Government proposes scrapping punishment for evading mandatory national service

The government has proposed scrapping a provision in a 1976 law that allows the president to banish or place under house arrest persons who evade mandatory national service after completing state-funded training or education at public schools.

Presenting the amendment bill (Dhivehi) on behalf of the government at today’s sitting of parliament, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Abdulla Rifau said the provision contravened article 55 of the constitution, which states, “No person shall be imprisoned on the ground of non-fulfilment of a contractual obligation.”

Rifau also noted that according to article 16(a) of the constitution, fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by chapter two could only be restricted or limited to any extent “only if demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

Debate

In the ensuing debate, PPM MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed argued that abolishing the provision would be a “cosmetic change” as it had become null and void with enactment of the new constitution in August 2008.

Advising a broader debate on national service, Nasheed noted that 80 percent of workers was employed by the government and 20 percent by the private sector when the law was passed in 1976 while the reverse was true at present.

“Our ground reality has changed while this law was on the books,” he said.

In 2013, Nasheed added, 7,623 students completed O’ Levels, out of which 3,123 students (43 percent) was eligible for A’ Levels after passing five subjects.

The number of students who completed A’ Levels in 2013 was meanwhile 1,725, he noted, of which 1,294 students (75 percent) was eligible to pursue higher education or bachelors degree.

While students who completed O’ Levels 40 years ago were forced to serve the government regardless of their grades, Nasheed said in the present day hundreds of people apply for job openings at government offices.

The 1976 law – comprised of 11 articles – requiring 80 percent of school leavers to join the civil service was therefore irrelevant today, he contended, with the exception of sections dealing with employees who refuse to return to work after completing government-sponsored higher education or training.

As the issue was not “clearcut,” Nasheed recommended “serious debate” on formulating new rules appropriate for present circumstances.

Unconstitutional

Opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Abdul Gafoor Moosa meanwhile contended that the entire law should be abolished as it was unconstitutional.

The law was also in conflict with article 36 of the constitution on the right to education, which stipulates that the state should provide free primary and secondary education and ensure accessibility for higher education for all citizens.

While supporting the amendment, MDP MP Imthiyaz Fahmy, however, accused the government of seeking positive headlines to mislead the public.

Jumhooree Party (JP) MP Gasim Ibrahim recommended expediting the debate on the legislation “to save time” as there was consensus among MPs on approving the amendment. The JP leader noted that several similar amendments to laws in conflict with the constitution were before parliament.

Among other amendments submitted by the government to bring outdated laws in line with the constitution include revisions to the Immigration Act, Child Protection Act, and detention procedures.

In June, Attorney General Mohamed Anil told local media that 51 pieces of legislation will be submitted to the current session of parliament out of a legislative agenda comprised of 207 bills.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Gasim calls for state of emergency to pursue criminal prosecution of Elections Commission

Jumhooree Party (JP) presidential candidate, Gasim Ibrahim, called on President Dr Mohamed Waheed to take action against Elections Commission (EC) members for allegedly violating the constitution “even by declaring a state of emergency.”

Speaking during a debate at today’s sitting of parliament, the JP leader contended that EC members had violated the constitution by allegedly “speaking against article 113”, which states that the Supreme Court shall have sole and final jurisdiction to determine all disputes concerning the election of a presidential candidate.

EC members should face criminal prosecution for allegedly divesting the constitution of its power and authority, the MP for Alif Dhaal Maamigili insisted.

Following the presidential election on September 7 in which he came third with 24 percent of the vote, Gasim alleged electoral fraud and contested the results in the Supreme Court, which subsequently annulled the polls on October 7.

The business tycoon went on to call upon President Waheed to “act in accordance with the constitution even by declaring a state of emergency” as failure to do so would see “the nation fall outside the bounds of the constitution.”

Chapter 11 of the constitution empowers the president to declare a state of emergency for 30 days “[i]n the event of natural disaster, dangerous epidemic disease, war, threat to national security, or threatened foreign aggression”.

However, the declaration of the state of emergency must be submitted to the People’s Majlis for approval within 48 hours, after which parliament has the authority to revoke the declaration.

Asked about Gasim’s appeal at a press conference today, President Waheed said the EC faced a number of serious difficulties and that the commission had done a lot of work within a short period.

“I don’t believe this is the time to take legal action against them. There is still room to work together to resolve the issue,” he said.

Debate

Gasim’s remarks came during a debate on an early day motion submitted by the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Azim calling on Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid to assume the presidency if a president-elect cannot be sworn in on November 11 as stipulated by the constitution.

The motion without notice – a non-binding motion that opens the floor for a one-hour debate – also called for the immediate resignation of President Waheed, contending that his administration had obstructed the constitutionally mandated presidential election from taking place.

Article 110 states, “Elections for the office of President shall be held within one hundred and twenty days to thirty days prior to the expiry of the existing presidential term.”

Presenting the motion, Azim noted that the constitutional deadline to conclude a presidential election expired on October 10. He argued that amendments to the relevant laws as well as interim arrangements with the Speaker assuming the presidency was necessary to avoid a constitutional void after November 11.

While the Supreme Court judgment annulling the September 7 election stated that the current president could remain in the post after November 11 in the absence of a president-elect, Azim said that the judgment was “unconstitutional.”

“If extra time beyond that given by the constitution is needed, under the principle of necessity, to complete a specific task as specified in the constitution, it does not necessitate the end of a legal government in place. That such a government will continue to exist under the doctrines of ‘state of necessity’ and ‘continuity of legal government’ under such circumstances is recognised by both constitutional and legal jurisprudence,” the Supreme Court stated in the case summary of its judgment.

In the parliamentary debate on the motion today, MDP parliamentary group leader, MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, contended that the Maldivian state has lost its democratic status as citizens have been deprived of “one of the most important bases of democracy.”

Constitutional void

Pro-government MPs meanwhile spoke against the MDP’s motion, insisting that the Supreme Court was the highest authority on constitutional matters.

“We have to accept the decisions of the Supreme Court,” MP Riyaz Rasheed said in response to MDP MPs arguing that the EC did not have to abide by the guidelines imposed on it by the Supreme Court judgment.

Independent MP for Kulhudhufushi South, Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed – legal reform minister under former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – argued that the speaker could not assume the presidency after November 11 even if President Waheed resigned.

Nasheed explained that the constitution did not specify a process to be followed in the event that a president is not elected by the end of the five-year presidential term on November 11. The constitution only specified a process for fresh elections if the president or vice president resigned before the end of their terms, he said.

Article 124(b) of the constitution states, “In the event of the permanent incapacity, resignation, removal or death of both the President or the Vice President, and both offices becoming vacant at the same time, leading to an incapacity to carry out the duties of the President, until such time as a President and a Vice President shall be elected, the duties of both offices shall temporarily be carried out, in order of priority, by the Speaker of the People’s Majlis, or by the Deputy Speaker of the People’s Majlis, or by a member of the People’s Majlis elected by a resolution of the People’s Majlis, until successors in office are chosen.”

“However, this constitution does not say what should be done if a president is not elected within the period in which it must be done,” Nasheed said.

If President Waheed resigns after November 11, Nasheed suggested that parliament should amend the constitution to specify a process to be followed in the absence of a president or vice president after the end of their terms.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)