Tag: PIC

No police involvement in motorcyclist’s death: Police Integrity Commission

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has concluded its investigation into the death of Abdulla Gasim Ibrahim and determined that his death was not due to police negligence, or due the use of disproportionate or unwarranted force.

Abdulla Gasim Ibrahim died following an incident outside the Justice Building on August 17 last year, in which an officer attempted to stop a fleeing motorcyclist and passenger by stepping in front of the vehicle and appearing to strike the riders with his baton.

Leaked CCTV footage of the incident shows the motorcyclist and his passenger colliding with Gasim, who was parked on the side of the road, resulting in his death. The police officer then leaves the scene, as others arrive and bundle Gasim into a police vehicle. Police made no mention of police involvement at the time of the incident.

Following the release of the CCTV footage, Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz  told Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee that the Police Standards Command had concluded that Constable Moosa Shamil – the officer seen in the leaked video footage of Gasim’s death – had used the baton to stop a suspected criminal in accordance with regulations.

The PIC statement listed six reasons as to why the commission agreed with the police service’s conclusion.

Firstly, it stated “there is reason to believe from the movements of the two policemen who stopped the motorcycle, that they came out in front of the Justice Building 20 seconds before the accident occurred, having received an instruction to stop a fleeing motorcycle.”

The statement then said that since the motorcycle was suspected to be stolen property, section 4 (c) paragraph 2 of “the Regulation Governing the Utilisation of all Lawful Powers and Discretions of the Police” allowed the policeman to attempt to stop the vehicle.

However, initial police reports only stated that the men had a stolen mobile phone in their possession. The motorcycle was said to be stolen property only in December 2012, after the case against the motorist and his passenger was sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

The PIC also justified the use of the baton to stop the speeding vehicle driven by “someone showing disobedience”, citing section 2(b), 2(c) and 3(d) of the “Regulation Governing the Holding and Use of the Baton.”

Furthermore, “having examined the video footage, it is not certain whether the baton used by the policeman came into contact with [the riders] on the motorcycle, and where it is deemed that there was contact, it is believed that the contact would have been on the back of the person sitting at the backseat of the motorcycle; and that no identification was made to confirm that the speed or the movement of the motorcycle altered because of any police movement.”

The last point noted on PIC’s statement read: “having examined the video footage received by the Commission, it is known that Abdulla Gasim stopped the motorcycle behind the policemen after the policemen had gone to the centre of the road; and therefore given that the attention of the policemen at that moment was on what was happening in front, there is no room to find that the policemen were aware that Gasim was standing where he stood, as a spectator.”

“No hope of justice when police investigate themselves”: Gasim’s widow

“There is no hope of justice when it is the police themselves who are investigating their actions,” Gasim’s widow, Naseema Khaleel, told Minivan News, adding that she was “appalled” by the PIC’s conclusion.

“These are things that even a mere child won’t accept. In the leaked video I can the seen the policeman standing in front of the motorcycle and swinging his baton. How, then, can the PIC say that it would have hit the passenger, and that too on his back?

“And as for the speed and direction of the motorcycle not being altered after the driver was hit with the baton – the video doubtless says otherwise. Judging by these observations by the PIC which go against the video evidence, it seems they perhaps watched a completely different video,” Naseema said.

She referred to where the report described Gasim as a “spectator” who had stopped at the scene.

“The report calls Gasim a spectator who stopped there out of curiosity. I found that most hurtful. According to this country’s regulations, when there is a vehicle approaching from behind with its sirens blasting, drivers are to move to the side of the road. That’s what Gasim did. He wasn’t waiting around to pry,” Naseema said.

Naseema said that she felt that along with Constable Moosa Shamil, he other officers who were seen in the leaked video to be active on the scene ought to be questioned about the day’s events for a more complete investigation.

Parliamentary investigation

Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee has meanwhile decided to summon Constable Moosa Shamil for questioning.

“We believe that since Constable Shamil is alleged of having committed this act, we must give him an opportunity to speak in his defence. This is why we are summoning him,”said Chair of the Committee, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed.

In view of Naseema’s remarks, Ali Waheed said that the committee had not previously thought to summon the other policemen at the scene.

“If members in the committee feel there is need for further deliberation, we will proceed as such. Speaking with the other officers there is an option we will take into consideration.”

Waheed said that if the committee felt it necessary, the parliament regulations allowed them to summon the PIC in relation to the matter they were investigating.

“Now that the PIC has also reached a conclusion, we will be looking into that too. We will be setting the schedule for these meetings soon,” Waheed said.

The committee summoned Gasim’s family on January 29. At the meeting, Gasim’s son Mohamed Gais said police had summoned him to obtain a statement in relation to his father’s death.

“The only question the police asked was if I wanted the death penalty to be given to the person responsible for my father’s death. I told them no, we want them to pay damages instead,” Gais said.

Naseema stated at the meeting that in spite of police having denied involvement, in light of the information available, she felt the police were still responsible for the death of her husband.

Police cover-up

Article 41(c) of the Police Act states that the Maldives Police Service should inform the PIC upon the occurrence of death or infliction of grave bodily injury to a person due to the use of force by a police officer.

Asked in December if police had in accordance with the said article notified PIC of the incident, PIC Director General Fathimath Sarira stated: “Police have notified the commission about the accident in a phone call. Although, when we first heard of the case, it was only said that a speeding motorcycle had collided with a parked one and led to a death. But then later, we got the footage too.”

Police Media Official Sub Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News in January that police had not mentioned the involvement of Constable Shamil to either the PIC or the public because “Initially even I knew of it as an accident. We wouldn’t know all the details at once. We learn facts as the investigation moves forward. It was portrayed as a cover-up in coverage, but we say it was an accident as that is what our investigations state it is.”

With regard to the PIC report, Minivan News asked Haneef if Constable Shamil had acted “having received an instruction to stop a fleeing motorcycle”, and if so how it was possible that police had not initially known of the police involvement as he had previously stated.

“Yes, he was responding to instructions and communication was made through our walkie-talkies. We had reports of the robbery and the accident as two separate incidents,” Haneef said.

PIC President Abdulla Waheed’s phone was switched off and Director General Fathimath Sarira was not responding to calls at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Policeman used baton according to regulations, no police involvement in Gasim’s death: PC Riyaz

Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz has said that an officer implicated in a collision that left a bystander dead had acted in accordance with regulations on tackling suspects.

Abdulla Gasim Ibrahim passed away following an incident near the Justice Building on August 17 last year, when an officer attempted to stop a fleeing motorcycle by stepping in front of the vehicle with his baton raised. The motorcycle then lost control and crashed into Gasim, who was parked on the side of the road on his motorcycle.

Leaked footage of the incident appears to show the officer hitting the vehicle’s driver with a baton.

Police stated back in August that Gasim had died following an accident where a fleeing motorcycle had crashed into him, failing to mention any involvement of the police officer.

The Maldives Police Service stated in December that the motorcycle which the men had been riding was also stolen property.

Commissioner Riyaz today told parliament’s Committee on Oversight of the Executive that the officer seen holding the baton had not acted illegally through his actions depicted in the footage.

Riyaz had been summoned before the committee to answer questions over alleged police involvement in the death of Gasim.

Speaking at the committee meeting today, the police commissioner stated that an investigation conducted by the Police Standards Command had reached the conclusion that Constable Moosa Shamil – the officer seen in the video – had used the baton to stop a suspected criminal in accordance with the existing regulations (Dhivehi).

Riyaz added that Shamil had completed and excelled at a two-day programme on baton use held by the Police Academy last March.

When some MPs raised the point that the video depicted Constable Shamil hitting the fleeing motorists with a lot of force using a baton, Riyaz replied that that could only be determined through checking forensic reports.

“I think that even taking a look from our eyes is enough to tell how much chance there is that the baton actually hit the man who is said to have been hit and injured by it,” he said.

While expressing regrets at the loss of a life in the incident, Riyaz praised Constable Shamil saying he would “salute” him for he had displayed “courage in having gone onto the street to stop the motorcycle at the expense of risk to his own life”.

He told the committee that police had submitted the case of Gasim’s death along with the case of the suspected thieves fleeing on a motorcycle to the Prosecutor General’s (PG) Office. Riyaz added that statements had been provided from police who had arrived at the scene as well as those of the officer who had attempted to stop the motorcycle.

He added that if there was a matter of police negligence in the incident, then the PG had the option of pressing charges against them.

Responding to statements by committee members that the family of Gasim had said they had received no communications from the police, Riyaz said the police had obtained a statement from Gasim’s eldest son, 18 year-old Gais Gasim.

According to the commissioner, the Maldives Police Service had been sharing updates with the widow of Gasim, Naseema Khaleel throughout the investigation. Riyaz stated that they had asked Gasim’s family as whether they wished for the guilty to be given the death penalty.

No communication initiated by police

Responding today to Riyaz’s comments, Naseema maintained claims that her family had rarely heard from the police regarding the investigation.

“We seldom heard from the police at all. We continued to call and ask for updates though, and the response we kept getting was that the investigation was going on,” Naseema said.

Naseema added that the PIC had also been vague and unresponsive about their investigations.

“We did hear from them at one point though, when they called and asked for Gasim’s heirs names and contact details. When I provided details, they then called our son, who became 18 years old in January, and summoned him to the police station once,” she said.

“”He has just turned 18 and one can’t really say he is an adult as such. Police asked him questions and he responded as he felt at the time. Police never told me or any guardians that he had been summoned there. That’s what Riyaz referred to today when he claimed family had been kept updated. That is not really the case,” Naseema continued.

“I am extremely disappointed after listening to what happened at that committee meeting today. What about the man who died? Is there no justice for him?”

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Prosecutor General Ahmed Muizzu and Vice President of the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives Ahmed Tholal were also not available for comment.

Leaked video

Riyaz also stated today that police were looking into how the video footage of the incident had been leaked onto social media.

The commissioner said that the investigation had revealed that the footage was from a police-owned CCTV and had been leaked from inside the police institution, describing it as “a very serious problem”.

He said that there were systems in place to determine that the video had indeed been leaked by police, and that leaking footage used in an investigation was in breach of the Police Code of Conduct.

He stated that the police would find out who was responsible for the leak and would take action against him within legal boundaries.

He pointed out that there had been previous instances where police officers who had committed similar acts had been dismissed from their posts.

PIC Investigation

Meanwhile, the Police Integrity Commission had previously stated on December 3, 2012 that they were nearing completion of their investigation into allegations of police involvement in the death of Gasim.

On September 24, 2012, Gasim’s wife had submitted a letter to the PIC requesting them to look into the incident. PIC Director General Fathimath Sarira had confirmed at the time that the PIC had received the leaked footage prior to it being leaked in social media.

Responding to a question by Minivan News as to why the Commissioner had stated Constable Shamil to be free of fault before the PIC had concluded their investigation, Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef said the investigations were treated as two separate matters.

“As per our investigation, there is no negligence in this case from the side of the police officer. If PIC finds there is an issue, or a place like HRCM conducts an investigation and finds there is an issue here, then we will act on those findings accordingly,” he said.

Article 41(c) of the Police Act states that Maldives Police Service should inform the PIC upon the occurrence of death or infliction of grave bodily injury to a person due to the use of force by a police officer.

Asked last December if police had in accordance with the said article notified PIC of the incident, Sarira had stated at the time that: “Police has notified the commission about the accident over a phone call. Although, when we first heard of the case, it was only said that a speeding motorcycle had collided with a parked one and led to a death. But then later, we got the footage too.”

Minivan News asked poliec inspector Haneef why police had not mentioned the involvement of Constable Shamil to either the PIC or the public. Haneef responded saying, “Even I initially knew of it as an accident. We wouldn’t know all the details at once. We learn facts as the investigation moves forward. It was portrayed as a cover-up in coverage, but we say it was an accident as that is what our investigations state it is.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police ask PG to press charges against motorists involved in Gasim’s death: no mention of police involvement

Police submitted a case to the Prosecutor General’s office on December, asking it to press charges against the motorist and the passenger on the speeding motorcycle involved in the death of bystander Abdulla Gasim Ibrahim on August 17.

In a press release issued on December 15, police stated that the persons alleged to have caused the death of Gasim were 21 year-old Ahmed Nadhee Saleem, of NooruhSabah on Gemanafushi in Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll and an unnamed 17 year-old boy.

Although previous police accounts stated that the two persons had been speeding on a motorcycle after stealing a mobile phone from an expatriate, the latest press release adds that the motorcycle being driven by the two was also stolen property.

The statement reads: “The request to press charges against these two persons has been sent to the Prosecutor General with relation to the events of August 17, at a time of which day these persons stole a motorcycle parked in front of Twilight Rivery in Henveiru ward, drove it at very fast speeds, stole a Nokia mobile phone from an expatriate who was standing near what was formerly known as the Bond Street shop, ignored orders from police at the scene to stop, and continued speeding despite attempts by police officers to stop them, resulting in a collision with a parked motorcycle on Orchid Magu near the Justice Building, causing severe injury and the ensuing death of the motorist on the parked motorcycle.”

The statement makes no mention of the police officer who was shown in leaked CCTV footage of the incident to have struck the fleeing suspects with his baton, causing them to collide with Gasim.

Police cover-up

The leaked video of the incident, which has been making rounds on social media since the beginning of December, shows a policeman stepping in front of the speeding motorcycle and hitting the motorcyclist on the head with a baton.

The victim’s family has also previously written to the Police Integrity Commission alleging that there was police involvement in the death of Gasim, describing the event as was later publicly seen in the leaked video. The family has said that it has so far not received any official response from the commission.

Despite the video evidence, police are now pressing charges against the cyclist and the passenger, while no mention of police involvement which led to the death was mentioned in the press statement.

Police Media Official Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Minivan News also tried contacting PIC President Abdulla Waheed, whose phone was switched off at the time of press.

PIC Director General Fathimath Sarira stated that the commission would be able to comment on the matter on Thursday, and that they had no comment for the time being.

On December 3, Sarira had confirmed that the commission was looking into the allegations of police involvement in the incident, stating that the ‘investigations are nearing conclusion’.

Meanwhile, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has submitted a motion to parliament, requesting the Committee on Oversight of the Executive review the case.

Prosecutor General Ahmed Muizzu was unable to speak to Minivan News today.

Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) President Mariyam Azra was also not responding to calls, while HRCM Vice President Ahmed Tholal and member Jeehan Mahmood had their phones switched off.

Warning: Some viewers may find the following footage disturbing

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Government advertises for vacant PIC seat

The President’s Office has today opened up applications for the vacant seat on the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) following the resignation of former Chair Shahindha Ismail earlier this month.

The PIC’s is charged with promoting police officer’s respect for law, independently investigating any unlawful activities, and enhancing trust and confidence in the police.

Shahindha resigned after significant differences of opinion with her fellow commission members regarding the events surrounding February’s transfer of power.

“For me, the commission is not heading in the right direction – when you look at the commission’s work of late, I didn’t feel it was working towards objectives stated in police act,” she said at the time.

The advertisement has been published in the government gazette and will close on October 31.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Contradictory findings in PIC’s report on February 8 crackdown

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has released the second of its three pending reports regarding police action around the contentious transfer of power in February.

The PIC states that it initiated the investigation due to allegations of police brutality when breaking up the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s demonstration on February 8, following the controversial resignation of President Mohamed Nasheed the previous day.

The PIC report on the events in Male’ on February 8 states that the investigation was carried out with a committee inclusive of all five members of the commission.

However, the report has two contradicting accounts, with President of the PIC Shahinda Ismail including her own findings in contrast to those of the other commission members.

The report states that the PIC looked into three main areas: whether police used disproportionate force in breaking up the MDP demonstration, whether individual police officers committed inhumane acts and acts of violence against citizens after breaking up the protest, and whether there were any police actions of the day which senior police officers must take responsibility for.

The investigation was carried out based on interviews, phone records, photos and video evidence.

Police acts within the law

PIC report contends that on February 8 , police acted within the boundaries of law and regulations.

It says that police acted 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.

The investigation justified police action by stating that demonstrators had caused damage to property on their way to the MMA area, and that as there were large numbers of demonstrators, it may have led to unrest had the police not broken up the protest when they did.

The report further states that although sufficient warning had not been issued before breaking up the demonstration, police acted in line with Article 24 of the Freedom of Assembly Act as there was a small number of police officers controlling the demonstration which had a large number of participants, and any delays in breaking it up may have led to danger.

The PIC also stated that there were no incidents on February 8 that senior police needed to take responsibility for. It stated as reasons that there had been no prior knowledge of the protest being planned, that the intelligence department was not functioning at its best due to changes in management after February 7, and that after former President Nasheed’s statement in his resignation speech that his continuing to stay in power may cause harm to the citizens, there was no reason for police to expect his party to orchestrate such a demonstration against the new government.

Individual acts of brutality

The report however went on to say that individuals in the police force had committed acts of violence, inhumane acts, and used verbal abuse against demonstrators on February 8, acting against Article 54 of the Constitution of the Maldives, Article 7(a.11) of the Police Act, Articles 16(a), 16(d.2), 16(d.3), 16(d.5) of the Regulations for handling and use of weapons.

The report highlights 12 specific incidents, including video evidence and interviews proving inhumane acts of police against former President Nasheed, police brutality against MDP Chairperson Reeko Moosa Manik and member of parliament Mariya Ahmed Didi and video evidence of police beating 14 individuals with batons.

The commission states here its intention to further investigate these acts, and take legal action against the officers who were involved.

Contradicting viewpoints

President of the PIC, Shahindha Ismail, has however stated in the report that she sees acts of police on February 8 to have been against the law, and that she observed no valid reason for police to have broken up the MDP demonstrations in the manner the police did.

Ismail stated that while demonstrations were permitted in the MMA area, there was no evidence beyond that of statements by police officers to prove that any illegal acts had been committed, or that there was any intention to do so by the demonstrators.

Ismail further stated that the police broke up the protest without prior warning, acting against the orders of the officer in charge in the area, Inspector of Police Ahmed Shameem, order to ‘hold’ without advancing, and also against the advice of Maldives National Defense Force commanders. She said that the police had acted under orders from Unit Commander Seargant Mohamed Naeem.

Ismail described the acts of brutality noted in the PIC report as “targeted attacks to cause immense harm to certain people”, stating that these acts could not be seen as actions to protect anyone and should be further investigated and taken action against.

Ismail also states that Assistant Commissioner of Police Abdulla Fairoosh and then Acting Head of Police Specialist Operations Department Ahmed Shameem must be held responsible for not having carried out the responsibilities of their posts in a sufficient manner.

She also notes the accounts given to PIC investigations by Fairoosh, Shameen and Assistant Commissioner of Police Hussain Waheed, stating that providing false statements to the investigation is a criminal offence as noted in Article 62 of Chapter 3 of the Penal Code.

Ismail further states that Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz and Head of Police Professional Standards Directorate, Assistant Commissioner of Police Ali Rasheed, must be held accountable for failing to investigate the acts of police on February 8. She states that this failure is a breach of the constitution and the Police Act.

Recommendations to the Minister of Home Affairs

The PIC report presents two recommendations to the Minister of Home Affairs.

It calls on the ministry to order the police to investigate undue use of force with batons during February 8.

Noting that many officers during the February 8 had had their faces covered with hoods and helmets, the report additionally calls on the Ministry to establish a system in the police which would facilitate identification of police being investigated under similar situations.

Police Media Official Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News today that they are in the process of studying the PIC report.

“After studying it, if we find that any steps need to be taken, or any reforms need to be made, then we will work on that,” Haneef said.

Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Minivan News also tried contacting the Police Integrity Commission, but was unable to get a response at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

CMAG lobbying anticipated to be key focus during Nasheed’s UK visit

Former President Mohamed Nasheed is expected during a visit to the UK this week to lobby the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) to keep the Maldives on its agenda and assist in enacting reforms to civil society institutions, his party has said.

With Nasheed this week making his first visit to Europe since February’s controversial transfer of power, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has said it anticipates the former president will lobby during the trip to keep the Maldives on CMAG’s agenda as well as to help set clear targets for a Commonwealth-backed reform agenda.

The MDP has claimed that it is now advocating for an agreement on “structural adjustments” that would help address concerns raised in the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) report.  The report, released last month, rejected accusations by Nasheed and his supporters that he was forced to resign from office.

The current government has meanwhile said that it would be difficult to look into concerns raised by the CNI concerning the events between February 6 to February 8 this year without potentially implicating Nasheed for his role in the alleged use of “excessive force” by police during his tenure.

The President’s Office also maintained that any reforms to the country’s judiciary or civil society would have to be made through the country’s independent institutions such as the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC)

Nasheed left today for the UK, where he is scheduled to meet senior UK government officials and MPs as well as top Commonwealth’s figures and human rights organisations. He will be joined during the visit by former Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem and the party’s Deputy Chairperson (Finance) Ahmed Mausoom.

As well as speaking both in London and Scotland on the theme of democracy in the Maldives, the MDP today said it anticipated Nasheed, who is presently chosen to represent the party in the next general election, would also be likely to lobby to keep the Maldives on the agenda of the CMAG.

CMAG had placed Maldives on its formal agenda in February, at the time citing ‘the questions that remain about the precise circumstances of the change of the government, as well as the fragility of the situation in Maldives’ as reasons.

The government has maintained that the CMAG ‘lacked mandate’ to place Maldives on the agenda. Following this there has been multiple instances where the government had expressed disapproval in what it termed ‘interference’ by the Commonwealth.

MDP MP and spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor said that it was anticipated Nasheed would seek to have GMAG retain the Maldives on its agenda in order to pressure the Waheed administration to meet a number of commitments such as those raised in the CNI’s findings.

“I expect there will be strong lobbying for our position [on CMAG],” he said. We have agreed to go ahead with the CNI recommendations, though with the reservations raised by Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed.

Saeed was chosen to be Nasheed’s representative on a reformed CNI panel charged with investigating the events surrounding the transfer of power on February 7. However, he resigned the day before the findings were released over concerns at what he claimed was omitted evidence and witness accounts from the final report.

Ghafoor added that with the CNI report suggesting a need for structural adjustment of certain civil society institutions along with the judiciary – a major concern for the Nasheed administration in its last few months – he hoped the Commonwealth would support such reforms.

“Whilst in government, we had previously participated with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on a voluntary basis whilst in government to undergo structural reform,” he claimed. “It required bitter medicine, such as in the sacking of some civil servants, but it was vital in trying to cut the state debt.”

Ghafoor added that he hoped CMAG could provide similar assistance in setting up a structural adjustment programme that set clear dates by which key reforms in areas like the judiciary or civil society were to be enacted.

“We have agreed to move ahead with the CNI with reservations, but we want to see wrong doings identified in the report being addressed,” he said, pointing to the actions of some police and military figures in the transfer of power.

While the Commonwealth was scheduled to last week rule on whether the Maldives would be removed from the investigative agenda of CMAG, it announced the decision would be delayed until its next meeting on September 28.

The President’s Office at the time expressed confidence that the country would be taken off the agenda at the next meeting, saying that this move had been supported by all but one of those present for the teleconference. Local media have reported that the delayed decision has been a result of a “technical glitch” during a live CMAG webcast, a situation Ghafoor claimed that he had yet to received clarification on.

“I’m not aware of any hitch taking place during the CMAG meeting. What we hope is that they will would keep us on the agenda and back a structural adjustment programme that would call for certain commitments to be met at specific dates,” he claimed.

Parallel to Nasheed’s UK visit, Ghafoor claimed that the MDP’s national council was also engaged in pressuring the party’s parliamentary group to boycott the People’s Majlis once it reconvenes, at least until the party was given guarantees about certain concerns it held about reforms.

“The national council on Thursday decided to try and pressure the parliamentary group to boycott Majlis,” he said. “We are discussing this today as a party. We are clear that we would wish to disengage from the Waheed regime unless our concerns are addressed.”

Responding to the MDP’s comments, President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad told Minivan News that in looking to address the concerns raised by the CNI concerning security forces and the country’s judiciary, it would continue to rely on independent institutions in the country.

“I understand that the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has already looked into some of the matters raised. I don’t know what they are looking at or what stage they have reached right now. Similarly, President Dr Waheed has also promised to refrain from interfering with the judiciary here, even when he has not been made aware of what is going on,” he said.

Masood stressed that the government would not however be able to set up any additional commission or mechanism to oversee reforms.

“Independent institutions can come in and oversee this. We would encourage them to do this and will not interfere with their work,” he said.

However, in terms of addressing the CNI’s concerns about the transfer of power, Masood also claimed that Nasheed himself faced possible criminal action for the events occurring on February 6 and February 7 before his resignation.

“During the events of February 6 to February 8, I wouldn’t say that Nasheed was in power, but he was in office, resulting in excessive force being used by police up to his resignation,” he said.

Masood said that President Waheed has accepted that police had used “excessive force” during protests held on February 8 after he came to power and condemned such acts.

“President Waheed has already said he will take action against those with involvement [in the use of excessive force], due process would be taking place through groups like the PIC,” he said.

However, Masood added that any calls from the EU or Commonwealth to investigate the events surrounding the transfer of power would lead to difficulties over the actions of Nasheed in the build up to his resignation.

“Any investigation would have to focus on Nasheed’s role in this, the Commonwealth and EU countries are asking us not to touch him,” he said.  “While the independent institutions can look into this, the EU and Commonwealth will be unhappy if their boy becomes involved in investigations. This will happen as there are many questions [Nasheed] has to answer.”

Nasheed, who is presently set to face trial over his role in the controversial detention this year of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, has alleged that charges against him are politically motivated in order to prevent him from standing as a candidate for the MDP at the next general election.  Nasheed has alleged that Judge Abdulla had been detained over fears he was a threat to national security.

Independent institutions

Despite the government’s decision to rely on the country’s independent institutions to help oversee any reforms or investigations into the CNI’s recommendations, groups such as the Elections Commission have this month found their work under increased scrutiny following the release of the CNI report (CNI).

Prominent members of both the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) and the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) have this month questioned the ability of their own institutions to fulfil their mandates.

Aiman Rasheed of local NGO Transparency Maldives’ suggested that weak and unassertive institutions must take some of the blame for the events of February 7 and the surrounding political crises.

“The independent institutions need to step up their game by standing for and protecting the values for which they were constituted,” said Aiman at the time.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PIC report calls for action against rogue police, holds former Commissioner Faseeh accountable

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has published a summary of one of its three reports concerning the February 2012 events on their website.

Of the three separate reports the PIC has said it will release, the one published today (in Dhivehi) covers the events the investigation carried out to see if the police had committed any unlawful acts during the events of February 6 and 7, which led to the controversial transfer of power in the Maldives.

The report highlights nine different incidents. In five of these, the report states that the commission will further investigate the role of the police and take necessary legal action.

It explains that the investigation was carried out with reference to videos downloaded from the internet, CCTV footage, interviews and phone logs. It emphasises that all conclusions were reached in the light of information uncovered from the above-mentioned means and the existing legislative framework.

According to the report, all conclusions were reached with the unanimous agreement of all five members of the commission.

Regarding the matter of police withdrawing from and returning to the Artificial Beach on February 6, the report states that the order to retreat was given by then President Mohamed Nasheed. It goes on to say that in refusing to obey this command, the police in the area had been acting in accordance with provisions in the constitution and the police act, while concluding that then Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh, Deputy Commissioner of Police Ismail Atheef, Chief Superintendent of Police Farhad Fikry, Chief Superintendent Mohamed Hameed, Superintendent Ibrahim Adnan Anees and Superintendent Ahmed AbduRahman had acted against these laws, namely Article 244(a) of the constitution, Article 6 (8) of the Police Act and the official police oath.

The report states that the commission believes that police occupying Republican Square had made valid and justifiable demands. It details these demands to have been for the Commissioner of Police to meet them, agree to not give them any more unlawful commands, and to provide a guarantee that no action would be taken against the officers for the events of that night.

While highlighting that police themselves have a constitutional right to go on strike, the report notes that it was wrong for them to have remained in the Republican Square after civilians joined the area and the gathering turned into a politically-motivated one. The report notes that it was some among these citizens who called for the resignation of then President Mohamed Nasheed.

With reference to the damage caused by officers to the police headquarters, the report says: “With reference to the videos and accounts reviewed by the commission, we have found that some among the police officers gathered in the Republican Square on February 7  entered the [police HQ] Shaheed Hussain Adam Building, damaged property, broken the panes of a window, took down the police flag, threatened senior officers and committed violent acts against them. These are disciplinary and criminal offences which should not have been seen from police officers.”

It furthermore states that these will be treated as separate offenses and legal action would be taken against those involved.

In contrast to the general account of events, the PIC in its report states that supporters of MDP and other civilians had marched into the area where the police were chanting their mission statement. The report claims that this led to clashes in which persons from both sides sustained injuries. It notes that the MDP were allowed to approach the police because MNDF officials who were tasked with cordoning off the area had retreated.

The PIC further claimed that its investigations had uncovered that police had entered the MDP ‘Haruge’ only with the intention to catch some individuals who had attacked the police at the Artificial Beach, and then run to the Haruge to hide. It also noted that people and property in the Haruge were attacked by both police and “some other persons”, stating that the commission would further investigate the role of the police in the incident, and take any required legal action.

On the issue of the takeover of the state TV channel, MNBC One, by police, military and opposition demonstrators, the report observed that the police went to the channel’s offices under the orders of an unnamed senior level commander. It states that they went to “provide protection to the channel” since it had received information that some civilians had entered and were vandalising state property within its premises.

The report states that police had been able to enter the MNBC premises after two attempts because a group of civilians were attacking them with sticks and stones outside the building. It describes the police entry into MNBC:

“Tear gas was used as police were unable to enter the MNBC premises due to attacks from civilians outside. The gate was locked, so police fired teargas with a riot gun into the premises through an opening in the gate. The police are authorised to use this weapon. Tear gas was fired inside in case there were people inside who might again attack the police. The gate was opened merely by thoroughly shaking and pushing it.”

The report notes that although the police used a “strict attitude” which “checking” the station, they did not commit violent acts against the people there. It also says that the police did not in any way attempt to influence the channel’s broadcasting. It states that the police checked the premises to see if any outsiders were there, and then retreated from the building. The PIC defends police’s actions in this matter by stating they were in accordance with Article 2 and 4 of the Police Act.

As a final point of investigation, the report notes that some police officers were injured in clashes between the officers of MPS and the MNDF. It holds then Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh accountable, quoting negligence, and states that the commission will take legal action against him.

The only recommendations in the report are directed for action from the Minister of Home Affairs. The recommendations are that the police institute remain free from political influences, and for the establishment of a working environment where the police could work without bias and with equability and fairness.

“A noble request can be made in an unlawful environment”

President of the Police Integrity Commission, Shahindha Ismail, speaking to Minivan News today expressed concern that some local media were misinterpreting the PIC report.

“The PIC does not collectively call the actions of the police on the 6th and 7th of February constitutional.”

“A very noble request or demand can still be made in an unlawful environment. This is what we are saying. The demand by the police to not give them unlawful commands was within the boundaries of law. But that they had remained there, with civilians, as part of what had escalated into a politically motivated gathering is wrong.”

Shahindha further said that the fact that many of the incidents highlighted in the report called for more investigation and action against police, confirming that the PIC did not endorse police action of the days in question as lawful.

PIC has previously said that it meant to release the reports before the CNI report. Shahindha said that the delay had been due to complications during the in-depth investigation.

President Nasheed’s nominee to CNI, Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed, when sharing his reservations with the press, had expressed disappointment that the CNI had not received the PIC report during the inquiry phase.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“I am very sceptical of the burden we will have to carry”: PIC chair

Chair of the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) Shahinda Ismail has said she is “very sceptical of the burden” the institution will have to carry following the publication last week of the Commission of National Inquiry’s (CNI) findings.

The comments were made after Minister of Home Affairs Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed yesterday said that the PIC would be tasked with investigating breaches of police conduct outlined in the CNI’s findings.

Of primary concern to Shahinda was the CNI’s lack of clarity regarding the cases the PIC was to investigate, as well as loopholes within the Police Act which made it difficult to implement PIC recommendations.

“After the CNI, it’s quite confusing when they have so vaguely blanketed the actions of the police. It would have been clearer to name specific incidents or policemen,” she said

Shahinda has questioned the ability of the PIC to follow through with this mandate after having had almost no contact with, or instruction from, the now-disbanded CNI.

“I was surprised at the dismantling of the CNI. There surely must be further questions from many people,” she said.

“After the Human Rights Commission (HRCM) completed their investigations, they sent a letter to us [to guide our work]. We would like something similar from the CNI,” she said.

Shahinda revealed that, throughout both versions of the CNI, the PIC had only had one meeting and received one letter from the commission.

The meeting involved mainly introductions and talk of future co-operation, whilst the letter from the CNI to the PIC asked only when its investigations into the events of February would be completed, she explained.

Referring to the CNI’s recommendations that the PIC, amongst other institutions, needed to be strengthened, Shahinda responded:

“My question would be – while I don’t claim the PIC is perfect – what information are they working with? Throughout their investigations, they showed no interest. There was no inquiry about specific incidents. To my knowledge, no one was summoned.”

Shahinda explained that the PIC was already investigating a number of incidents relating to February 7 and 8, making the lack of contact doubly confusing.

“They knew we were already investigating specific incidents – that’s what we do,” she said.

Shahinda also outlined what she saw as the weaknesses within the police act that, in certain cases, had allowed the Home Minister the option of ignoring PIC recommendations.

Article 44 of the Police Act states that any parties handed recommendations by the PIC can choose not to act on them if they inform the commission of the decision in writing.

“He is not really bound by the act,” said Shahinda, before alleging that this clause had already resulted in the Home Minister ignoring recommendations forwarded to him.

The PIC chair gave the example of a case involving police officer Ali Ahmed, whom she said had been adjudged unfit to continue to serve by the commission.  Shahinda claimed the case had been forwarded to the Home Minister.

“I know for a fact he is still a policeman and was promoted after this incident” she said.

“It is really upsetting – a huge concern – for me that the police leadership is showing a trend where unlawful officers are acting with impunity. This can only lead to further violence,” added Shahinda.

Dr Jameel was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has recently expressed his belief that around 300 members of the security services were “undermining the public interest of the entire country”.

Following the findings of the CNI’s report, which concluded that Nasheed was not removed from power in a coup, he called for legal action to be taken against implicated officers.

Nasheed’s representative on the commission Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed resigned the day before the report was published, citing – amongst other things – withheld evidence and non-examination of crucial witnesses.

The report’s findings have been welcomed by the United States, India, and the United Nations as well as the Commonwealth, although the MDP has said it will lobby for the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) to reconsider.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Releasing PIC findings ahead of CNI report “of utmost importance”: PIC President

The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) has stated its intention to release findings from ongoing investigations into alleged breach of laws and regulations by police officers during the lead up to and in the direct aftermath of February’s controversial transfer of power.

Speaking to Minivan News today, PIC President Shahinda Ismail said the institution would be releasing three separate reports. These reports will focus on the events of February 6 and 7, the events in Male’ on February 8 and the events in Addu Atoll on February 8 and 9. She also stated that these reports would be available to public upon release.

“I feel that it is of utmost importance to release the reports before the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) report comes out. If not, there is a chance that the PIC investigations are not given the importance it merits. We’re working to get this done,” Shahindha added.

Meanwhile, local news website Haveeru quoted PIC Vice President Dr Abdulla Waheed as saying that the commission has gathered information from a variety of sources and its reporting was now almost complete.

Asked if PIC had so far taken action against any police officers found at fault through the investigations, Waheed refused to comment on it before the release of the said reports.

With reference to the HRCM reports released last Saturday, Waheed said that the commission had not yet discussed the findings concerning police conduct. He added that the commission would be able to respond to them once government offices resumed work after the holiday period.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)