Tag: no-confidence motion

MDP proposes no confidence motion against Home Minister

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has confirmed that a no confidence motion against Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has been sent to the secretariat of the People’s Majlis.

MDP MP and Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor speaking from the island of Thinadhoo confirmed to Minivan News that an estimated 26 signatures had been secured by the party to support the no confidence motion.

However, Ghafoor said he was not able at time of press to confirm the exact numbers of MPs expected to support the motion, or if the People’s Majlis had approved or set a date for a no confidence vote to take place.

Parliament’s Counsel General Fathmath Filza could also not be reached for comment today by Minivan News.

To have a no confidence motion heard within the People’s Majlis, officials regulations require signatures from 25 serving MPs. Support from a majority of the full membership of parliament during the vote is then needed to remove the Home Minister from his post.

As well as serving under the present coalition government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, Dr Jameel served as Justice Minister with oversight of the judiciary during the autocratic rule of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, as well as being an active member of the former opposition party, the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP).

The case is the second no confidence motion to be proposed this month after MP Alhan Fahmy of the government-aligned Jumhoree Party (JP) said he had held discussions over taking a no confidence vote against both President Waheed and Vice President Mohamed Waheed Deen.

Addressing the motion proposed against Dr Jameel, MDP MP Imthiyaz ‘Inthi’ Fahmy claimed in local newspaper Haveeru that the action had been taken over concerns concerning what the party called an “unprecedented” increase in murders and assault in the Maldives since the transfer of power.

Inthi also criticised the Jameel for what he called a failure to probe human rights abuses allegedly conducted by police on February 8 this year.

Police Integrity Commission findings

In a Police Integrity Commission (PIC) report released earlier this month into allegations of police brutality in the breaking up of Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s demonstrations held on February 8 provided two contradicting accounts of the events.

The report contended amongst it findings that on February 8 , police acted within the boundaries of the law and its own regulations, acting in accordance with Article 6(4) and Article 6(8) of the Police Act and as protection from any danger that may ensue from the MDP demonstrations.

President of the PIC, Shahindha Ismail, has however stated in the report that she saw certain acts carried out by police on February 8 to have been against the law, claiming that there no valid reason for police to have broken up the MDP demonstrations in the manner the police did.

Dr Jameel’s detention

During his time in opposition before February’s controversial transfer of power, Dr Jameel was an outspoken critic of Nasheed’s religious policies, authoring a pamphlet entitled ‘President Nasheed’s devious plot to destroy the Islamic faith of Maldivians’ and attacking his “business dealings with Jews”.

Under the former government, Dr Jameel was controversially detained by police on charges of slandering the government as a result of the publication, which authorities alleged at the time was a “pamphlet of hatred”.

Both Dr Jameel and DQP Deputy Leader of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) were not responding to calls by Minivan News at the time of press in regards to the no confidence motion.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MP Rasheed committed to MDP despite support for Majlis speaker

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ahmed Rasheed said he remains committed to the party even if he is “punished” by its Parliamentary Group for not supporting a no-confidence motion forwarded against Majlis Speaker Abdulla Shahid.

Rasheed told Minivan News today that he expected to remain an elected member of the party, which he continued to support, despite standing by his position to back the parliamentary speaker against a reported three-line whip enforced by the MDP.

During a vote of no confidence taken against Shahid yesterday, 45 out of the 74 parliament members present in the sitting voted in favour of the speaker and 25 voted against him. Two members abstained. MDP MPs Hassan Adil and Ahmed Rasheed were said to have voted against their party line. MDP MPs Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed and MP Ali Riza abstained.

MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said that the MPs who voted against the no confidence motion would now be required to explain themselves to the party’s Parliamentary Group Leader, MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih.

Hamid added that the MDP had not yet decided on what course of action may be taken to deal with the MPs who voted against the whip at a time when the party trails in parliamentary support to a coalition of government-aligned parties.  The MDP currently stands alone as an opposition party against the coalition government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, which it alleges was brought to power in a “coup d’etat”.

“I wouldn’t go as far as to say that we will do anything rash. Under these stressful circumstances we have to be disciplined as a party,” Ghafoor explained in regards to the possible measures that could be taken against MPs who had not supported the vote.

While the exact nature of action to be taken by the party against members who voted against the bill is presently unknown, MP Rasheed said he would not be looking to switch his political allegiance even when potentially facing being reprimanded or expelled.

“I believe in the MDP manifesto. There is no question to me that it is the only party that actually has a manifesto,” he claimed. “In my mind, there is also no one trying to force me out of the party.”

Last month, the MDP’s former President Dr Ibrahim Didi and former Vice President Alhan Fahmy switched allegiances to the Jumhoree Party (JP). The decision was taken after the MDP’s National Congress passed a majority vote to remove both men from their respective leadership posts after they stood accused of making statements contradictory to the party’s official line.

Despite pledging his allegiance to the party today, Rasheed maintained his support for Shahid in the no confidence motion, claiming that the present speaker, out of 77 parliamentary members, was the “only person right now” who should have the Majlis chair.

Despite Shahid representing the government-aligned Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), Rasheed contend that the speaker – due to a perceived lack of power in the position of his party – would not directly support former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and his Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).  The PPM was formed last year after an increasingly bitter war of words between current DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and Gayoom, who had originally founded the party. The war of words saw the party split between supporters loyal to Gayoom and those in favour of Thasmeen’s tenure.

“Discipline”

Questioned as to whether the MDP, through its Parliamentary Group, would be looking to discipline the MPs who failed to back the party line, Ghafoor would not be drawn into the possible repercussions until an internal review was complete.

“The issue is that these MPs went against the whipline. This has been noted by the Parliamentary group Leader.  He now wants to find out why,” he said. “If they go against the party line they must have a good explanation for doing so.”

Ghafoor claimed that as a party, the MDP had generally been “disciplined” in ensuring solidarity among its members during parliamentary voting – a decision he said had afforded it the best record among fellow parties.

“There have of course been mishaps from time to time where people have gone against the party line,” he said.

Ghafoor took the example of former Party President Dr Ibrahim Didi and Vice President Alhan Fahmy as a notable example of where its members had been reprimanded.

“At this delicate time, [voting against the party line] does serve to reduce confidence in the party,” he said.

“Major principles” were at stake in yesterday’s high-profile no-confidence motion, Ghafoor said, adding that there was particular pressure from grassroots supporters to ensure the no-confidence vote succeeded.

“This is nothing personal, but the party supporters are in no mood to tolerate such actions from their MPs,” he said.

Ghafoor claimed that whatever action the party may decide to take against MPs voting against the official MDP line, it would not act in a “rash” manner.

The MDP Parliamentary Group has maintained that it has held “serious reservations” for some time about the Parliamentary Speaker’s ability to pass policies into legislation – despite his capabilities and understanding of national politics.

Speaker support

Speaking during yesterday’s debate, DRP Leader Thasmeen stated that the no-confidence motion had been forwarded amid baseless accusations.  He defended his fellow party member, saying that he had been executing the responsibilities of the speaker in accordance with the parliament rules and procedures.

Thasmeen further claimed that the motion was an attempt by MDP to “break” the coalition after the party leadership’s recent “political failures.”

“Such a motion will not impact the ‘unity’ between the parties in the coalition supporting the government of President Waheed. So therefore I must say, yet again this is another wrong step taken by the MDP leadership,” Thasmeen added.

PPM spokesperson MP Ahmed Mahloof stated that despite his being an outspoken critic of Shahid who made several statements in the media and the parliament floor, he would stand by the speaker’s side today.

“Yesterday, the PPM Parliamentary Group (PG) came to a conclusion that this motion is a ‘trap’ set up by the MDP to ‘finish off’ the people and the ruling coalition,” he said.

“Today at a time where Abdulha Shahid is facing a grave matter at hand, I will stand by him. Abdulla Shahid will get all the votes from PPM. What we ask is that he act justly and equally,” he added.

MDP MP Ali Waheed during the debate alleged that the motion would reveal those MPs who spoke “in two mouths”, referring to the PPM MPs allegations of that Shahid and Thasmeen had cut deals with GMR and the government of former President Mohamed Nasheed to support the privatisation of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Speaker of parliament survives MDP-initiated no-confidence motion 45:25

Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid has survived the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) initiated no-confidence motion.

In the vote taken on Tuesday, 45 out of the 74 parliament members present in the sitting voted in favour of Speaker Shahid and 25 voted against him. Two members abstained.

Surprisingly, government-aligned Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed voted in favour of removing Shahid despite speaking against the motion, while MDP MPs Hassan Adil and Ahmed Rasheed voted against their party line. MDP MPs Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed and MP Ali Riza abstained. A fifth MDP MP, Zahir Adam, was absent.

During the debate over the motion, MPs from the coalition of parties supporting the government of President Mohamed Waheed Hassan spoke in favour of Shahid, with a number of MPs describing the speaker as the “most able and competent” MP to be in the role.

Speaking during the debate, leader of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ahmed Thasmeen Ali stated that the motion had been forwarded amid baseless accusations and defended his fellow party member, saying that he had been executing the responsibilities of the speaker in accordance with the parliament rules and procedures.

Thasmeen further claimed that the motion was an attempt by MDP to “break” the coalition after the party leadership’s recent “political failures.”

“Such a motion will not impact the ‘unity’ between the parties in the coalition supporting the government of President Waheed. So therefore I must say, yet again this is another wrong step taken by the MDP leadership,” Thasmeen added.

Former president Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) spokesperson MP Ahmed Mahloof stated that despite his being an outspoken critic of Shahid who made several statements in the media and the parliament floor, he would stand by Shahid’s side today.

“Yesterday, the PPM Parliamentary Group (PG) came to a conclusion that this motion is a ‘trap’ set up by the MDP to ‘finish off’ the people and the ruling coalition,” he said.

“Today at a time where Abdulha Shahid is facing a grave matter at hand, I will stand by him. Abdulla Shahid will get all the votes from PPM. What we ask is that he act justly and equally,” he added.

MDP MP Ali Waheed during the debate alleged that the motion would reveal those MPs who spoke “in two mouths”, referring to the PPM MPs allegations of that Shahid and Thasmeen had cut deals with GMR and the government of former President Mohamed Nasheed to support the privatisation of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA).

“Today is not a day  the Speaker should be upset about. Today is a day the Speaker will be victorious. [Because] the people will hear those who ‘smashed’ the DRP speak today,” he said.

“I am happy because today those who accused the Speaker of taking bribes, selling off the airport to GMR and travelling abroad at GMR’s expense, will applaud him [for his integrity],” added Waheed.

Waheed also alleged that the MDP had been “held hostage” while Shahid proceeded with the oath taking ceremony of President Waheed on February 7.

“He let just two or three MPs into the parliament chamber and forgot about the rest of the MPs,” Waheed claimed.

MP Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed during the debate stated that every time there was a conflict of opinion, it should not be taken as far as a no confidence motion.

“Shahid is not someone who had my support to become the speaker. [But] up until today during our journey with the constitution, he has contributed to a lot of things that we achieved. We don’t need to go to a confidence assessment of the speaker who focused on what we had to do up until today,” he said.

Speaking in his concluding statement at the end of the debate, Shahid stated that even if the position of the parliament speaker is seen as a ‘big seat’ and a great privilege, he had faced a very difficult environment in the last three years during his time as the speaker.

“At times I felt very comforted and proud to see the results [produced] by the parliament members. I never responded to the allegations and claims made against me in parliament. I even did not respond to such allegations and claims even outside the parliament, because I wanted to be sure I was doing my job,” he said.

He claimed that due such the allegations he had to work under circumstances that caused hurt to himself, his family and the party which he belonged to.

“But one person is elected out of 77 members to make some sacrifices. I made those sacrifices during the last three years. I have learned that as someone who makes vital decisions, I can’t please everyone,” he said.

He further stated that there were a lot of members who had opposing views to him, and that there were also members who later came to him and admitted that what they had previously believed was not right as well.

He said that the decision that the members were to make today was a historic one and that it was the first occasion in the parliamentary history of the country where the parliament was to take a no- confidence motion against a speaker.

He advised the members to not to make the issue a political one but rather a decision that they would make for the sake of the best interest of the people. He asked the MPs to think about the people who elected the members before pressing the voting button.

“Whatever way the decision [of the vote] goes, I wish all you members well. Whatever way the decision comes out, I will continue repaying the debt I owe to the constituents of Keyodhoo Constituency who elected me,” he said.

Shahid concluded his speech stating that he did not hold any hard feelings towards any member, and thanked the members who had said “beautiful things” about him.

Many MPs cheered as the Deputy Speaker announced that the motion had failed to get the required number of votes to oust Shahid.

MDP Response

Speaking to Minivan News after the vote, MDP Spokesperson MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said the MDP  parliamentary group had made a decision to take the no confidence motion against the speaker even before the transfer of power on February 7, but had waited for the right moment.

Ghafoor said that one reason for the motion was to assess the current political situation following the emergence of the PPM.

“Our argument is that a political party by the name of PPM has been formed. We wanted to assess the strength of the opposition coalition,” he said.

Ghafoor admitted that for the time being, the coalition of the political parties supporting the government seemed to be united as was seen from the vote, but questioned how long  they would work together.

He said it is inevitable that the coalition would break apart in the near future because of leadership tensions, raising doubts as to whether political figures within the coalition could work together for a longer period.

Asked whether the fact that MDP got 25 votes when the party had 30 MPs meant that there were internal conflicts within the party, Ghafoor said that it did not represent an internal conflict but just “a difference of opinion”.

“Our experience is that we lost four votes today. Two of our MPs abstained from the vote while MP Ahmed Rasheed and MP Hassan Adil voted with the opposition. MP Zahir Adam was absent today,” he said.

Ghafoor further stated that the parliament was a place of discussion and votes but on February 7, the transfer of power did not take place like that. He also said that the vote reflected that the majority of the parliament did not object to the coup.

“While the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) has raised doubts over the transfer of power on February 7, today we saw  that despite those doubts, the majority of the parliament voted in favour of a coup,” he said.

Ghafoor said that despite the no-confidence vote not succeeding, the MDP did not view it as a defeat but rather an indication of how the political culture in the country had progressed.

After deciding in April to forward the no-confidence motion, the MDP stated that motion against Shahid concerned allegations that he had been making decisions relating to significant parliamentary issues without discussing them with various political parties.

The party claimed that Shahid had been acting outside of his mandate by deciding to suspend certain parliament regulations, whilst opting to follow others that were to his personal benefit.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Deposed VP of MDP Alhan Fahmy launches ‘free MDP’ protest; claims Nasheed behind the party coup

Deposed Vice President of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), MP Alhan Fahmy, today announced that he would be launching a campaign to “free” the party from former President Mohamed Nasheed, and to advocate reform of the party.

Speaking at a press conference this morning, Fahmy alleged that Nasheed was behind his ousting, and the ousting of Party President Dr Ibrahim Didi.

On Monday MDP’s National Council declared a lack of confidence in the party’s leadership and removed Didi and Fahmy from their positions, in a near-unanimous vote: 69 of 73 votes cast (almost 95 percent) were in support of the no-confidence motion for both Didi and Fahmy’s leadership. Four members abstained from voting for either motion.

The motion was proposed by MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, who alleged that Dr Didi and Fahmy had made public statements contradicting the party’s official position on the illegitimacy of the new government and Dr Waheed’s presidency, a position passed in a resolution on February 8.

Fahmy today stressed that the motion of no confidence taken against him was in contrary with the party constitution, and referred the move as a “coup” within the party.

“This [motion of no confidence] was a pre-planned attempt to defame certain figures of the party instigated by former President Nasheed and those who blindly follow him,” Fahmy told the press. “Nasheed is behind all this,” he claimed.

Fahmy criticised Nasheed claiming that the MDP could not be saved or liberated if members of the party allowed Nasheed to ‘rule’ the party according to his wishes, and sit back applauding him.

He also alleged that Nasheed had not once entered the party office since his fall from the presidency, and that he had been driving the entire party from his own residence at Kenereege.

“When you start running the party inside Kenereege, that is not democracy. No single person can take the fruit from the hard work of many like that,” Fahmy claimed.

Fahmy further alleged that Nasheed had given statements to the international media which were contrary to Islam and Sharia law, and that allowing Nasheed to become the party’s presidential candidate would “destroy the party”.

He further claimed that he would have challenged Nasheed in the presidential primary party if he had been old enough to compete.

He also claimed that Nasheed was the only MDP member permitted to meet President Mohamed Waheed Hassan or the Vice President, Waheed Deen: “When a certain person wants to he can, but if we do so, it becomes a huge problem,” Fahmy claimed.

However, Fahmy acknowledged that Nasheed had contributed a lot to the democracy of the country during his tenure as President.

Fahmy’s campaign began this afternoon at 4:00pm in the Raalhugandu Area near the tsunami monument. A small group of 15-20 of the MP’s supporters were quickly outnumbered and heckled by a large group of MDP members, as they made their way to Majeedee Magu.

One of Fahmy’s supporters told Minivan News that the campaign would call for the party to be “freed” from forces that had “hijacked” it.

“The MDP is the largest political party in the country, and it is also funded by the state like all other parties. No one person or a group can hijack a party like that. We are coming out to call for the party to be freed, and reformed,” the official told Minivan News.

Fahmy was elected as a Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) MP, but switched sides in early 2010 after facing the DRP’s disciplinary committee for voting against the party line in a vote of no confidence against then-foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed. The DRP had accused Dr Shaheed of fraternising with Israel.

MDP response

Speaking to Minivan News, the party’s international spokesperson, MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor, said he was “disappointed” by the Fahmy’s comments.

Responding to the claim that Nasheed was behind his ousting from the deputy leadership, Ghafoor said that MDP was “full of people who can think for themselves” and Fahmy’s comment was “outright disregard”.

” The MDP is full of people who can think for themselves, in fact I am the sponsor of the motion and I can assure you that I forwarded it in my own capacity and nobody had any influence on me,” said Ghafoor.

In response to claims that Nasheed was driving the party from his personal residency, Ghafoor stated that the party secretariat still worked in the party office and that for security reasons, when there was an issue that had to be discussed with Nasheed, members came to his residence.

Ghafoor also added that MDP was run by committees and some committees met at venues other than the party secretariat office, because it lacked space.

Regarding Fahmy’s claims that Nasheed made ‘unislamic’ statements to foreign media, Ghafoor claimed that this was “just the usual rhetoric” to discredit political opponents on religious grounds “when one switches ship.”

“It seems like Alhan [Fahmy] has taken an Islamist position. It is not something new to the Maldives. The rhetoric of religion and foreign influence has always been played down in the Maldives for political reasons. It is not something we worry too much about,” Ghafoor said.

“Let’s see the political weight of that event. It is rather ironic for someone to believe that they have room within the party to call for room after they’ve been voted out with such large majority,” Ghafoor told Minivan News.

” MDP is always in process of reforming and will continue to do so. All I’ve got to say to Alhan [Fahmy] is ‘good luck’,” added Ghafoor.

The MDP has maintained that as the transfer of power on February 7 was illegal, former President Nasheed and his cabinet should continue to sit in the National Council as senior members of government.

The motion was forwarded by Ghafoor, citing that the issue was “political” rather than “personal”.

The ousting of the party’s leadership was “a solemn occasion and I took no pleasure in it,” Ghafoor said. “But it was a good day for the party and a good day for democracy. We have shown that the largest party in this country can act democratically,” said Ghafoor.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

No-confidence motion against Attorney General will not succeed, say MDP Chairperson

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik has said that the no-confidence motion opposition parties were trying to file in the parliament against the Attorney General Abdulla Muiz will fail.

“We will not let the no-confidence motion succeed, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) is attempting to terminate anyone that works for justice,’’ Moosa told MDP Official website.

Moosa said that the no-confidence motion was planned to save Gassan Maumoon, son of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who is currently being investigated for allegedly hitting a 17 year-old boy with a wooden plank.

Recently, interim council member of PPM Mohamed ‘Mundhu’ Shareef told the local newspaper that he was concerned about the revision of prosecution guidelines, insisting that it might force Prosecutor General Ahmed Muiz to press criminal charges against Gassan Maumoon.

“His decision to revise prosecution guidelines concerning a single individual proves that he hasn’t been carrying out his responsibilities,” he told newspaper Haveeru, adding that Muiz had violated the Supreme Court ruling issued in September 2009 in Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) President Hassan Luthfy’s case that the AG cannot appeal verdicts delivered by lower courts.

Shareef told the media that he will submit a resolution to PPM Parliamentary Group to forward a no-confidence motion against AG Muiz.

Meanwhile, the government has said that it will forward a no-confidence motion against Prosecutor General after he allegedly forced a police senior officer’s team to leave his office when they went to see the PG for advice on Gassan’s arrest and the Criminal Court’s ruling.

When police arrested Gassan for investigation of the case where a 17 year-old boy was injured, the Criminal Court ruled that police have violated the criminal justice procedure in arresting Gassan and that he cannot be held in detention.

Later the police said most of the criminals arrested in the past were arrested in the same way as Gassan and that if Gassan’s arrest was unlawful so will be all the arrests made in the past.

PPM Spokesperson Ahmed Mahlouf and Media Coordinator Ahmed Nihan did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

No-confidence motion against Male’ Mayor temporarily withdrawn

A no-confidence motion against Male’ City Mayor “Sarangu” Adam Manik tabled in the agenda for today’s city council meeting has been withdrawn.

Haveeru has reported that West Maafanu Councillor Mohamed Falah withdrew his motion as a replacement for Adam Manik, Hulhu-Henveiru Councillor “Maizan” Ali Manik (Alibe), was currently overseas in Japan for an Athletics Association trip.

One of two opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) councillors on the 11-member city council, Ibrahim Shujau, explained that Falah did not want the position to remain vacant until Alibe returned on 12 July

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Muthalib: “100 percent sure no-confidence motion against Education Minister will succeed”

A no-confidence motion against Education Minister Dr Musthafa Luthfy has put on parliament’s agenda for June 30, after the motion was put forward by Independent MP Ibrahim Muthalib.

Muthalib said that “by divine will” he was “100 percent sure the motion will succeed if the vote is taken.”

”We [and the MPs who signed the petition] forwarded the no-confidence motion because of many concerns we had,” said Muthalib, adding that he did “not want to talk further on the issue yet.”

Dr Luthfy has come under heavy criticism, extending to protests outside his home, after the ministry’s steering committee suggested that the subjects Islam and Dhivehi be made optional at A-Level.

Muthalib has also claimed that Dr Luthfy had told him that students of Arabbiya School, which was shut down after a wall collapsed, would be transferred to other schools.

Dr Luthfy told Minivan News that demolition work on the old site was starting tomorrow, so the refurbishment could begin.

Muthalib said that a meeting with the Education Minister was scheduled for Thursday at request of the minister.

“We now believe that national education matters will not go well because of the attitude and thinking of the Education Ministry, especially Mustafa Luthfy,” Muthalib said recently. “So [Luthfy] should either make amends or resign.”

Dr Luthfy meanwhile claimed that if the situation was dealt with fairly, there “was no issue that can lead to a no-confidence motion.”

”The constitution says that a no-confidence motion should be forwarded if either a minister fails to implement the government’s policy or if he or she was irresponsible in his duty,” Dr Luthfy said.

”I am a person whose duty is to implement government’s policy, and everything I do is done to implement the government’s policy.”

Dr Luthfy noted that the issues mentioned in the no-confidence motion were all religious matters.

On June 8, Muthalib presented a petition to forward the motion against Education Minister, which was signed by five independent MPs, three Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MPs and two People’s Alliance (PA) MPs.

The government has meanwhile launched a spirited defense of the Education Minister.

“This is a part of DRP’s plan to pick off ministers one-by-one,” said the President’s Press Secretary, Mohamed Zuhair.

“First they plan to try and bring down the Education Minister, and if that succeeds they will then go after other ministers. This no-confidence motion is a shallow attempt to destabilise the government and the country.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nominee for new Auditor General will be ready next week: Zuhair

Press Secretary for the President’s Office, Mohamed Zuhair, confirmed the nomination for the post of Auditor General will be sent to Parliament next week, reports Miadhu.

According to the Constitution, the Auditor General must have the necessary academic qualifications to discharge his or her duties and shall not take any other job while posted as Auditor General.

The Auditor General must be nominated by the President and approved by Parliament. Zuhair said the government was giving the issue priority.

The post of Auditor General is vacant after a no confidence motion in Parliament against former Auditor General, Ibrahim Naeem.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

New Auditor General to be appointed next week, government hopes

The government hopes appoint a new Auditor General by next week, after outgoing AG Ibrahim Naeem was dismissed from his post by parliament earlier this week.

Assistant executive director and interim head of the Auditor General’s office, Mohamed Hussein, said according to the law Ibrahim Naeem was no longer the Auditor General and was not attending the office.

Hussein said he did want to reveal whether staff at the audit office were disheartened by parliament’s decision.

”We always work according to the policy of Auditor General at the time,” Hussein said.

The President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said the government was “seeking a capable and educated man for the position,” and hoped to fill the position next week.

“President Mohamed Nasheed has promised to appoint someone as capable and as educated as the former Auditor General,” Zuhair said.

Naeem was formally dismissed by parliament in a DRP-PA coalition-led no-confidence motion on Sunday, after corruption allegations were sent by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) in a letter to a parliamentary sub-committee chaired by Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim.

The ACC also sent the case to the Prosecutor General’s office, seeking to initiate court proceedings.

Deputy Prosecutor General Hussain Shameem confirmed the office had received “a huge file of documents.”

“I don’t think [the case will be influenced by Parliament’s decision] as we look it from at a completely different angle,” Shameem said.

“It’s a different process to Parliament. We have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not he is guilty. Parliament decides on the basis of whether or not he was doing his job.”

Shameem said it would take “weeks” to decide whether the case would be forwarded to the court.

Meanwhile DRP Vice President and MP Ali Waheed said he wished Naeem “a bright future.”

Waheed said the 43-28 vote in favour of dismissal was successful due to votes from the Qaumee Party, Peoples Alliance and many independent MPs.

”This shows that even if a dictator tries to go against the law, the politicians of the country will not allow him do it,” Waheed said.

DRP held a ceremony at the DRP office following to the vote, to celebrate its victory in the no-confidence motion.

”We celebrated the victory as we had tried very hard for this,” Waheed said. ”We were arrested and police took us to Dhoonidhu and people tried for this so much.”

He said all the demonstrations over the weekend were because the MDP MPs “tried to deadlock the parliament.”

”We do not want parliament to be cancelled for even one day,” Waheed said.

He called on people to show the same effort when the parliament begins debate over the controversial decentralisation bill.

He said he do not want to say anything about accusations the Auditor General made against senior DRP officials in his audit reports.

”That will be decided by the court, whether they are true or not,” he said.

Zuhair claimed that the vote against the Auditor General proved the DRP had “the best interest of their political party in mind and not the best interest of the country.”

He said Naeem’s reports contained accusations against former government ministersare now independent MPs.

”That’s why they voted the way they did in the no-confidence motion,” Zuhair said.

He added that the audit report was not only the work of the Auditor General, “but a big team in the Audit Office.”

Minister for Home affairs Mohamed Shihab is another government official facing a potential no-confidence motion from the DRP, in response to a police decision to detain Waheed and several other senior DRP leaders.

Shihab said he would not comment on prospect of a no-confidence motion against him “until I receive notice of it from parliament.”

Spokesperson for Maldivian Democratic Party Ahmed Haleem did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)