Tag: parliament

Parliament committee to seek international expertise for CNI report review

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee is seeking international experts to help oversee a review of the Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) report.

Committee Chair Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed said during a press conference yesterday (January 9) that efforts were being made to bring international experts in the fields of law and public inquiries to the Maldives for a review of the CNI report. The process is expected to take a minimum of two weeks.

The CNI report, which was released back in August 2012, looked into the circumstances surrounding the controversial transfer of power in February the same year. The report concluded that the change of government had been constitutional.

The government today dismissed the review as being politically motivated, while also rubbishing allegations that President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik had violated the constitution by not providing information from the CNI’s investigation to parliament.

Ali Waheed has claimed that the purpose of seeking international expertise was to ensure the autonomy and credibility of the parliamentary inquiry for both local and international actors. He added that parliament secretariat would make the announcement for applicants to fill the two positions at a later date.

The press conference was held right after the committee summoned the two former intelligence heads of both Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) and Maldives Police Services as part of the parliamentary inquiry.

Ali Waheed was not responding to calls at the time of press. However, he was reported in local media as describing yesterday’s meeting as one of the most “extraordinary, concerning and fearful” experience in his parliamentary career.

“The information the committee got from the [intelligence heads] surprised me. New questions have come up over what took place last year,” he said. “The former intelligence heads wept at today’s committee meeting.”

Impartiality

When questioned about the impartiality of the committee, which has a majority representation of MDP members, Waheed claimed that the committee has previously been mostly made up of former opposition parties under the former administration.

He added that the committee at the time, under an opposition majority, had taken major decisions against the former government such as endorsing the bench of the Supreme Court during former President Nasheed’s administration.

“If the Maldivian Supreme Court is deemed legitimate, than regardless of who controls the majority of the committee, its decisions would be binding as well. This committee will do everything it can to maintain its credibility and autonomy,” he told local media. “I hope that committee members and members who give evidence to the committee will also think about that. I want this inquiry to take place transparently.”

Constitutional claims

Five members of the Executive Oversight Committee today passed a motion stating that President Waheed had disregarded Article 99 of the Constitution.

Article 99 states that the [Parliament] or any of its committees has the power to – (a) summon any person to appear before it to give evidence under oath, or to produce documents. Any person who is questioned by the [Parliament] as provided for in this Article shall answer to the best of his knowledge and ability; (b) require any person or institution to report to it; (c) receive petitions, representations or submissions from interested persons or institutions.

When contacted today, Media Secretary of Presidents Office Masood Imad declined to comment, stating that he “was very busy”.

He requested Minivan News to ask the committee members as to what constitutional clause President Waheed was alleged to have violated by not providing the information to parliament.

Masood said yesterday that the statements given to CNI were not in public domain and therefore it would be President Waheed who would make a decision on the matter.

“That is a property of [CNI], but now that commission has been dissolved. So now whether to make the documents available in the public domain is solely up to President Waheed to decide,” he said at the time. “The commission was formed to release a report on the findings. The report is now available, that means it will have what is mentioned in the statements.”

President’s Office Spokesperson, Ahmed ‘Topy’ Thaufeeq also dismissed the committee’s motion claiming that it was a “political” decision.

In an interview given to Channel News Maldives today, Thaufeeq said that the new government has never tried to exert undue influence over the parliament.

“President Waheed has never even once violated the constitution. He is using the powers that have been vested to him by the constitution. He has never gone beyond his jurisdiction. Yesterday, the decision was made by a committee that had the majority of opposition MDP. That is a political decision,” he was quoted as saying.

Thaufeeq went on to accuse the People’s Majlis of trying to influence the day to day running of the government.

“Government reluctance”

Executive Oversight Committee member and MDP MP Ahmed Easa responded that any information from the executive power must be given to the parliament unless it concerns the national security of the state or involves critical confidential information.

“Any document the parliament requests must be given from the government unless its concerns the national security or critical confidential information,” he said. “Even if the information concerns national security interests, there are procedures in which it can be shared. So far government has not said that those documents fit into the said criterion.”

He also claimed that there were no legitimate grounds for President Waheed to ignore the request from parliament without giving proper reasoning. According to Easa, the action “clearly violated the constitution”.

The Kendhikulhudhoo constituency MP admitted that committee would face “huge challenges” in reviewing the findings of the CNI Report without obtaining the information of which the report was based on.

“For an example, CNI has clearly mentioned that there are issues within the country’s judiciary. However, it has not gone into details. So how can we find about the mentioned issues within the judiciary without obtaining the information on which such a conclusion was based upon. We need to find out based on what information had the CNI come to such a conclusion,” he explained.

“They are crying out loud saying that the findings in the CNI report was the truth. If so what we are saying is that the truth must have been obtained from credible true information. Why are they hesitating to share that information with us?”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives legal system “inaccessible” to migrant workers: Transparency Maldives

Migrant workers suffering poor treatment from their employers are giving up on taking their cases to court due to the “inaccessibility” of the Maldives legal system, an official from Transparency Maldives’ Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre (ALAC) has claimed.

ALAC Communications and Advocacy Manager Aiman Rasheed told Minivan News today that a large number of human rights abuse cases in the Maldives are “potentially” going unreported due to foreign workers not taking their disputes to court.

Rasheed claimed that both defects within government bodies and corruption were to blame for the human rights abuses affecting migrant workers.

“We are finding that a lot of the issues raised at our ALAC mobile camps involve employees not receiving their wages, having their passports confiscated by employers or are living in sub-standard living conditions,” Rasheed said.

Because of the perceived inaccessibility to the legal system in the country, Rasheed claimed that a lot of injustices involving migrant workers were not being taken to court.

“Getting involved in a legal case is a very costly process. It is very hard for a normal person to afford the services and the process can take a very long time.

“The problem is that we [ALAC] appear to be the only agency providing free legal advice to migrant workers, despite authorities recognising there is a need for free advice,” Rasheed claimed.

Since being launched back in 2012, ALAC has been providing free legal advice and training to victims and witnesses of corruption through mobile camps in Vaavu Atoll and Addu City.

So far, ALAC has assisted with 64 ongoing legal cases related to migrant rights abuses in just six months, whilst further providing advice and training to over 3,000 individuals, Rasheed claimed.

“While we cannot provide financial support to these individuals, we can offer guidance through our lawyers making the entire legal process a lot easier to navigate,” he said.

“We are wanting to further strengthen our partnership with state departments, because this is a national problem.”

While state departments have begun to introduce initiatives targeted at raising awareness of human rights abuse, in particular the ongoing issue of human trafficking, Rasheed claims that there has been no “serious action” taken to address the problem.

“There is a good reason as to why we are on the US State Department’s Tier Two watch list for human trafficking for [three] years in a row,” he added.

Blue Ribbon Campaign Against Human Trafficking

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs Yesterday (January 9) inaugurated an initiative targeted at raising awareness of the human trafficking issue in the Maldives.

The strategy, entitled ‘Blue Ribbon Campaign Against Human Trafficking’ is expected to include activities to try and raise awareness among students and the business community.

The tourism industry, which employs the largest number of foreign staff in the country, was identified as another key focus of the initiative.

The Foreign Ministry announced that it had signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with multiple local media outlets in the country as part of the campaign’s aim to raising awareness of human trafficking and other related issues.

India’s concerns

Last month, Indian authorities raised concerns about the treatment of migrant workers in Maldives, stating that the tightened restrictions over providing medical visas to Maldivians was a “signal” for the Maldivian government to address the their concerns.

The commission spokesperson added that the introduction of the tighter regulations was imposed as a clear “signal” from Indian authorities that the concerns it had over practices in the Maldives such as the confiscation of passports of migrant workers, needed to be brought to an end.

On November 26, 2o12, a public notice had been issued by the Maldives Immigration Department requesting no employer in the country should be holding passports of expatriate workers.

Back in October, a senior Indian diplomatic official in the Maldives had expressed concern over the ongoing practice of confiscating passports of migrant workers arriving to the country from across South Asia – likening the practice to slavery.

The high commission also claimed this year that skilled expatriate workers from India, employed in the Maldives education sector, had continued to be “penalised” due to both government and private sector employers failing to fulfil their responsibilities.

Individuals wishing for free legal advice from Transparency Maldives’ Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre can contact the organisation for free on (800) 3003567

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives government to review laws that “victimise” sexually abused minors

The Maldivian government has today said it will review and potentially “correct” laws in the country it claims victimise young women and minors who have suffered sexual abuse.

President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad told Minivan News the government would be holding consultations with the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and other relevant authorities to discuss how minors who have been sexually abused were being treated in the country.

The comments were made as the Prosecutor General (PG’s) Office today confirmed it had pressed charges against a 15 year-old girl from the island of Feydhoo in Shaviyani Atoll for having “consensual sexual relations”.

A spokesperson for the PG’s Office said the charges against the minor were unrelated to a separate case against the girl’s stepfather over allegations he had sexually abused her.

“Protected, not punished”

President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad said that from government’s perspective, the 15 year-old girl was a victim who needed to be protected, not punished by authorities.

“We will be talking with the Ministry of Islamic Affairs over this manner and will review and correct the problem,” he said.

Masood claimed that the Maldives had experienced a number of similar cases of late where young women had been victimised and punished by authorities – a situation he said the government was looking to prevent.

“We are reviewing this right now and if we have to go to the extent of changing existing laws then we would look to do this,” he said.

While unable to comment on specific cases at time of press, Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) Vice President Ahmed Tholal told Minivan News that he was hugely concerned about the number of reports of sexual abuse against minors in the country.

Acting Minister of Gender, Family and Human rights Dr Mariyam Shakeela and Minister of Islamic Affairs Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed were not responding to calls at the time of press.

The reported handling of the case by authorities has garnered significant attention this week in both local and international media.

Charges

A PG’s Office spokesperson today confirmed that the charges against the minor were related to a separate offence of Sharia Law, which had been filed back on November 25, 2012.

The 15 year-old last year gave birth to a baby that was discovered buried in the outdoor shower area of a home on Feydhoo – her stepfather was later charged with sexual abuse, possession of pornographic materials and committing murder without intent.

The spokesperson said that another charge was filed against the girl’s mother over claims she had failed to inform authorities of the alleged sexual abuse of her own child.

Judicial authorities told Minivan News earlier this week that the charges against the 15 year-old were yet to be filed with the Juvenile Court at the time.

Director of the Department of Judicial Administration Ahmed Maajid was not responding to calls at time of press.

NGO criticism

The charges against the 15 year-old girl have been slammed as an “absolute outrage” by NGO Amnesty International.

In a statement released yesterday, Amnesty International’s Maldives Researcher Abbas Faiz stressed that suspected victims of rape and sexual abuse required counselling and support rather than facing prosecution.

“We urge the Maldivian authorities to immediately drop all charges against the girl, ensure her safety and provide her with all necessary support,” the NGO’s statement read.

Amnesty Intentional also raised concerns that should the minor be found guilty of “fornication” as reported in the media, she could potentially be flogged in line with sentencing for similar cases held in the country.

“If found guilty of ‘fornication’ the girl could be punished with flogging. She would likely be kept under house arrest until she turns 18 when, under Maldivian law, the flogging can be carried out. Flogging is a violation of the absolute prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment,” Amnesty International stated.

“The Maldivian authorities should immediately end its use regardless of circumstances. The fact that this time a 15-year old girl who has suffered terribly is at risk makes it all the more reprehensible. Flogging is not only wrong and humiliating, but can lead to long-term psychological as well as physical scars.”

Fornication offence

Back in September 2012, a 16 year-old girl was sentenced to house arrest and 100 lashes for fornication with a 29 year-old man.

Permanent Magistrate of Raa Atoll Hulhudhuhfaaru, Magistrate Abdul Samad Abdulla, sentenced the girl to eight months under house arrest, and for public flogging once she reaches the age of 18.

Ali Rashid, an official of the Hulhudhuhfaaru Magistrate Court, said at the time that the girl had been sentenced for fornication because she had confessed to it. However, the 29 year-old male with whom she was co-accused had denied the charges.

“The man said he hadn’t committed fornication, but he admitted to having hugged and done certain other things with the girl. This amounts to sexual assault of a minor under the law. That’s why he has got the minimum sentence possible under the relevant law, 10 years in jail,” Rashid explained.

The official of the Hulhudhuhfaaru Magistrate Court referred Minivan News to Article 25 of the act detailing special actions to be taken in cases of sexual offences against children (Act number: 12/2009).

Article 25 says: “Unless proven otherwise, it cannot be considered that a child between ages 13-18 had given consent to committing a sexual act. And unless proven otherwise, it will be considered that the sexual act was committed without the child’s consent.”

In November 2011, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, speaking in parliament, raised concerns about the issue of flogging in the Maldives.

Speaking on the issue, Pillay said at the time, “This practice constitutes one of the most inhumane and degrading forms of violence against women, and should have no place in the legal framework of a democratic country.”

Her statements and calls for discussion on the issue were met with outrage from then political opposition and religious conservative Adhaalath party, giving rise to protests and demonstrations. The Foreign Ministry, under the former government, dismissed the calls for discussion on the issue, stating: “There is nothing to debate about in a matter clearly stated in the religion of Islam. No one can argue with God.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Executive Oversight Committee summons former intelligence heads

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee has summoned the former intelligence heads of both the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) and the Maldives Police Service (MPS) as part of an inquiry into the controversial transfer of power in February 2012.

Brigadier General Ahmed Nilam and former Superintendent Mohamed ‘MC’ Hameed were separately summoned today to attend the closed door meetings.

Nilam was summoned first at 12:00pm, with Hameed addressing the committee at 1:00pm.

According to local media, chair of the committee, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed, said that the decision had been taken to hold the meeting behind closed doors to ensure any potentially sensitive intelligence information remained confidential.

The select committee last month agreed, with bipartisan support, to summon Nilam, Hameed and former SAARC Secretary General Fathimath Dhiyana Saeed.

The committee at the time decided that all three individuals would be summoned to parliament separately on January 9.  According to the local media, Saeed was to be summoned at 11:00am today, but requested that her hearing be postponed over personal issues.

Saeed is being summoned over a personal memoir released to the media last month.  The contents of the memoir included allegations that certain figures behind protests leading to the controversial transfer of power on February 7 had also planned to assassinate former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Failure to come to an understanding over issuance of a legal order

Meanwhile, the committee today failed to reach an agreement over issuing a legal order requiring President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik to provide evidence gathered by the Commonwealth-backed Commission of National Inquiry (CNI).

The CNI was charged to review the circumstances behind the change of government, concluding that the transfer of power took place constitutionally despite the MDP’s claims of a coup d’état.

The parliamentary committee had called for a vote amongst its members over whether to issue a legal order to obtain statements given to CNI by senior Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) figures and officials of the former government.  However, the vote failed to secure a required committee majority of 6 members to be passed.

Although backed by all five MDP members on the committee, the vote was short of a sixth and decisive supporter with government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Ahmed Nihan Hassan Manik voting against the motion. His fellow party member MP Ahmed Shareef abstained from the vote.

The statements that the committee had intended to obtain from the government included the accounts given to the CNI of former Defense Minister Tholthath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, former Home Minister Hassan Afeef and former Chief of Defense Force retired Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel.  The testimonies of former Male’ Area Commander retired Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and former Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh would also have been requested among others.

The committee had previously sent a letter to President Waheed requesting for him to provide it members with the stated documents.  The request was denied.

Some sitting members of the committee at the time expressed their dismay with the president’s response, arguing that the only option left for the committee was to issue a legal order.

However, in order to issue a legal order, the matter should be approved by an absolute majority of at least six committee members.

Following the failure to obtain a legal order today, MDP Spokesperson MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor questioned the government’s decision not to supply the information.

“There is absolutely no way as per the constitution where the executive can hide its actions from the parliament. The constitution has given the parliament immense powers in terms of government accountability to the extent that the government cannot even take a loan without parliament’s consent,” he said.

Ghafoor added that while the MDP held a parliamentary majority, it was aiming to conduct the inquiry with bipartisan support.

“We don’t want to make this a political issue. This is a national issue. We are trying to confirm the legitimacy of an installed government. Party politics is not what we are interested in,” he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court schedules hearings against key parliamentary decisions for next week

The Supreme Court will hear two separate cases filed against decisions taken within parliament next week.

According to the Supreme Court’s official website, a case lodged by former Civil Services Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan against parliament’s decision to impeach him over allegations of sexual harassment is scheduled for January 14.

A separate case will then be held two days later on January 16 concerning the Majlis’ decision to hold no-confidence votes against President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and other senior government figures through a secret ballot.

The two cases have been criticised within the People’s Majlis, with some MPs claiming the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction to look into matters approved by parliament.

Right to justice

Speaking to Minivan News today, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor accused the Supreme Court of being grossly negligent in carrying out its duties as the country has switched from an autocratic system of governance to a democratic one in 2008.

Ghafoor contended that the Supreme Court’s conduct had been contrary to keeping the powers of the state both independent and separate.

“Due to this negligence, it has allowed incompetent, insincere judges to take over all the ranks of the judiciary, disregarding the article 285 of the constitution. Now, the validity of both Supreme Court and High Court is limited and restricted due to its failure to establish a proper legitimate judiciary,” he said.

“We don’t see justice being served, to be honest, the people of this country have lost their right to justice. I don’t see true justice being established in the country, not as long as they are here.”

The Henveiru South constituency MP also accused the Supreme Court of failing to specify its reasons behind decisions taken on constitutional matters.

“They are failing to grasp the intentions of the constitutional assembly that drafted the constitution. Why are they failing to refer to the meeting minutes of the assembly to understand their intentions as a tool to interpret the constitution? This is what happens when you don’t have a competent judiciary, they fail to grasp the spirit of the constitution,” he claimed.

The Supreme Court last month issued two separate injunctions ordering parliament to  withhold selection of a CSC president to replace Fahmy and to halt scheduling impeachment votes against President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed.

The Supreme Court in both injunctions claimed that it needed to review the legality of the concerned issues in line with “necessary constitutional and legal principles” that had to be followed.

Exclusive cognizance

Responding to the injunctions issued by the Supreme Court, Independent MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed has said in a personal press video that the powers stated in article 88 of the constitution were given to parliament to execute its duties. Nasheed added that the powers outlined in the article should not be restricted by the country’s courts.

“The article 88 (b) of the constitution is a power given to the parliament to execute its duties. It should not be confused with the recently passed privileges bill. What article 88(b) states that no court of law can question the decisions reached by the parliament,” he said.

“The Article 88(b) of the constitution states – ‘Unless otherwise specified in this Constitution, the validity of any proceedings in the People’s Majlis (Parliament) shall not be questioned in any court of law.’  It is for a reason that this clause was included in the constitution. This is a principle adopted by parliaments across the world. I don’t know the Arabic word for that, but in English it is known as ‘Exclusive Cognizance,’” he explained.

Nasheed contended that article 88 (b) outlined powers that should be exclusive to parliament and all courts of law should respect the legislature.  He claimed that a failure to respect parliament could mean every decision reached in the Majlis would be challenged.

“For example, even in a football game, though a team may be very upset by a decision of the referee, the play continues. They don’t go to court and seek an injunction so that match would be halted until a court decides on the matter. Neither is the decision overruled. The game continues,” Nasheed argued.

“What is happening right now could mean that if a player is shown a red card or a yellow card, the team who is unhappy about the referee would stop playing and go to court and seek an injunction to hold the play until the court reaches a verdict. Imagine what will happen if such practice takes hold.”

Parliament decisions

Former CSC Chair Fahmy was impeached from parliament in June last year over allegations of sexual harassment against an employee. The decision was reached after a debate on the report, which was produced by Parliament’s Committee on Independent Institutions.

Following much debate in parliament, Nasheed stated that the Committee on Independent Institutions had mandate over the CSC and it did not need to conduct a criminal investigation to remove Fahmy from his post.

“What we applied are widely accepted civil standards. Based on our findings, 7 out of the 10 committee members decided that it was more likely that Fahmy had committed this act than that he did not. And that is enough to remove him from his post,” Nasheed said.

The subsequent no-confidence vote to remove Fahmy passed by a majority of 38 to 32 votes. However, Fahmy filed a case at Supreme Court contending that he was removed from his position unlawfully.

Back in October meanwhile, the MDP proposed a no-confidence motion against President Waheed claiming that the police and the military had “brutalised” its supporters on February 8 under direct orders from the president himself.

The MDP also alleged that President Waheed had destroyed the sensitive economy of the nation and adversely impacted investor confidence in the Maldives.

Other reasons, the MDP alleged, included the failure of President Waheed’s administration to curb gang violence in the country, as well as his government taking a loan worth MVR 300 million (US$19.5 million) from the Bank of Maldives (BML) without prior approval from parliament – a violation of Public Finance Act and Public Finance Regulation.

The MDP subsequently proposed the amendment to parliamentary regulation which would pave the way for a secret ballot in the vote to impeach President Waheed. However, the first attempt, despite approval from parliament’s General Affairs Committee was defeated in parliament by 39 to 34 votes.

Parliament last month passed the amendment when it was again re-submitted and approved with a 41 to 34 majority. The approval was backed by two government aligned parties, the Jumhoree Party (JP) and Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).

The amendment was also later challenged in the Supreme Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government submits sexual harassment bill to Majlis

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Rozaina Adam has submitted a bill to parliament on behalf of the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik aiming to define and outlaw sexual harassment across Maldivian society.

The decision forms part of a wider government strategy to submit twelve separate bills to the Majlis after an amendment to parliament regulations was approved in October.  The amendment to the People’s Majlis’ Rules of Procedure enabled the current government to submit bills to the legislature despite President Waheed’s Gaumee Ittihad Party (GIP) having no elected representatives in parliament.

DRP MP Rozaina Adam was not responding to calls at time of press.

The government has stated that the objective of the sexual harassment bill is to ensure gender discrimination is made illegal at workplaces, educational institutes, and other service providers such as hospitals.

The bill defines sexual harassment as “any sexual act committed against, or towards, a person without their consent”.  It states that a sexual act is defined as words which are spoken, or written, a sound that is made, a picture or a drawing that is shown, a physical action or gesture that is made, or any other action which could be perceived, believed or known by the recipient to be done with a sexual intention.

Details are also included on the specific actions by employers, employees and service providers which would be outlawed should the bill be passed.

Employers are also required to refrain from implying through actions or words that acceptance of sexual advances is a guarantee of securing advancement at work or additional opportunities.

The bill also governs institutions mandated with taking care of persons, including children, the elderly and persons with special needs. The bill specifically prohibits sexual harassment against any persons under the care of such institutions.

As per the bill, each organisation must have a committee mandated with oversight of the issue of sexual harassment.  The committee should consist of ten members, of which the majority is to be female. The bill also defines the procedures the committee must follow when handling complaints.

The bill is yet to be scheduled for debate on the parliament floor and comes after CSC President Mohamed Fahmy was voted out of his post on November 20, 2012 under allegations of sexual harassment against an employee.

The Supreme Court has since ordered the parliament to halt appointing a new member to his post, until the court comes to a ruling on whether Fahmy’s rights had been infringed upon through his dismissal.

Meanwhile, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) MP Abdulla Yaamin has submitted a motion to Parliament’s Independent Commissions Oversight Committee, asking it to investigate allegations of sexual harassment against a member of the Elections Commission.

The full bill submitted to the Majlis can be read here.  (Dhivehi)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MNDF military hospital to provide medical services to immigration department

The Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) military hospital is to begin to provide medical services to employees of the Department of Immigration and Emigration.

Defence Minister Colonel Mohamed Nazim was quoted in local media as saying that all services of the military hospital are now available under Aasandha to the employees of the immigration department.

“Employees of Immigration Department and their families can obtain medical treatment under Aasandha from the military hospital. This includes their husbands and wives. We are trying to provide the best medical services to our employees,” he told Sun Online.

The Department of Immigration and Emigration was recently transferred from the under the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Ministry of Defence.

According to the President’s Office, the decision to transfer the department was taken to make administration of the country’s immigration system more efficient.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) last week questioned the legality of the decision to transfer control of the Department of Immigration and Emigration to the Defence Ministry.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament Speaker Abdulla Shahid on official visit to Angola

Parliamentary Speaker Abdulla Shahid has commenced a three day visit Angola today in order to reinforce inter-parliamentary cooperative ties between the two countries, an African news service has said.

During his stay in the country, Shahid will meet with his Angolan counterpart, Fernando Da Piedade Dias dos Santos as well as heads of parliamentary groups of the national assembly.

According to a press note from the Angolan national assembly, the agenda includes official talks between the parliamentary delegations of Angola and Maldives, and an official dinner offered by the Angolan speaker of the national assembly.

The press note reads that Shahid will also visit the new city of Kilamba in Luanda, in order to learn about the national housing boosting programme.

Shahid is to return on January 9, according to the African news source.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

80 years to save country should Adhaalath Party be dissolved: Sheikh Imran

Adhaalath Party Leader Sheikh Imran Abdulla has warned it could take “80 years” to save the country should the religious conservative party be dissolved under new regulations passed by the Majlis.

If signed into law, the Political Parties Bill passed last month would require a party in the Maldives to have a minimum of 10,000 registered members.

Speaking at a rally held at Ghiyasuddin School Thursday (January 3), local media quoted Sheikh Imran as saying it was compulsory for all citizens to ensure Adhaalath Party was not dissolved.

“It would not be wrong to say that it will take 80 years to save the country and for it to revert to the present situation if Adhaalath Party is dissolved in the current political circumstances.

“Thus it is compulsory upon you to ensure that Adhaalath Party isn’t dissolved. It is compulsory upon all citizens,” he said.

Sheikh Imran claimed that efforts to limit the number of political parties in the Maldives indicated attempts to return the country to an autocratic regime.

“Social values have been torn apart. Conflicts, assault and arguments within parties have become commonplace. Things have gone so far that and mothers and children don’t speak to each other, and mothers ask children to leave their homes. So what I have to say is that a solution has to be sought to the problem of political parties,” Imran was quoted as saying in Sun Online.

Imran encouraged educated people from all over the country to join the party, adding that he would lead the campaign to dissolve political parties if people fail to establish a system by which they can coexist.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)