Tag: parliament

Parliament committee passes implementing tobacco-free zones as scheduled

Tobacco-free zones are to be implemented from January 1, 2013, after the Subordinate Regulations Committee of the People’s Majlis decided not to delay their introduction, local media has reported.

Entitled “Regulation of Determining Tobacco-Free Zones”, the regulation aims at inhibiting the consumption of tobacco products by prohibiting smoking in certain public areas.

Traders’ associations and MP for Nolhivaram Constituency Mohammed Nasheed proposed to delay the starting date of the Regulation for one year, according to local newspaper Haveeru.

Opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs were reported to have  supported the proposal to delay the starting date, claiming there to be “a lot of issues” with the regulation.

After considering the matter, the Subordinate Regulations Committee made a final decision on a narrowly-approved vote.

Under the new regulation, smoking or similar consumption of tobacco will be prohibited within the following places; tea shops, cafes and restaurants, parks, government office premises, office premises of companies with government shareholding, office premises of independent state institutions, public places where people usually gather in numbers, old age homes, homes for those who need special care, and rehabilitation centres.

However, under special permission from the Ministry of Health, cafes and restaurants can define a special area where people can smoke.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MJA express concern over media limitations outlined in assembly bill

The Maldives Journalists’ Association (MJA) has expressed concern over certain clauses in the Freedom of Peaceful Assembly Bill passed this week that it says will directly impact reporting by local and international media organisations.

The bill, passed by parliament on December 26, includes a number of measures such as banning demonstrations outside private residences and government buildings, as well as establishing reporting limitations on media not accredited with the state.

MJA President and board member of the Maldives Media Council (MMC) ‘Hiriga’ Ahmed Zahir stated today that the association has appealed to Attorney General Azima Shakoor and President Mohamed Waheed Hassan to review some of the clauses in the legislation.

According to the bill, only journalists who are accredited by the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) will be authorised to cover and report on gatherings and police activities in the country. The bill would also require MBC to establish a regulation on accrediting journalists within three months of its ratification.

Zahir claimed that in view of existing laws and regulations, the MBC is mandated with the oversight of broadcast media, while it was the MMC that had been entrusted with regulating all media outlets in the country.

“For one thing, I do not believe that a body appointed by the parliament will be able to undertake the accreditation of media persons in an independent manner free from any influence. We are seeing the MBC failing to address many existing issues even now, so we cannot support handing over additional responsibilities like this to such a body,” Zahir said.

Zahir also stated that in principle, the MJA did not approve of the idea of journalists having to get accredited before being able to report on events like protests.  The MJA has stated that events and gatherings should ideally be accessible to all media outlets.

Zahir also raised concerns that foreign journalists coming to the Maldives would also be required to obtain additional accreditation. He said that international media was already faced with having to meet specific visa requirements and obtaining state approval.

“For example, [international reporters] cannot really cover events if they are just here on a tourist visa, that won’t be allowed anywhere in the world,” he said.

However, due to the current political situation in the Maldives and allegations of some media personnel carrying out “irresponsible activities”, the MJA stated it could ultimately agree on some form of accreditation process.

Zahir nonetheless emphasized that even in such a case, accreditation should be done by a self-regulatory body with representation from media outlets in the country.

“From the existing bodies, we would prefer that the responsibility be handed over to the MMC. The council has representatives from all major media outlets in the country. Its members will respect individual rights and can do an independent job,” Zahir said.

On the back of the MJA’s concerns about the bill’s impact on media, Attorney General Azima Shakoor has been quoted in local media as accepting some form of review may be needed.

“Although the said bill regulates a different issue, one stipulation in this contradicts with the mandates of MBC and MMC. Hence, the best line of action may be to correct this through an immediate amendment. I feel that would be the most convenient solution now,” she was quoted as saying.

The bill further states that if an accredited journalist is suspected of being involved in a gathering’s activities, they would be treated in the same manner of those assembled as to the discretion of the police. The bill, however, does not define what could be considered such an act.

Commenting on the vague nature of the clause, Zahir told Minivan News that loose phrasing seen in the bill potentially left too much interpretation at the discretion of the police and their powers.

“The bill should more clearly define what exactly it means when saying a journalist is ‘seen to be participating in a protest’. They should set down specific actions. For example, it’s not a problem for a journalist to go into a crowd of people gathered, they do not necessarily have to stay behind police lines all the time. Just them walking into a crowd should not be defined as participation. It has to depend on a certain action they do alongside protesters,” Zahir explained.

Zahir stated that although media personnel – as individuals – are granted the constitutional right to participate in demonstrations, the MJA did not encourage such actions.

In the initial draft of Freedom of Peaceful Assembly bill, the accreditation of journalists had been put down as a responsibility of the MMC, as reported in local news websites. However, the responsibility had been transferred to the MBC by the time the bill had been revised at committee level and submitted to the parliament for final voting.

MBC Vice President Mohamed Shaheeb was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nexbis files court case over Maldives contract termination

Nexbis has filed a case with the Maldives Civil Court claiming that the People’s Majlis lacks the jurisdiction to order the government to terminate the IT company’s Border Control System (BCS) contract.

The lawyer representing the Malaysia-based mobile security provider, Ismail Wisham, revealed that the case was filed at Civil Court on Tuesday (December 25).

Wisham also stated that a request had been filed with the court to issue an order that the government delay parliament’s decision to cancel the contract until outstanding several ongoing trials in the country concerning the contract were resolved.

Earlier this week, parliament voted unanimously to instruct the government to terminate the border control project agreement with Nexbis.

All 74 MPs in attendance voted in favour of a Finance Committee recommendation following a probe into the potential financial burden placed on the state as a result of the deal.

Speaking to local media on Tuesday (December 25), Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed claimed the government would respect parliament’s unanimous decision to halt the BCS project agreement with Nexbis.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Pieces of metal allegedly found in MPs food

Parliament members have claimed that “pieces of metal” were found in a meal provided by a Male’-based catering service, according to local media.

Jumhooree Party (JP) MP Abdulla Abdul Raheem told Haveeru that the pieces of metal were found on the plates of Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MPs Abdulla Mausoom and Mohamed Ramiz during a lunch provided from the Kings Corner restaurant near to the parliament.

According to local media, Raheem said that Parliament’s general committee has decided to return to caterer South Beach, despite its service being stopped over a reported case of food poisoning.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament passes MVR 15.3 billion budget for 2013

Parliament today passed a MVR 15.3 billion (US$992 million) state budget for 2013, reduced by more than MVR 1 billion (US$64.8 million) from the MVR 16.9 billion (US$1 billion) proposal submitted by Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad last month.

The budget was passed with 41 votes in favour, 28 against and no abstentions. MPs of the formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) voted against the budget.

In addition to changes imposed by the Budget Review Committee, the estimated budget was passed with eight amendments approved at today’s sitting.

Among the amendments voted through included the scrapping of plans to revise import duties on oil, fuel, diesel and staple foodstuffs, as well as any item with import duty presently at zero percent.

An amendment instructing the government to conduct performance audits of the Human Rights Commission and Police Integrity Commission and submit the findings to parliament was passed with 53 votes in favour, ten against and four abstentions.

Amendments proposed by MDP MP Ali Waheed to shift MVR 100 million (US$6.5 million) to be issued as fuel subsidies for fishermen and MVR 50 million (US$3.2 million) as agriculture subsidies from the Finance Ministry’s contingency budget was passed with 68 votes in favour.

A proposal by Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Abdulla Maussom to add MVR 10 million (US$648,508) to the budget to be provided as financial assistance to civil society organisations was passed with 57 votes in favour and three against.

Budget review

Presenting the budget report (Dhivehi) at Tuesday’s sitting, Budget Review Committee Chair MP Gasim Ibrahim said the committee held 31 meetings, spent 45 hours studying the proposed budget and met senior officials from 27 ministries and state institutions.

The omissions approved by the committee to reduce the budget from MVR 16.9 billion to MVR 15.3 billion were largely made from recurrent expenditure, the Jumhooree Party (JP) Leader said.

While Finance Minister Abdulla Jihad had agreed to MVR 1 billion in cuts, the committee decided to trim the budget “by a little bit more than that,” according to Gasim.

The committee approved cuts amounting to a total of MVR 1.6 billion (US$103.7 million).

However, he added, the committee added MVR 389 million (US$25.2 million) for infrastructure projects such as harbours, sewerage and water for islands.

The budget items that the committee made cuts to included overtime pay (50 percent), travel expenses (50 percent), purchases for office use (30 percent), office expenditure (35 percent), purchases for service provision (30 percent), training costs (30 percent), construction, maintenance and repair work (50 percent) and purchase of assets (35 percent).

The committee estimated that the cuts to recurrent expenditure would amount to MVR 1 billion (US$64.8 million) in savings.

The committee also instructed the Finance Ministry to reduce an additional MVR 605.7 million (US$39.2 million) from office budgets.

On the measures proposed by the Finance Committee to raise revenue, the committee approved revising import duties, raising the Tourism Goods and Service Tax (T-GST) from eight percent to 12 percent in July 2013, increasing airport service charge from US$18 to US$25, leasing 14 islands for resort development and imposing GST on telecom services.

The Finance Ministry had however proposed hiking T-GST from 8 to 15 percent in July 2013 and raising airport service charge or departure tax from US$18 to US$30.

The committee also decided to limit loans obtained in 2013 to finance the budget to MVR 2 billion (US$129.7 million) and prohibit the government from taking loans for development projects with an interest rate higher than seven percent.

The government has meanwhile been asked to provide details of the loans and guarantees planned for 2013 for parliamentary approval as required by amendments brought to the Public Finance Act in 2010.

Professional opinion from MMA and Auditor General’s Office

According to the Budget Review Committee report, the Maldives Authority Authority (MMA) advised the committee to reduce total expenditure to MVR 15 billion and attempt to reduce public debt.

The central bank warned that the projected deficit in the 2013 budget was likely to adversely affect the foreign exchange market and foreign currency reserves.

The MMA also advised the committee to pass a budget that would “facilitate” the Maldives joining the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF’s) “Staff Monitoring Programme.”

The programme would provide access to loans from the international debt capital market, the MMA said.

Speaking to press at the conclusion of a visit by an IMF mission last month, head of the delegation Koshy Mathai explained that the requested “Staff Monitoring Programme” would not involve disbursement of funds from the IMF.

“We would basically see how the government is doing against its own targets – it would set targets for itself for performance of these different economic areas – and then if the track record is built up and things are going well, then maybe later we could discuss having a programme where money is disbursed,” Mathai said.

Meanwhile, in its professional opinion on the budget, the Auditor General’s Office expressed concern with the public sector investment programme (PSIP) being formulated without either a national development plan or population consolidation policy.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament passes bill redefining limitations on freedom of assembly

Parliament on Tuesday (December 25) passed the bill on “Freedom of Peaceful Assembly” despite unanimous opposition from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). The legislation was first submitted by independent MP Mohamed Nasheed on 5 April 2012.

The bill, which was initially called ‘Freedom of Assembly Bill’ was passed on the parliament floor with 44 votes in favour, and 30 votes against.

Among the key features of the bill is the outlawing of demonstrations outside private residences and government buildings, limitations on media not accredited with the state and defining gatherings as a group with more than a single person.

One of the main stated objectives of the legislation is to try and minimize restrictions on peaceful gatherings, which it claims remain a fundamental right.

The legislation continues that any restrictions enforced by police or other state institutions on participants at a gathering must be proportionate actions as outlined under specific circumstances defined in the bill.

The bill also provides a definition for ‘Gathering’ in Article 7(a), stating it refers to more than one person, with the same objective, purposefully attending a public or private place temporarily and peacefully expressing their views there.

Article 9(a), meanwhile, defines ‘Peaceful’ in relation to a gathering as being one where the organizers have notified [authorities] that this is a gathering to achieve a peaceful purpose, and provided no acts of violence occur, nor are there any chants, writing or drawings encouraging violence used in the gathering. Additionally, in such a gathering, no acts violating any laws must be committed, nor encouraged. Nor should participants have any items on them which can potentially be used to commit acts of violence.

Section (b) of Article 9 rejects defining a gathering as ‘not peaceful’ on the basis of words or behaviour of certain participants during a protest that may be considered hateful or unacceptable by other persons.

Under the new bill, citizens are not allowed to hold gatherings within a certain distance of the headquarters of police and the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF).

Demonstrations would also be outlawed within a certain distance of the residences of the president and the vice president, the offices of the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA), tourist resorts, harbours utilized for economic purposes, airports, the President’s Office, the courts of law, the Parliament, mosques, schools, hospitals and buildings housing diplomatic missions.

The bill also states that demonstrators wishing to protest against a specific individual, may not use megaphones, stand outside, or have a sit-down outside that person’s residence.

The regulation also states that although demonstrators do not need to seek authorization ahead of a gathering, police must be then notified of any pre-planned demonstrations before they commence.

Among the actions prohibited under the bill include an article stating that participants in a demonstration are not to have on them swords, knives, other sharp objects, wood, metal rods, batons, bleach, petrol, kerosene, any form of chilli (including dried or powdered), acid, explosives, any other items that can potentially be used as a weapon or any gear used by police for riot-controlling and peacekeeping.

Article 21 stipulates that participants will also not be allowed to cover their faces with masks, balaclavas or any other material which would prevent them from being identifiable.

The bill does guarantee organizers and participants of a gathering the right to decide where to hold a demonstration as well as choosing its objectives and the persons who are given the opportunity to speak during the protest.

The bill will not be applicable to activities, gatherings or meetings organized by state institutions, or those organized under any other law and to sports, games, business or cultural events.

According to the bill, if participants in a gathering have to face material or physical loss due to the negligence of police who must provide protection, then the police institution must provide compensation. It further adds that in such instances, the affected individual cannot be penalized for having taken part in the gathering.

The regulations also impose restrictions on police officers, preventing them from partaking in activities such as joining a gathering, displaying agreement or disagreement to messages or themes of a protest and ordering where or when to hold demonstrations.  Police officers are also prohibited from intervening in a gathering unless they are in uniform and states officers must not cover their faces unless as part of their riot gear under the bill.

Right to assemble

The bill also states that the right to assemble can be narrowed in the instances of a perceived threat to national security, or in order to maintain public safety as well as to establish societal peace in accordance with existing laws, to protect public health, to maintain levels of public discipline or to protect the rights and freedoms guaranteed to other individuals.

With regard to the media’s right to cover demonstrations, the bill adds that the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) must draft a regulation on accrediting journalists within three months of the ratification of the Bill on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly. It is only those journalists who are accredited by the MBC who will be granted access to cover and report on gatherings and police activities in the vicinity.

If an accredited journalist is believed to partaking in the gathering’s activities, treating these journalists as equal to those assembled is left at the discretion of the police. The bill, however, does not define what could be considered such an act.

The Maldives Media Council and the Maldives Journalists Association have expressed concern over these stipulations on Wednesday.

The limitations defined in the bill will bring positive changes: Home Minister

Minister of Home Affairs Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has stated that the Freedom of Peaceful Assembly Bill would bring positive changes to the country’s political environment and that it would provide guidance to politicians.

“It’s been established today that every right comes with accompanying responsibilities. I believe even the constitution reflects these principles. However, these principles need to be broken down into a law that would bring convenience to the people. Some among us thought when the constitution came that these are limitless freedoms that we’ve got. These past days we have seen people acting under that belief,” Jameel was quoted as telling the Sun Online news service.

“Under the name of this freedom, they were violating the personal and individual rights and protections of citizens. They were going at people’s residences, gathering outside and yelling vulgarities at parents and families, depriving children and families of sleep. All under the excuse of freedom of assembly.”

The Home Minister said that this bill would bring necessary limits at a time when many undesirable activities were being carried out under the guise of freedoms. He noted that the freedom of assembly was granted within limits in all other developed countries.

Not an ideal time to tamper with fundamental rights: MDP

Responding to the claims, MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor expressed concern that the fundamental right to assemble was being limited through the bill at “a time like this.”

“It is not wise to tamper with constitutionally provided fundamental rights at a time like this, when we are in times of a coup. But even that can be understood only by persons who can at first understand democratic principles, of course,” Ghafoor said.

“We need time for the Maldivian psyche to be able to grasp the concepts of fundamental rights first.”

“Home Minister Jameel is a prescriptive, Salafiyya-educated, uncivilized man. He has never yet been able to partake in and win any elected posts, his statements hold no weight in the eyes of the people. He is a man who obviously does not even understand this very basic, fundamental concept,” Hamid said in response to Jameel’s statements in media about the freedom of assembly bill.

Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN), which is cited in the parliamentary committee report as an entity that provided written feedback on the bill was unable to comment on the bill at the time of press.

MDN said that the NGO had today received the final bill which had been passed by the parliament, and that they were currently reviewing it to establish how much of their recommendations had been featured in the final bill.

Minivan News tried to contact MP Mohamed Nasheed, who was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Chair of the committee MP Riyaz Rasheed and Vice Chair MP Ahmed Amir were also not responding to calls this evening.

Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) Vice President Ahmed Tholal’s phone was switched off at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Amendments approved to parliamentary rules of procedure

Parliament on Tuesday approved changes to the house rules that would allow sittings to proceed even if the quorum of 20 MPs is lost.

Under the rules of procedure prior to the amendment passed yesterday (December 25), sittings must be immediately adjourned if the number of MPs in the chamber falls below 20, which is 25 percent of the 77 MPs in parliament.

The change was voted through with 69 MPs voting in favour, four MPs voting against and one abstaining.

A number of sittings of the People’s Majlis have been forced to a close due to loss of quorum. The amendment to the rules was reportedly proposed to address the recurring issue of loss of quorum.

Under the amended rules, the Speaker would be allowed to continue proceedings until a MP brings the loss of quorum to his or her attention.

However, a minimum of 20 MPs would still have to be in attendance to begin sittings while more than 39 MPs must be present for a vote to be called.

A second amendment to the rules of procedure was meanwhile passed 44-28 yesterday with two abstentions to allow sittings to be held during recess upon request by 26 MPs.

The amendment was proposed in a report by the General Affairs Committee.

MPs of the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) voted against the report. While PPM MPs voted for a proposal by MP Ibrahim Muttalib stating that no-confidence motions could not be voted on during sittings held in recess, the amendment was defeated 43-27 with four abstentions.

Under the approved changes to the house rules, a request by one-third of parliament or 26 MPs to hold a sitting during recess must be accommodated within 14 days including weekends and public holidays.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nexbis to challenge termination of Border Control System project

Additional reporting by Ahmed Naish.

Nexbis has said it will challenge parliament’s decision instructing the government terminate a Border Control System (BCS) project signed under the previous administration.

The Malaysia-based IT group has said it will seek a court injunction preventing any attempts to cancel the agreement whilst court hearings over the contract were still ongoing.

Speaking to local media on Tuesday (December 25), Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed claimed the government would respect parliament’s unanimous decision to halt the BCS project agreement with Nexbis.

Dr Jameel told local newspaper Haveeru that it was “difficult to come up with an exact figure at present” for the level of compensation the government would potentially have to pay Nexbis after prematurely terminating a contract with the company.

The home minister was not responding to Minivan News at the time of press.

Yesterday’s vote on the deal was taken after Parliament’s Finance Committee claimed there had been foul play in the agreement signed between Nexis and the Maldives immigration department.

Prior to the parliamentary vote, an official spokesperson for Nexbis told Minivan News on December 23 that the company would “challenge” any decision by the Majlis to halt the BCS contract while court hearings were continuing in the country.

“We are asking the Supreme Court to intervene with the decision as we have come to be aware that the contract cannot be legally terminated if there is an ongoing legal case. Presently we have legal cases in the Civil Court, the High Court and the Supreme Court,” the Nexbis source added.

Meanwhile, Director of the Department of Judicial Administration Ahmed Maajid today (December 26) confirmed that to his knowledge, Nexbis was currently involved in ongoing cases within the Maldives’ judicial system.

Maajid added that on a legal basis, the contract between Nexbis and the government could not be terminated until all proceedings involving the company were concluded.

“There is a provision in the Judicature Act under Law 22, 2010 that basically states no public body can terminate a contract with a company that is involved in judicial proceedings in the courts,” he said,

“The government has made their decision based on the the Majlis’ vote. But the legality of that decision can be challenged at the Civil Court if Nexbis submit a case. They have a constitutional right to do so.”

The MVR 500 million (US$39 million) BCS project moved ahead this year after a series of high-profile court battles and delays that led Nexbis to last year threaten legal action against the Maldivian government should it incur losses for the work already done on the project.

The Malaysia-based mobile security provider has come under scrutiny by political parties who claim that the project is detrimental to the state, while the Anti-Corruption Committee (ACC) has alleged corruption in the bidding process.

Nexbis has denied any allegations of wrong doing within its contract.

Unanimous vote

Amidst these concerns, parliament voted unanimously yesterday (December 25) to instruct the government to terminate the border control project agreement with Nexbis.

All 74 MPs in attendance voted in favour of a Finance Committee recommendation following a probe into the potential financial burden placed on the state as a result of the deal.

Presenting the Finance Committee report to the floor, Chair MP Ahmed Nazim explained that the “main problem” flagged by the ACC was that the tender had not been made in accordance with the documents by the National Planning Council authorising the project.

The documents were changed to favour the chosen party and facilitate the deal, Nazim said, which the ACC considered an act of corruption.

Regarding allegations of corruption within the contract, the Nexbis source told Minivan News that the company is “systematically denying” any allegations of corruption, adding that if there was any foul play within the contract “we were unaware of it”.

Nazim stressed that the Finance Committee inquiry focused on the financial burden on the state and had discovered that the government would have to pay US$166 million to Nexbis over the course of the agreement.

Conversely, he claimed that the Maldivian government would only earn US$8 million as royalties during the agreement period.

Nazim noted that the Finance Ministry informed the committee that it was yet to receive a copy of the agreement two years after it was signed.

The Finance Ministry has also not included any funds in either the 2012 or 2013 budgets to pay for the project.

Nazim also accused the then-attorney general of “negligence” in the deal as he had not provided an official legal opinion to the Immigration Department in writing.

Recommendations by the former attorney general to amend the agreement could not be found in the documentation, he added.

Nazim said the Finance Committee concluded therefore that the best course of action would be to terminate the Nexbis agreement and install a different border control system at the earliest date.

Following the Finance Committee decision, the budget review committee has included a recommendation compelling the government to terminate the Nexbis agreement.

The Finance Committee also recommended terminating the agreement over concerns it contained clauses to waive taxes to the company, Nazim said. He noted that imposing or waiving taxes was a prerogative of parliament under article 97(d) of the constitution.

During the ensuing debate, MPs from both the formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and government-aligned parties spoke in favour of terminating the agreement.

Along with the decision to terminate the Nexbis deal, the government of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hasaan Manik late last month also opted to void an airport development agreement with India-based infrastructure group GMR.

The GMR contract, a 25-year agreement to develop and manage an entire new terminal at Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA), was the single largest foreign investment project in the country’s history.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Committee approves six month jail term for violating MPs’ privileges

Parliament’s Privileges Committee completed work Sunday (December 23) on the parliamentary privileges bill submitted back in 2010 by MP Riyaz Rasheed. The proposed bill will now be forwarded to the People’s Majlis floor for a vote.

Under the draft legislation, a person found guilty of committing acts that are deemed disrespectful towards parliament, or that interferes with the Majlis work, would face a fine or a jail sentence of between three to six months.

The bill further stipulates that members of the public found guilty of disruption while attending the People’s Majlis to view proceedings would either be fined between MVR 500 or MVR 1000 or sentenced to jail for three to six months.

Moreover, persons found guilty of providing false information to the parliament or any of its committees would be fined an amount between MVR 3,000 and MVR 10,000 or sentenced to three to six months in jail.

On the arrest of serving MPs, the draft legislation conceded that parliamentarians could be arrested if they are seen committing a crime, but stipulated that the Speaker of Parliament must be notified at the earliest time following such an arrest.

In the event that an MP has to be arrested under different circumstances, police must provide a court order obtained through an application by the Prosecutor General.

The bill additionally stipulates that even when under arrest, MPs must be allowed to attend parliament proceedings.

In contrast to existing parliamentary rules of procedure, the draft privileges bill allows the arrest of MPs even at a time when a no-confidence motion against a state official has been tabled in the parliament.

The bill however stipulates that MPs under arrest must be allowed to participate in no-confidence votes.

The bill also states that no MP must be summoned to a court of law or any institution in a manner which may interfere with their official work at the parliament or in any of its committees.

It further states that a court summons must not be delivered to an MP while they are on the premises of the parliament building.

Additionally, the bill states that no MP must misuse his elected post or any information gathered in official capacity for personal benefit or to facilitate such benefit to a third party.

Minivan News attempted to contact Chair of the Privileges Committee MP Hussain Mohamed, but his phone was switched off at the time of press.

In the two years that the privileges bill has been pending at the committee stage, groups of concerned citizens have demonstrated against some of the clauses in the bill.

Some concerns raised by the group include the inhibition of criticism against parliamentarians, large amounts of remuneration, special treatment in criminal justice proceedings and a pension scheme unique to parliamentarians.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)