the Maldives Supreme Court has brought a ruling that the candidates will have the power of veto – so unless all candidates agree to the electoral roll there will be no elections.”

“Plus, if a run off is needed it will be on November 16th, which is after the expiry of the current presidential term, creating a constitutional void. This whole process is a huge threat to democracy, which perhaps sadly is what some of the candidates want, having seen how the public voted in the first election round,” Branson wrote.

“The people of the Maldives need fair representation and they need free elections as soon as possible. Should that not happen, governments must lobby for change and the world community must demand action until free, fair elections take place,” he concluded.

Virgin politics

Branson first waded into Maldivian politics on his blog on February 24 2012, soon after Waheed’s controversial ascension to power amid a police mutiny earlier that month.

Branson publicly called for President Waheed to “do the right thing” and hold free and fair elections before the end of the year.

It was, Branson wrote to Dr Waheed, “completely astounding that you have been part of an overthrow of a democratically elected government that has effectively let the old regime back into power.”

“Knowing you, I would assume that you were given no choice and that it was through threats that you have ended up in this position,” Branson said. “I do very much hope that was the case rather than you doing it of your own free will.”

Days later, Branson wrote another entry, saying that he had spoken on the phone to Dr Waheed, who told him he had appointed “a respected person” to examine the truth of what caused President Nasheed to “resign”.

“He says that he didn’t know who issued an arrest warrant for President Nasheed after he left office but that it had been rescinded within 48 hours. He is determined to be an honest broker, to be seen to be one, and to get everyone’s confidence. He said that he offered to bring in people from President Nasheed’s party but they refused to join.”

A few days later, Branson wrote a third post, resuming his first call for early elections “as soon as feasibly possible”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“The world needs more political leaders like President Nasheed”: 350.org

Global climate justice NGO 350.org has reaffirmed that “urgent action is needed to address the climate crisis” in the Maldives, and that its continued active international leadership is “immensely important”.

In light of the IPCC’s findings and the danger sea level rise poses for the Maldives, 350.org has highlighted the essential international leadership role former President Mohamed Nasheed and the country have played for achieving climate justice.

“The IPCC’s 5th assessment report largely reaffirms what we already knew, and makes it abundantly clear that urgent action is needed the world-over. It is immensely important the Maldives to continue it’s active, leadership stance to go carbon neutral within a decade and advocate for more international action,” Will Bates, Global Campaigns Director and Co-Founder of 350.org told Minivan News.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes’s fifth assessment report emphasised the importance of human influence on the climate change system.

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased,” read the report released last month.

“As the ocean warms, and glaciers and ice sheets reduce, global mean sea level will continue to rise [during the 21st century], but at a faster rate than we have experienced over the past 40 years,” said IPCC Working Group 1 Co-Chair, Qin Dahe.

The IPCC’s report “sounds the alarm for immediate action on climate change,” declared 350.org.

“The report, which is the most authoritative, comprehensive assessment of scientific knowledge on climate change, finds with near certainty that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet and that climate impacts are accelerating… Scientists have upped the certainty that humans are responsible for warming, increasing their confidence to 95%,” highlighted 350.org.

350.org has been building a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis. It has coordinated over 20,000 climate demonstrations in more than 182 countries since the organisation’s founding in 2008.

350 parts per million is what many scientists, climate experts, and progressive national governments are now saying is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere.

“The world needs more political leaders like President Nasheed”: 350.org

Bates noted that former President Nasheed has been an integral figure for the global climate justice movement.

“President Nasheed’s courageous and creative actions to confront the true scale of the climate crisis in 2009 and 2010 were a powerful wake-up call for the world. Hearing from an entire nation about the imminent threat to their future through their democratically elected president, and seeing their actions to address the crisis was an inspiration for the rest of the world to step up our efforts to address the climate crisis,” Bates stated.

“The world needs more political leaders like President Nasheed who understand the severity of the threat, and who speak and act truthfully in response,” he added.

The NGO also believes President Nasheed’s leadership within the Maldives has benefited the nation’s domestic climate justice movement.

“I believe it was in part thanks to the openness and freedom given to civil society in general during his administration that allows young people and NGOs to organize on climate change above and beyond what President Nasheed was working on at the national policy and international levels,” said Bates.

“No doubt his efforts to have the Maldives go carbon neutral in a decade was a powerful act of leadership that more governments around the world should be following as well,” he added.

“We support human rights and a free and fair democratic process in the Maldives,” Bates noted in regard to Nasheed’s ongoing domestic efforts to ensure these values are upheld.

Although he emphasised that 350.org is not directly involved in Nasheed’s political struggles at home, Bates explained how the non-violent direct action strategy 350.org employs can benefit the Maldives in its fight for climate justice as well as democratisation.

“Social movements around the world have proven the power of non-violent direct action as a means of creating change, political and otherwise,” he said.

“President Nasheed’s underwater cabinet meeting in 2009 was a particularly creative form of action, and there are countless ways that different non-violent tactics – from marches and rallies to culture-jamming and online memes – can enhance struggles against climate change as well as for promoting democracy and fair elections,” he continued.

“We’ve seen incredibly creative actions in the Maldives by grassroots activists fighting climate change too and with such international concern for the political situation there, similar tactics could be employed at the current time with great effect,” he added.

Nasheed has often spoken of the close interrelationship between climate change, human rights, and democracy, particularly since his February 7, 2012 controversial transfer of power, and 350.org has echoed this belief.

“Human rights and climate justice are very clearly inextricably linked as the climate crisis infringes on people’s access to food, water, health, and general security. Furthermore, the causes of the climate crisis, such as the extraction and burning of fossil fuels and cutting down forests have immense human rights implications. Meanwhile many the solutions, such as more decentralized renewable energy infrastructure, are in many ways a step towards democratizing more of how our world works,” said Bates.

“Although that is not to say that countries that exist with undemocratic systems of government can’t also enact solutions to achieve greater human rights and climate justice,” he added.

Extreme sea level rise threats

“The rate of sea level rise will very likely exceed that observed during 1971–2010 due to increased ocean warming and increased loss of mass from glaciers and ice sheets,” all prospective scenarios in the IPCC’s report projected.

Sea level is expected to rise between 0.26 metres (0.85 feet) and 0.98 metres (3.22 feet) by 2100, depending on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced this century, it added.

While these projections represent the possible low and high extreme scenarios of sea level rise, small island states – such as the Maldives – are especially vulnerable, the IPCC previously stressed in it’s fourth assessment report.

With over 80 percent of the land area in the Maldives being less than a meter (3.28 feet) above mean sea level, “the slightest rise in sea level will prove extremely threatening,” UNDP Maldives previously declared. “A rise in sea levels by 0.50 meters could see significant portions of the islands being washed away by erosion or being inundated [by the ocean].”

“Even now some islands are seriously affected by loss not only of shoreline but also of houses, schools and other infrastructure,” it continued.

Not only is the Maldives extremely vulnerable to sea level rise, other climate change impacts – including extreme weather events, coral bleaching and acidification – which exacerbate these negative effects, it added.

Earlier this year the World Bank also expressed the urgent need for concerted efforts to support the Maldives in adapting to climate change due to sea level rise projections.

Additionally, the UN’s 2013 global human development report highlighted inequality and climate change vulnerabilities as major concerns for the Maldives, despite the country’s “significant economic growth” in recent years.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court issues edict insisting all guidelines be followed

The Supreme Court last night issued a ruling ordering the Elections Commission (EC) to continue to abide by the guidelines in its October 7 verdict scuttling the results of the first round in September.

The latest ruling declared that “as the aforementioned presidential election not being held on the dates in the judgment is not a legally justifiable reason for not holding the election in accordance with the guidelines provided in Supreme Court case number 42/SC-C/2013, [the Supreme Court] informs and orders the Elections Commission and all relevant institutions of the Maldivian state to hold the presidential election that must be held in 2013 in accordance with the guidelines provided in Supreme Court number 42/SC-C/2013.”

The guidelines included holding the election before October 20, as well as demanding that all parties sign the voter lists, effectively giving presidential candidates power of veto.

The day before the election candidates Abdulla Yameen and Gasim Ibrahim had still not signed the voter lists and were not responding to phone calls from the EC or officials sent to their homes.

The pair, who received 25.35 percent and 24.07 percent respectively in the annulled first round, subsequently demanded extensive fingerprint verification of the new voters’ registry – another Supreme Court demand, issued at midnight on October 10. The evening before polls were due to open, both sought a Supreme Court ruling demanding that the election be delayed.

Receiving only a brief instruction from the court to follow its guidelines, the EC prioritised the guideline requiring an election before Oct 20 and proceeded with the vote. However, staff attempting to leave the commission’s office with ballot documents and equipment just hours prior to polls opening were obstructed by police.

Following the rescheduling of the election for November 9 – just two days before the end of the presidential term – Elections Commissioner Fuwad Thowfeek labelled the Supreme Court’s guidelines as “restrictions” and expressed concern that they effectively allowed political parties to stop elections from happening.

“We have said that when we get to a certain point, when a certain party doesn’t do what they must do, it should not affect the entire election. If that is the case, we will never be able to hold an election,” Thowfeek said, following meetings with the President, the cabinet and political parties.

“They assured us they will not allow for these kind of obstructions in the upcoming election. Ministers have given us commitment that they will find a solution and facilitate this. That is why we have started work again. If the same thing happened as before, this is not something we must do. We are starting work again because we are confident there will be an election. I am certain we will succeed this time,” he added.

“I hope the government considers these restrictions in the future and finds a solution. Otherwise, holding elections will become impossible and that affects the most fundamental [right] in a democracy,” he said.

Last night’s Supreme Court ruling

“The constitution of the Republic of Maldives obligates the Elections Commission and all relevant state institutions to ensure that the presidential election that must be held in the Maldives in 2013 is one where all Maldivian citizens eligible to vote is able to exercise the right [to vote] freely and without any kind of obstacle,” read the Supreme Court edict, signed by Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain.

“The elections must be held in accordance with the guidelines stated in the Supreme Court case number 42/SC-C/2013 to ensure that elections held in the Maldives are fair and conducted transparently in line with the principles specified in article 170 of the constitution of the Republic of Maldives,” read the edict.

The integrity of the Supreme Court has meanwhile come under increasing criticism, domestically and abroad.

Following the Supreme Court’s indefinite suspension of the first round despite local and international praise of the vote as free, fair and democratic, Transparency Maldives warned “the failure of parliament and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) to address alleged integrity issues of the Supreme Court judges have “created avenues for political and other actors to question the conduct, injunctions and verdicts of the Supreme Court”.

Prior to his registration as a presidential candidate Gasim was a member of the JSC, and was responsible for rejecting a recommendation from the JSC’s own subcommittee recommending that Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed be suspended pending an investigation into his leaked sex tapes.

The sex tapes and suspension of the election have resulted in escalating protests targeting the courts, with large pairs of white underpants quickly becoming widely adopted as a protest symbol.

“Expeditious resolution of such allegations and issues is imperative to ease rising tensions in the election environment and prevent the derailment of democratic processes,” said Transparency Maldives in its statement.

“Relevant state institutions, including the Judicial Service Commission and the Parliament of the Maldives must expedite the resolution of these issues and allegations, in a transparent manner free of conflict of interest, to reduce questioning of and allegations of partisan bias in such processes.”

UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, raised concern over the politicisation and impartiality of the Supreme Court as far back as May.

Knaul expressed “shock to hear that many members of the judiciary, including in the Supreme Court, hold memberships in political parties.”

Conflicts of interest and the resulting impact on judges’ impartiality was a concern, noted Knaul.

“It seems that judges, and other actors of the State, do not want to fully acknowledge and understand this concept, leading to the dangerous perception from the public that the justice system is politicised and even corrupted,” she said.

The Supreme Court, she noted, had been “deciding on the constitutionality of laws ex-officio, without following appropriate examination procedures, under the understanding that they are the supreme authority for the interpretation of the Constitution.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: The Maldives, Egypt and the revenge of the deep state

When Mohamed Mursi was ousted in Egypt in June, the Muslim Brotherhood decried it as the revenge of the “deep state.”

They said that in the days of the revolution in January 2011, they had managed to cut off the head of the Mubarak regime, but in the two years that followed they failed to pull out the roots.

And so a loose coalition of politicians, bureaucrats and security forces – the remnants of the old regime – gathered together and slowly hacked away at the new government.

The climax came in June, Mursi flinched and the forces of the deep state took their chance.

Today, Hosni Mubarak is free, Muslim Brotherhood activities are again banned, and the revolution of 2011 appears to be slowly unravelling.

A lot remains unclear. Will scheduled elections actually happen? Will they be free and fair? What will Egypt look like a decade from now?

The Maldives might offer an answer.

An island of chaos

When Mohamed Nasheed was ousted in February 2012, the Maldivian Democratic Party also decried it as the revenge of the “deep state.”

“Dictatorships don’t always die when the dictator leaves office,” Nasheed wrote in the New York Times that week.

Given what we know now, his words were remarkably prescient.

“The wave of revolutions that toppled autocrats in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen last year was certainly cause for hope. But the people of those countries should be aware that, long after the revolutions, powerful networks of regime loyalists can remain behind and can attempt to strangle their nascent democracies.”

This process happened in the Maldives over a year before Mursi was locked up.

Since then, the country has stumbled towards elections, led by a lame-duck president and pulled in two directions by rival clans – one loyal to Mohamed Nasheed and a reformist, democratic ideology and one to the former leader for 30 years, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and a conservative, autocratic government.

Two competing tribes

Educated at Egypt’s Al Azhar University, Gayoom took power in 1978 and continued to govern based on a centralised system of patronage.

Never winning an election by less than 90 per cent, he relied on island chiefs, or ‘khateebs’, to keep control of 200 disparate island-communities. Gayoom’s government appointed them, as well as judges, bureaucrats and the top police and military officers.

Over three decades, he grew the roots of the Maldives’ “deep state.”

But by 2004, with tourism booming and the Maldives modernising, a new, democratic vision emerged under the yellow flag of the Maldivian Democratic Party.

Over the next four years, with the support of the West, Nasheed’s movement slowly forced Gayoom to launch a reform programme, pass a new constitution and hold free elections.

Nasheed won that battle after a second round run-off, but over the next three-and-a-half years, he failed to win the war to deconstruct the “deep state,” most notably the judiciary.

Judging the judiciary

With all the reforms of the last decade, the Maldives got new leaders and new members of parliament, but the judges stayed the same.

Article 285 of the country’s revised constitution envisaged a different judiciary – but it was dismissed as symbolic by a committee dominated by Gayoom’s former appointees.

The decision left the nation saddled with the judges from a former era.

‘They were hand-picked by Gayoom,’ says Maldivian journalist Zaheena Rasheed. “They lack education and some of them even have criminal records.”

The US State Department points out that of the Maldives’ magistrates, “an estimated quarter of the judges had criminal records, and two of the judges had been convicted of sexual assault.”

In again, out again

Having failed to clean up the judiciary by committee, Nasheed confronted them head on.

In a move that many criticised as dictatorial, he ordered the arrest of a politician who had allegedly accused him of carrying out a Christian-Jewish conspiracy in a Muslim country.

But the Criminal Court judge overruled Nasheed, triggering a bizarre series of arrests and releases which caused many to ask who was in control, the judges or the president?

Nasheed then ordered the arrest of the Criminal Court’s Chief Judge, accused of blocking attempts to prosecute former officials charged with corruption.

Three weeks of protests, followed by a mutiny by elements of the police and the military, and it became clear where power lay.

Nasheed fell from power and on February 7, he appeared on television and resigned.

“I have never wanted to rule by force,” he said. “I came to this decision because, in my opinion, I sincerely believe, that if this government is to be maintained, it would require the use of extreme force and cause harm to a lot of citizens.”

The next day he told reporters, “I was forced to resign at gunpoint.”

When an election is not an election

Nasheed’s deputy, Mohamed Waheed Hassan, took over and eventually took the country back to the ballot box on September 7.

Over 200,000 people voted, a turnout of more than 88 per cent. Nasheed fell short of a first-round win but took 45 per cent of the vote.

Gayoom’s half-brother, Abdulla Yameen, came second with 25 per cent.

Around 1,000 observers deemed it “a transparent and fair election”. It was ‘an achievement of which any of the mature democracies would have been proud,’” said J M Lyngdoh, head of the Indian election observer mission.

But then third-placed Qasim Ibrahim, Gayoom’s former finance minister, complained about electoral fraud. Gayoom himself also appeared on television to voice his concerns about the vote and within days, the Supreme Court had annulled the result. It cited a secret police report that claimed over 5,000 ballots were ineligible.

Gayoom was quick to tweet, “I welcome [the] Supreme Court’s historic decision last night because it upholds the Constitution [and] the right of the people to elect their leader in a free, fair, transparent [and] credible election.”

“A tool”

“The Supreme Court is being used as a tool by the people people who brought down Mohamed Nasheed’s government to prevent him returning to power,” says Aishath Velezinee.

She served as Deputy Home Minister under Nasheed and sat on the committee and campaigned to clean up the judiciary, but she was overruled.

The court’s ruling to void the September 7 election also included 16 recommendations on how to run another vote by October 20, narrowing the role of the Elections Commission and raising the involvement of other institutions, including the police.

“[The Supreme Court judges] are writing the law when they should be interpreting it,” says Rasheed.

A former UN worker, who did not want to be identified, goes further. ‘The bottom line is that this situation is ridiculous because the Supreme Court ruling is unconstitutional.’

The country is now waiting nervously to see if a vote can be held ahead of the deadline, and if so, what the result will be and if it will be respected.

Back to Egypt

If Egypt’s “deep state” is now back in control, it is also still considering what to do about elections.

Interim leaders have announced a roadmap which plans for both parliamentary and presidential votes to be completed by spring next year, but there is no guarantee that they will be free or fair, or that the result will be respected.

Egypt’s judiciary may become crucial, being called up on to rule on any disputes.

Is it up to the task?

Thousands of miles away in the Maldives, they know the importance of keeping the judiciary free from political interference.

Failing to clean it up “has been a grave mistake,” says Velezinee. ‘But it was impossible at the time. Everyone assumed the judiciary was untouchable.’

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)

China calls for Maldives to “maintain national stability and social development”

China has called for “national stability and social development” to be maintained in the Maldives, in a rare official statement on the country from its Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“The presidential election is the internal affairs of the Maldives. China respects the choice of the Maldivian people and hopes all relevant parties could settle the disputes properly through friendly negotiations. The Chinese side believes that the Maldivian government and people have the wisdom and capacity to resolve relevant issues,” read the statement.

“As a friendly neighbour of the Maldives, China is closely observing the developments in the Maldives and sincerely wishes that national stability and social development can be maintained,” the statement added.

While India has historically been the Maldives’ strongest regional ally, relations have been strained between the two governments partly due to the consistently poor treatment of expatriate Indian workers, and the government’s extra-contractual expropriation of the Maldives’ single largest foreign investment, GMR’s renovation of Male airport.

This has led some overseas observers to speculate that China may seek to increase its own diplomatic efforts in the country, after it recently opened an embassy in the capital Male.

China is also now the single largest tourism market for the Maldives, responsible for almost a quarter of all tourism arrivals as of 2011.

Recent protests and political turmoil over the delayed, cancelled and obstructed elections have been extensively covered by Chinese state media, Xinhua.

A Chinese travel advisory, updated on September 27, noted that while the Maldivian social order “is generally stable”, “partisan conflicts around the presidential elections are intensifying.”

The Chinese Embassy in the Maldives urged Chinese visitors to monitor the local security situation, contact and confirm the hotel booking before departure, and avoid non-essential travel to Male’.

Friday’s protests were also extensively reported by Chinese state-run press agency, Xinhua.

The Chinese statement follows those from the Commonwealth, UK, EU, India, US, UN, Canada and Australia expressing concern over the delayed presidential election and calling for free, fair and inclusive polls.

“The international community has been watching developments in the Maldives with concern ever since the Supreme Court annulled the first round of Presidential Elections on October 7,” read the latest statement from the Australian government, noting the rescheduling of polls for November 9.

“The first round of Presidential Elections on 7 September was judged free and fair by international and domestic observers. Following the annulment, a new first round of Presidential elections was scheduled to be held on 19 October but did not proceed. The Election Commission has now announced that elections will be held on 9 November.

“It is imperative that the elections now be held as scheduled with no further delays. Maldives voters have engaged actively and in good faith with the electoral process and this commitment needs to be honoured,” the statement read.

“As a fellow Indian Ocean country and Commonwealth member Australia stresses the importance of abiding by democratic values and processes, good governance and strong resilient institutions. Australia looks to all state bodies and presidential candidates in the Maldives to work together collaboratively to ensure that the election can take place in a manner that is free, fair and inclusive,” it concluded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Elections Commission restarts polling preparations

The Elections Commission (EC) has published the eligible voters list and accepted complaints regarding the voter registry, sourced from the Department of National Registration (DNR), from 9am until 6pm today.

Voter details can be checked in the Maldives by sending an SMS to 1414 in the format ‘VIS [ID#]’, or by calling the helpline on the same number. The eligible voter list can also be checked online at www.elections.gov.mv.

The voter registry will also be availabe on every inhabited island and Male’ residents can verify their information at the Elections Commission Voter Registration Section, located in the former Godown building.

Complaints forms can be downloaded from the EC’s website and are also available at the commission’s secretariat, Voter Registration Section, and at all Island Council offices.

The Elections Commission (EC) has begun preparations for the presidential election for the fourth time in two months. The police  forcibly brought a Supreme Court-ordered re-vote to a halt on Satyrday (October 19) after previously surrounding the EC to stop the September 28 second round run-off from taking place.

Last night the EC announced the first round of presidential elections will take place November 9 and the second round – if necessary – will be held November 16.

The Supreme Court annulled the first round of presidential polls held on September 7 citing electoral fraud despite unanimous domestic and international praise over a free and fair vote. The apex court delineated 16 guidelines to hold a revote by October 20.

The commission will continue to follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines, but will seek to change them in the future, EC Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek said. In an October 20 interview on Television Maldives (TVM), he described the guidelines as “restrictions”.

The EC said that in the next three weeks it would allow registration for new eligible voters, and re-registration for those voting in a location other than their home island. Voters who re-registered for the October 19 poll will not need to submit re-registration forms again unless they wish to change their voting location.

Candidates signatures

According to the Supreme Court guidelines, the EC must obtain signatures from all candidates on the voter registry. However, the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and Jumhooree Party (JP) last week refused to approve the lists, leading police to stop the election an hour before polling was due to start.

The move has prompted widespread international concern and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) protests.

However, the President, the cabinet and political parties have since assured the EC that “they will not allow for these kind of obstructions in the upcoming election”, explained Thowfeek yesterday.

EC Vice Chair Ahmed Fayaz has noted that candidates will be given a specific time period to sign the voter registry, after which the commission will continue with the election.

Thowfeek confirmed to Minivan News on October 19 that Defense Minister Mohamed Nazim had been appointed as the government’s focal point for anything election-related.

“I believe [his role] is to find agreement on the disputes between all the candidates,” Thowfeek said during an October 20 televised interview.

Voter registration process

Meanwhile, the Maldives’ Department of National Registration (DNR) has recently said there is a possibility that names of deceased people could be included in the electoral register as it “faces difficulties in obtaining information” to maintain a more current database.

However, the Supreme Court guidelines have mandated that the EC disregard its voter registry and use the DNR’s database as the primary source for the voter lists.

For the annulled first round as well as past elections, the EC compiled its voter registry by collecting current data from island council and city council offices, which was cross checked with the DNR database, and then updated after the commission publicly published the list and provided voters with an opportunity to amend any incorrect information.

“It has been very hard work over the last five years to come up with a voter registry of this standard,” Elections Commission Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek explained to Minivan News in a previous interview.

The 17 member Commonwealth election observation team in particular praised the final voter registry, describing it as “accurate and robust”.

Election obstructions

“There are a group of people who want to block this [vote], those who know they may not do well, so they are trying to buy time and make the election difficult. It’s very sad,” Thowfeek noted a week prior to the halted October 19 election.

Both the Jumhooree Party (JP) and the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) filed cases with the Supreme Court on October 18 requesting that the October 19 re-scheduled election not go ahead without all parties having first signed the register.

The parties then refused to sign the registry without fingerprint verification of over 10,500 re-registration forms – PPM demanded a random 10 percent sample of forms verified, while JP wanted five percent.

Once the PPM and JP had submitted their letters to the EC after midnight on October 19, the party leaders then became unreachable, while the police refused to support the election taking place without the candidates’ signatures.

The PPM also requested the apex court order the annulment of the voters’ list used in the first round on September 7, threatening that the party would not accept the result if the existing list was used, according to local media.

This resulted in a midnight ruling from the Supreme Court on October 10, ordering the EC to disregard re-registration efforts for the annulled presidential elections, and restart the entire process with fingerprinted forms for all voters who wish to vote in a location other than their permanent address.

Prior to the first round, the PPM had called on the EC to make the voter registration process “more lenient” and requested access to the commission’s IT section.

“There is no rush”: Gasim

The PPM also sought an order at the Supreme Court on October 11 to block former President Mohamed Nasheed’s candidacy on the grounds of his criticism of the judiciary and his being “irreligious”.

Meanwhile, on October 16 the JP also raised concerns about the voter re-registration process, with the party’s representative on the EC’s National Advisory Committee accusing the MDP of being able to access the commission’s servers and directly register its own candidates – compromising the system.

The JP said it had filed a complaint with police over its allegations, demanding law enforcement officials address the concerns it had raised, according to local media.

Two days later (October 18) – on the same night JP and PPM filed cases to delay the October 19 poll – JP’s presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim stated that the party will “accept elections readily if it is conducted in accordance with the guidelines issued by the SC” and that the party was ready to proceed with voting once it was “absolutely certain that the voter registry satisfactorily meets our standards”.

“There is no rush, it’s not like we are a soul caught in a life or death situation,” added Gasim.

Gasim has since called on President Mohamed Waheed to take action against Elections Commission members for allegedly violating the constitution “even by declaring a state of emergency”.

Meanwhile, an internal inquiry has been launched by the police professional standards command following allegations by EC Chair Thowfeek that Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz obstructed the EC from conducting the presidential election scheduled on October 19.

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) declared on October 19 that the police had no legal mandate to intervene and stop elections this morning, local media has reported.

Riyaz has denied the allegations, insisting that police only refused to provide security as the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court judgment were not followed by the EC.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)